Why spend more on higher education

A couple days ago, Salon published this article about the state of public colleges and universities in California. The complaints will be generally familiar to anyone who’s read articles on the same topic: declining government funding, rising tuition along with fees and other expenses, more student debt, more work for professors and other employees. The author pins the blame on state government funding decisions. California spends too much on prisons and not enough on colleges and universities.

Yet, oddly enough, Salon published two other articles at the same time documenting problems with what students are getting from colleges and universities nationwide. One documents grade inflation. The numbers clearly show that schools now give out much better grades than they did 50 years ago. It’s hard to believe that’s because of a massive rise in student intelligence. More likely, it’s caused by a decline in standards.

Another article documents that ways that universities–including many public ones–are partnering with profit-hungry corporations to squeeze more money out of students. Among the highlights:

The dorms it develops are more than cement structures for living; in many cases, it has transformed dormitory residences into extravagant resorts. Examples include the amenities-rich complex now being built at the University of Alabama, which features a movie theater, clubhouse and resort-style pools and fitness rooms, and the Players Club, a resort-style housing complex that was built for Florida State University. Similar projects are in progress at the University of Texas-Austin, University of Kentucky and the University of Connecticut-Storrs.
… at the University of Louisville privatized dorms cost about $600 more per student/per semester than traditional dorms. And those extra fees come right out of students’ pockets.

As a result, colleges are intentionally burdening the entire student body with increased housing costs, and putting a particular burden on working families and low-income students—all in the name of profit.

…nearly 900 colleges have partnerships with financial institutions that attach bank products to student IDs. The report finds that banks and financial institutions now influence and control federal financial student aid distribution to over 9 million students by connecting checking accounts and prepaid debit cards to these IDs.

For quite some time, federal student aid was disbursed via check with no cost to access the funds; now, due to these new financial deals, students pay fees to access their student aid, including fees for activation, ATM fees, overdrawing fees, per-swipe fees and in-activity fees. According to SEC filings, Higher One—one of the largest integrated financial aid disbursement services companies—made $142.5 million in revenue in 2011 through extracting fees from student aid disbursement cards. To date, 32 of the 50 major public colleges in America have brokered deals with banks to issue ID cards that act as debit cards.

…With the magnitude of the continued changes taking place at colleges and universities, one would think that college newspapers, many with long histories of being independent voices on campus, would play an even larger role in informing and empowering student issues and activism on campus. But this fundamental presence is also being threatened.

Recently at the University of Georgia, student journalists at The Red and Black walked off the job after the nonprofit publishing company that owns the paper installed non-student staffers who held strong editorial and censorship power over student employees. Although the publishing company and The Red and Blackare independent of the university, interference in their reporting inspired students to walk away from a situation where the power structure was clearly encroaching on their individual freedoms.

So the same source tells us that universities should get lots more of our money while they simultaneously have wandered far away from their stated purpose of educating students and preparing them for careers and generally advancing intellectualism. Why not instead have government money for colleges and universities tied to some sort of standards? For starters, how about saying that a certain percentage of all government money that a university gets must be spent on academic pursuits, rather that resort-style dorms or other distractions?

They are in a bind.

Funding cuts mean that colleges are now, more than ever before, dependent on full-tuition students. Tuition used to be a smaller slice of the pie, and there was plenty of room for scholarship students and those paying reduced fees. But those days are long gone, and universities are now in fierce competition for the smaller handful of students who can afford to pay out of pocket, because these are the people who subsidize everyone else and keep the rest of the college running.

In order to attract these students (or, more importantly, attract their parents), they need to offer luxury accommodations and other perks.

Furthermore, budget cuts are forcing schools to focus on their “core competencies” and privatize anything they can, leading to even fewer affordable student services.

Anyway, the problem here is not enough money. Returning state funding will fix this.

Harvard is well known for grade inflation. I think their standards are decent at least. When my daughter was at Chicago ( a school without grade inflation) someone from Harvard came to talk about this problem. He was booed. (Good naturedly.)

For elite schools I suspect kids are more intelligent. MIT when I started 40 years ago was about the same size as it is today. Today there are more kids to apply, and far more women apply than when I went, so the competition is much more fierce. Someone in admissions said that the current class was much smarter than my class (but we were more interesting.) I see lots of resumes from kids just graduating, and I believe it. I was a total goof off in comparison, and I had a very decent cum.

As for dorms fancy dorms are seen as a competitive advantage, but are few and far between. My kids’ dorms were nothing special. My dorm, on the other hand, was designed by Alvar Aalto and was an architectural landmark. My freshman year we had people coming to clean up our rooms, that disappeared to save money, and the Harvard people had really nice suites with maid service back then. So the sterile dorms of today weren’t always the case.
Also, more and more state universities don’t even let you live in dorms all 4 years. Cal does not, Maryland used to but doesn’t any more. My daughter got to stay but she was an RA.

All in all things are worse now. Maybe they can get up to an acceptable level of squalor soon.