Higher Education Bubble?

[schaabdl]

I am not recalling discussion but as a parent of two currently in college, I found this article to be somewhat disturbing and interesting.
Source
***
The internally referenced site is also quite revealing. This does indicate a definite lack of direction for the university system other than people filling seats and therefore money comes to the coffers.
What Will They Learn?
***
The tuition charged at schools rose faster than inflation (similar to the health care cost arguments) and they have something in common - a reliance on a third party pay system, be it insurance or loans. There is no incentive to keep costs contained.
***
Final note:

University of California scholars Philip Babcock and Mindy Marks report that students these days study an average of 14 hours a week, down from 24 hours in 1961.

OK, I partied too much the late 69-71 while at Arizona State to even remember study. So I completed my three degrees while a working stiff and know that I spent more than 14 hours a weeks study time. I think the measure of a class was still related to the "credit hour" - meaning if I did 3 hours of study each week for a class, in addition to attending class, then the class was at least challenging. Although I am very proud of childrens' "success" with grades - I do wonder what they learning. Are the A's too easy or were they earned?

[David]

Charles Murray, who I really respect, says very few kids show go to traditional colleges. He's much more interested in vocational training. he does have a point.

[qosmann]

My own question is what would those employees of institutions of higher learning do when management confronted them with the choice of taking a 75% pay cut in order to keep the doors open.

Cant happen? sure, ask those who used to solder circuit boards or work in mills or call centers or toy factories.

Oh but if you are fortunate enough to enter into the privileged class, that is ok for you. Screw the rest of the citizens of this nation.

[David]

Much more on this topic. These discussions are really taking off as tuitions skyrocket.

SOURCE

[FastEddy]

Here in California, the numbers can be handled more easily:

65% of California Education System employees Do Not Teach.

[David]

I'll tell you what's gonna happen here. People are just going to default on loans. I just saw where NY State financial assistance has written off $2 billion of college loans as noncollectable. Courts are already getting into the business of questioning the deceptive recruiting of students by for profit colleges. It won't be long with Mary and her Anthropology degree and working at Kohls is gonna be given a pass on repaying her student loans. Why the heck not? Everyone else is being bailed out. Obama has put government in charge of all student loans now. Where did he get money to go to Occidental, Columbia and Harvard? Obligations like student loan repayment will mean zip in the new America.

[FastEddy]

Originally Posted by David

... Courts are already getting into the business of questioning the deceptive recruiting of students by for profit colleges. ... Everyone else is being bailed out. Obama has put government in charge of all student loans now. Where did he get money to go to Occidental, Columbia and Harvard? ...

That the student loans programs are a cash machine for the fat greedy taxsucking administrators in the liberal/government/education complex is not news.

That the milking and bilking of the students of "higher" education by the same is not news.

That those students have been propagandized, brainwashed and mislead by the same is not news.

What IS news is that a small, but growing number students are waking up to the ripoff; demanding that the lying, cheating and stealing cease; demanding a fairer treatment from college administration and teaching staffs; demanding that such basics as hard science, real world journalism, Constitutional law, ethics without the taints of socialism ... be taught.

The real value verses the total costs are way out of balance in "higher" education in this country and several others.

The second tier of "higher" education, the junior colleges, the publicly funded municipal city and regional state colleges and universities are hardly more than a cash flow negative holding pattern for the vast majority of students ... seldom better than excessively expensive high school with ash trays.

Too many job seekers from these institutions are discovering that their "liberal" college education is a liability, not an asset ... an indication that the "liberal" college "educated" job seeker has wasted the initial and most productive part of their lives.

---

I am currently seeking more help in my business. "Wanted: well spoken, clean cut, enthusiastic, technically oriented data entry, order entry staff. Real world work history an asset. No benefits, no health care, no day care, hard work, long hours, low pay but with no deductions. If you can speak American business english with a smile and can add three, two digit numbers together in your head, please call ..."

[bond]

That the student loans programs are a cash machine for the fat greedy taxsucking administrators in the liberal/government/education complex is not news.

OH PLEASE..............

Collage Football Collage Football Collage Football.

As long as you have entertainments for the Masses Higher Education for all its costs and silliness is safe.

[FastEddy]

bond: " ... Collage Football Collage Football Collage Football. ... As long as you have entertainments for the Masses Higher Education for all its costs and silliness is safe. "

Ahhhh, you noticed it too! Yes, the reason 65% of all California "education" system employees do not teach = many of them are on coaching staff and cleanup after the games.

[qosmann]

There are a number of interesting observations in this thread and I appreciate ALL of them.

I was talking this over with my son the other day in between episodes of a Harvard lecture series he found on YouTube.

what if the colleges discover that they can deliver their product for 1% of its current cost? what if the colleges discover they can for 80% of their employees and still deliver the same if not better education?

think it cant happen? Think again. Schools have been trying to use television to make their delivery system more effective. they have failed. But today we have a mature internet technology, and internet tools capable of replacing the lecture hall. AND generations of potential students who are not just comfortable with, but demand internet delivered services.

What if one english professor can record a lecture once, and update it once in a while, and serve 10's of thousands of students?

Granted, the sciences are better served in collective environments. But art, history, english, sociology and other humanities... what benefit is there to the existing college structure?

as for college football and basketball, what are these but free minor leagues for the professional leagues? let the big businesses of professional sports pay for and support their own minor leagues, and stop shifting the burdon to the taxpayer.

Higher so called education is inefficient, and where there is inefficiency there is opportunity for those not bound by tradition.

So... is there a higher education bubble? of course. Time for education to modernize. We will find it to be much better at a much lower cost when that happens.

[FastEddy]

Originally Posted by qosmann

There are a number of interesting observations in this thread and I appreciate ALL of them.

I was talking this over with my son the other day in between episodes of a Harvard lecture series he found on YouTube.

what if the colleges discover that they can deliver their product for 1% of its current cost? what if the colleges discover they can for 80% of their employees and still deliver the same if not better education?

think it cant happen? Think again. Schools have been trying to use television to make their delivery system more effective. they have failed. But today we have a mature internet technology, and internet tools capable of replacing the lecture hall. AND generations of potential students who are not just comfortable with, but demand internet delivered services.

What if one english professor can record a lecture once, and update it once in a while, and serve 10's of thousands of students?

Granted, the sciences are better served in collective environments. But art, history, english, sociology and other humanities... what benefit is there to the existing college structure?

as for college football and basketball, what are these but free minor leagues for the professional leagues? let the big businesses of professional sports pay for and support their own minor leagues, and stop shifting the burdon to the taxpayer.

Higher so called education is inefficient, and where there is inefficiency there is opportunity for those not bound by tradition.

So... is there a higher education bubble? of course. Time for education to modernize. We will find it to be much better at a much lower cost when that happens.

Excellent! Add to your list that the hard sciences are better taught, easier accessed by the students from anywhere on the 'Net.

My favorite example: Physics for Future Presidents ... In which two of the very best physics "generalists" in the world today teach an accredited course that explores a broad variety of scientific questions of our day in detail and without politically correct speak ... just the facts and truly scientific explanations. UC Berkeley admin had a deal of difficulty letting Dr. Muller teach online ... at first ... then the class became internationally popular and actually encouraged students from around the world to not only appreciate these lectures, but to consider UC Berkeley for enrollment. This single online class is indirectly attributed as having placed UC Berkeley back into the top ten world class educational institutions (at least for hard science and engineering).

[David]

College Board has a dog in this fight. Your thoughts?

Value of College Degree Is Growing, Study Says
By TAMAR LEWIN

Despite rising tuition and student-loan debt levels, the long-term payoff from earning a college degree is growing, according to a report to be issued Tuesday by the College Board.

Workers with a college degree earned much more and were much less likely to be unemployed than those with only a high school diploma, according to the report, “Education Pays: the Benefits of Higher Education for Individuals and Society.”

According to the report, the median earnings of full-time workers with bachelor’s degrees were $55,700 in 2008 — $21,900 more than those of workers who finished only high school.

And the pay premium for those with bachelor’s degrees has grown substantially in recent years. Among those ages 25 to 34, women with college degrees earned 79 percent more than those with high school diplomas, and men, 74 percent more. A decade ago, women with college degrees had a 60 percent pay premium and men 54 percent.

The report found that after about 11 years of work, college graduates’ higher earnings compensated for four years out of the labor force and for student loans, at 6.8 percent interest, to cover the average tuition and fees at a public four-year university.

Even during the recession, a degree offered protection from unemployment. The 2009 unemployment rate of college graduates 25 and older was 4.6 percent, compared with 9.7 percent for high school graduates.

“Consistently over time, unemployment rates are about half for college graduates,” said Sandy Baum, an author of the report. “And jobs began recovering for college graduates about a year and half ago. While it’s easy to find a college grad who’s unemployed, you’re statistically much less likely to be in that circumstance if you have a higher level of education.”

The debate over whether college is worthwhile has grown more spirited as tuition spirals higher, faster than inflation.

“For reasons that are not entirely clear, more people are questioning whether it’s necessary to go to college,” Ms. Baum said.

Among economists, though, even those who emphasize alternative approaches to skill development agree that for most people, a college degree pays off.

“In general, college is a good investment, but there is great variability in outcomes,” said Robert Lerman, an economics professor at American University. “A significant minority of college graduates don’t earn as much as those with less education. And all is not lost if you don’t go to college. There are other routes to improving your earnings, for example, credentials that demonstrate mastery of an occupational skill like plumbing.”

The report, first issued in 2004 and updated in 2007, also described social benefits: those with a bachelor’s degree, it said, are more likely to volunteer, vote, exercise and have health insurance and pensions. They are also less likely to smoke, be obese or have low-birth-weight babies. It did not assert that a college education, by itself, was responsible for all those differences.

“Correlation is not the same as causation,” Ms. Baum said. “But that said, the people who have done careful statistical analyses, controlling for demographic characteristics like income and family background, have overwhelmingly concluded that there’s some causation here, that some things that happen to you in college, for example, would make you more likely to adopt healthier behavior.”

SOURCE

[qosmann]

Originally Posted by FastEddy

Excellent! Add to your list that the hard sciences are better taught, easier accessed by the students from anywhere on the 'Net.

My favorite example: Physics for Future Presidents ... In which two of the very best physics "generalists" in the world today teach an accredited course that explores a broad variety of scientific questions of our day in detail and without politically correct speak ... just the facts and truly scientific explanations. UC Berkeley admin had a deal of difficulty letting Dr. Muller teach online ... at first ... then the class became internationally popular and actually encouraged students from around the world to not only appreciate these lectures, but to consider UC Berkeley for enrollment. This single online class is indirectly attributed as having placed UC Berkeley back into the top ten world class educational institutions (at least for hard science and engineering).

I've heard the author of the Physics for Future Presidents on Wattenburg's program on KGO before. Have not looked up the lecture on YouTube but I should. Thanks for the reminder.

Will also look into your other reference.

[FastEddy]

Originally Posted by David

College Board has a dog in this fight. Your thoughts?

SOURCE

"America's Best Colleges / Why Does College Cost So Much?" - Robert B. Archibald and David H. Feldman, 08.11.10 in Forbes.com

"Colleges buy land they don't know how they'll use" - By MARC BEJA , 09.06.10 in Forbes.com from AP

(Keyword searches at Forbes.com online reveals several dozen articles related to "college costs".)

[schaabdl]

Originally Posted by FastEddy

"America's Best Colleges / Why Does College Cost So Much?" - Robert B. Archibald and David H. Feldman, 08.11.10 in Forbes.com

"Colleges buy land they don't know how they'll use" - By MARC BEJA , 09.06.10 in Forbes.com from AP

(Keyword searches at Forbes.com online reveals several dozen articles related to "college costs".)

If demand is high and supply nearly at a fixed level, then one would expect high cost. However, the Forbes article does have a glaring absence (maybe it is in the book) - and that is third party pay system. As long as student loans are easily obtained then there is no incentivie to keep prices in line with inflation. This is the same issue with medical costs - who is actually paying does impact the final price.

[qosmann]

Originally Posted by schaabdl

If demand is high and supply nearly at a fixed level, then one would expect high cost. However, the Forbes article does have a glaring absence (maybe it is in the book) - and that is third party pay system. As long as student loans are easily obtained then there is no incentivie to keep prices in line with inflation. This is the same issue with medical costs - who is actually paying does impact the final price.

it is the good old economic observation - when you subsidize something, you get more of it.

over the past 50 years (baby boomers coming into their prime demographically speaking) education has been way over subsidized and way oversold.

no reason to control costs when revenue is unrestricted, unobstructed.

like I've said in other posts in this thread.... education is inefficient. inefficiency is opportunity.

but unfortunately we all suffer from the liberal educational elite mentality that any and all education is of equal value. I personally believe that a liberal education is of great value, but there is no need to spend what we spend these days to get such an education.

so what? so if the institutions of higher education can deliver the same product for one percent of the cost... then what?

who will answer? taxpayers? tenured professors?

time for a change. IMHO

[FastEddy]

Originally Posted by schaabdl

If demand is high and supply nearly at a fixed level, then one would expect high cost. However, the Forbes article does have a glaring absence (maybe it is in the book) - and that is third party pay system. As long as student loans are easily obtained then there is no incentivie to keep prices in line with inflation. This is the same issue with medical costs - who is actually paying does impact the final price.

... And of course Value verses Costs do not enter into these equations, either. Same, same for medical ...

qosmann: "it is the good old economic observation - when you subsidize something, you get more of it. ..."

... and it comes in quart jars? Buckets and buckets of education all for the price of ever diminishing dollar values.

Graffiti: The deflation of educational values is directly proportional to the inflation of educational costs ... plus a constant

[schaabdl]

Where Is That Money Going?

[qosmann]

Out here in California we are being subjected to RINO NutMeg's ads about how she would give a billion dollars to the state higher education system to "fix things".

funny how even the CEO of a highly innovative internet company defaults to a "throw money at the problem" position rather that take the obvious step that I and others have suggested.

sigh.... we are doomed....

[FastEddy]

A few weeks back, I met Greg, the head of the San Rafael Ca. School Bored ... He, without hesitation, asked me if I was "one of those tea party types". As our conversation developed He also, without hesitation, admitted to being a genuine Marxist ... I kid you not.

... And this was at a "fund raiser" for the San Rafael School District. Imagine if you will that the richest school district in California, possibly the richest in the World, is throwing annual "fund raisers"! ... charity events! ... As if!