# College Tuition: Biggest Rip Off In Modern Times???



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Is is just me, or does anyone else think the cost of a college education is ludicrously expensive? I just received an email about a new congressional bill introduced called the Student Loan Forgiveness Act. This is in response to the over one trillion dollars in student loan debt here in the good old USA. It was also stated that the average cost of a college education has increased 827% since 1980, the year I graduated from high school. 

What are your thoughts? I think families are getting screwed, kids are getting short changed, and college sports coaches are getting paid way too much money!


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

To get a good job, you need a good education
To pay for a good education, you need a good job

Try to wrap your mind around that one.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I've worked at universities all my life. I agree that things absolutely need to change in students favor. As far as I can tell, the issue is not so much professor or teacher salaries or work loads. My understanding is that administrator salaries and positions have grown enormously. In addition there is enormous competition to make facilities and programs world class (or at least much better). Universities spend highly on buildings, facilities, and programs to elevate their stature among universities. All the dorms I have seen seem luxurious to me especially compared to what was available when I was a student. 

I realize that the US is richer than we were when I was a student, but the trend I see is that students seem to come overwhelmingly from middle to upper class families. I worry that our universities are primarily educating the wealthy half (roughly) of society rather than the competent half. When I went to school, I was not aware of much wealth among students. Now, it seems everyone has a car and a credit card. Aside from charging too much for a college education, we are making that education prohibitive for a significant portion of society that we should want to educate.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Unless you're a basketball star. Then you get a free education and become an instant millionaire when you leave college and join the NBA.

The problem for many others is that the fastest growing job market is in janitorial work, and other low paying service jobs.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Yes mmbls, I know what you mean about the wild spending on infrastructure. I live near Syracuse University and there is construction of new buildings going on non-stop. I think it's criminal to have the banks making a trillion dollars in loans for a college education. And yes, the administrators make huge salaries.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

starthrower said:


> ....What are your thoughts? I think families are getting screwed, kids are getting short changed, and college sports coaches are getting paid way too much money!


Just one example--University of Alabama president makes $512,000/yr, while the football coach makes $5.62M/yr.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Lewis H. Lapham wrote a great article on forgetting history for the current issue of Harper's Magazine. He included some poll stats about recent college graduates. 76 percent have no knowledge of the Bill Of Rights. 73 percent couldn't name America's arch enemy during the four decades of the cold war.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Vaneyes said:


> Just one example--University of Alabama president makes $512,000/yr, while the football coach makes $5.62M/yr.


Clearly, they have their priorities in the right order


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

mmsbls said:


> ...
> 
> I realize that the US is richer than we were when I was a student, but the trend I see is that students seem to come overwhelmingly from middle to upper class families...


It seems the same here in Australia, compared to before. The experiments of post-1945 era to make education _equitable_ did work for a while, but now its different. Two candidates for the same job can have the same uni degree with similar marks, but if one comes from poor background and another from more well to do background, the latter has added advantages, what some theorists call _social capital_. It's got more to do with things like the neighborhood you grew up in, the jobs your parents had, the school you went to than what piece of paper or marks you have from uni. It's all about connections and networking, basically. If you don't have that in your background, you can be as smart as, but the guy with the_ right_ background will get the job regardless.

A cynical view, yes. Overall I'm a positive person, but not much about education today. Or the _money talks, it's not what you know but who you know_ kind of attitudes.

& it explains my anti intellectual attitude on this forum. I'm suspicious of theory devoid of any or much practicality. You can teach a poor guy a degree, but you can't give him _social capital,_ which is in practice more important.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

If I had a large company that needed moderately skilled workers I think I would try to hire out of high school and train them. 

Also, if I had a kid finishing high school at this time, I would advise her to take a year or two or three off before going to college. Work, live, save some money, maybe travel - if she decides she really needs the university education after that, it'll be a thing she chose and will take seriously, rather than just "the thing to do" at her stage in life.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> If I had a large company that needed moderately skilled workers I think I would try to hire out of high school and train them...


Which is basically what used to happen in the past, before mass university education, post-1945. & it's still partly how apprenticeships for the trades are done, although there are technical colleges involved in that as well.

Speaking of which, here in Australia there is a loans system for uni degrees, but until now technical college has been exempt. Students there didn't have to pay for tuition, only an admin fee (usually a flat rate, and not a huge amount). Over the years, some courses in techs have had tuition fees attached - esp. higher diplomas - now the government plans to introduce same student loans in techs as has been the case in unis for like 30 years. I knew this would happen. It would only be a matter of time.


----------



## Chrythes (Oct 13, 2011)

No free higher education in the US for those who get high results from SAT and other tests? 
Here every profession in the University has got state-financed places for those who succeed well during the State Exams, those who has less luck need to pay if they want to study that specific subject (of course, every subject has got it's minimum score for those who want to get into state-financed places - medicine requires a very high score, so there's always an intense competition between the students).
But on the other hand there's UK, which gives you a loan for your studies, but you have the possibility to never pay back if you don't earn a certain amount each year, and the studies in Scotland or Denmark are free, so it's even better.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Yes, in the UK, we pay but it's a lot cheaper - I am extremely glad that I don't live in the U.S. as I would never have been able to afford it, and yet here I was capable of getting into one of the leading institutions. It would have sucked massively if I missed out! 

I don't know what the system is like in the U.S., whether or not you have to pay up front, but here any student can get a loan from the government which follows the inflation rate for their tuition which they needn't pay back until they are earning a reasonable income (wiped off after 25 years if you never get a job  ). My tuition has cost an average of around £3,200 per year with a four year course totalling to £12,800. I also get a maintenance loan for accommodation and living costs, which is a similar number, slightly less, so double that to around £24,000. Students from poorer backgrounds like myself are also entitled to maintenance grants, which are also for living costs but which don't need to be repaid, and individual universities may offer bursaries.

So, by the end of my degree, I'll owe around £24,000, but I won't need to start paying until I have a job with a certain salary, and then the rate at which I pay it back should be manageable. Of course, students starting university now will have tuition fees three times as much, around £9,000 per year, with the new government legislation.

I really don't know the arguments about free higher education well enough to know if or what students should be paying, but I don't see how the entirety of higher education in its current state can or should be supported by taxes, as far too many people are going to university for poor degrees that they don't need and should not be subsidised for doing it.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

science said:


> if I had a kid finishing high school at this time, I would advise her to take a year or two or three off before going to college. Work, live, save some money, maybe travel - if she decides she really needs the university education after that, it'll be a thing she chose and will take seriously, rather than just "the thing to do" at her stage in life.


Definitely! A lot of kids don't really know what they want to do for a living at age 18. I say keep the money in the family and don't **** away 100 grand or more to universities and bank loans. Let your kid figure out what he/she wants to do and help them along financially until they get on their feet and become independent.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

My university of choice right now is 57,000 dollars a year for tuition. Add a place to live and money to live on to that equation and its quite costly. Fortunately I'm working with them and perhaps could get it all covered due to my academic excellence and my poverty background.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

57 grand? That's insane! Here's hoping you get the full scholarship.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

If a US citizen gets into a US school with loads of money, some of them have need-blind admissions and will then full-need financial aid.

When I finished high school I was a really religious guy, intending to go to Cedarville College (as far as I could tell at the time, the most prestigious fundamentalist Christian school). But colleges like Yale were sending me applications, so I applied just for fun, and then to my surprise I got in. Then, although Cedarville cost about 1/3 as much as Yale, the financial aid packages left me almost no choice: we couldn't afford Cedarville, but for Yale my parents would pay nothing and I had only to work and take loans, finishing my education with something like $30k of debt. I understand that at least Harvard and Princeton have the same admissions and aid policies.

Problem is, there's only maybe a dozen institutions that can afford that kind of aid, and between them all they might deal with a few thousand students a year. The overwhelming majority remain. 

My younger brothers didn't get such options: they went to an art college in Seattle and the University of Wyoming, and my parents will be in debt the rest of their lives for those schools.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Thank you, starthrower. I'm under much pressure constantly to never slip up on anything whatsoever. If I have a single off-day then my entire academic future collapses beneath me basically. It doesn't help that I started late due to family circumstances. I've got quite far in a short period of time though. I know many people who have spent half a million for education and more. So in short, yes college tuition is a huge rip-off. Nothing else has increased as much as tuition has. Luckily if I DO get that full scholarship, I'm pretty plush all the way through PhD program for tuition. Without these opportunities I'd surely end up like most people who came from where I'm from.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)




----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

brianwalker said:


>


Going to watch this tonight... I think everybody should have a secondary education, but I'm sure the other side has some points that will resonate with me as well. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

Higher education needs to be accessible to all.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Philip said:


> Higher education needs to be accessible to all.


You should watch this video.



brianwalker said:


>


And read this article.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/10/pe...nd-its-not-the-internet-its-higher-education/

http://www.educationnews.org/higher-education-bubble/


----------



## Mesa (Mar 2, 2012)

When i leave university after next May, i'll be almost £20,000 in debt, with effectively a worthless degree from a worthless university.

It's entirely my fault, but still. Since the time and money was a waste anyway, i should have done philosophy or classics.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

brianwalker said:


> You should watch this video.
> 
> And read this article.
> 
> ...


Re-Edit:

I don't really care. The future of education should not be decided by men in ties.


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

I agree tuition is pretty crazy. It's not just the tuition either...you have to remember that students also have to pay cost of living as well as for books. Just speaking from my experiences at college (one of the cheaper ones out there), it costs ~$7000 a year in tuition. So over 4 years that's like buying 4 new cars lol. Plus, the costs of tuition are rising by a pretty hefty amount every year, but the services provided are not changing in the least.

As an aside, what really gets me is some of the degrees that colleges offer. They often offer all sorts of degrees that basically have practically no job prospects after graduation, but they still charge you these exorbitant fees and of course they lure you in and tell you that you'll be set for life once you graduate. I see so many people getting degrees in things like English (nothing against English majors for the record!) that end up working for minimum wage because they can't find any jobs out there. I kind of experienced this first-hand after getting a degree in bioengineering, only to discover post-graduation that, despite what the media may suggest, it's a practically non-existent field.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Philip said:


> If society decides to limit the number of college students, for whatever reason, the selection should be based on potential and aptitude, not the size of the wallet; that's what accessible means.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Even then, i think everyone who wants to go to college should be able to. Potential and aptitude can be developed.


I don't know where you're from, but the American Ivy league is incredibly affordable because if your family income is below a certain amount you go for free.

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/home/content/harvard-increases-financial-aid-low-income-students

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2007/12/harvard-announces-sweeping-middle-income-initiative/

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/3/30/financial-aid-2016/

CORRECTION: A previous version of this editorial stated that under the revised terms of the Harvard Financial Aid Initiative, financial aid is only guaranteed to families that earn up to $150,000 rather than the previous $180,000. Under the new policy, families earning above $150,000 are still likely to receive some aid.

Philip, if your family income is say, 40,000$ per year, you go to Harvard for free, 100% free, tuition and lodging, etc, are all *provided via grants. *


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

LOL this is why I'm going to an Ivy League school. My family doesn't even make 1/5 of 150,000. I will be rolling in the aid.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

brianwalker said:


> I don't know where you're from, but the American Ivy league is incredibly affordable because if your family income is below a certain amount you go for free.
> 
> http://www.fas.harvard.edu/home/content/harvard-increases-financial-aid-low-income-students
> 
> ...


#21


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Philip said:


> Re-Edit:
> 
> I don't really care. The future of education should not be decided by men in ties.


Who should they be decided by? How should we decide to what extent we subsidize education?


----------



## dmg (Sep 13, 2009)

My college, which is a junior college, just built this nice pond on campus. Meanwhile, our professors have to use antiquated computers in class which results in delayed lessons and mumbled curses.


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

brianwalker said:


> Who should they be decided by? How should we decide to what extent we subsidize education?


It should be decided by nude mud wrestling.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

dmg said:


> My college, which is a junior college, just built this nice pond on campus. Meanwhile, our professors have to use antiquated computers in class which results in delayed lessons and mumbled curses.


The community college in my county built a massive granite structure displaying the college's namesake at the entrance way to the tune of over 700,000 dollars. The initial estimate was 125,000. I wonder if there were any kickback schemes involved? Anyway, shortly thereafter the administration announced another tuition increase.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

starthrower said:


> The community college in my county built a massive granite structure displaying the college's namesake at the entrance way to the tune of over 700,000 dollars. The initial estimate was 125,000. I wonder if there were any kickback schemes involved? Anyway, shortly thereafter the administration announced another tuition increase.












One of the first and most important experiences I had in college - I think it wasn't even college yet, just the recruiting session - was seeing these marble statues that didn't mean anything and wondering how much they cost and then realizing that there was a huge amount of money in the world, right there around me, and all I would have to do is find a way to shave off a sliver of it and I'd be fine in life.


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

The high cost of education is one of the reasons that there is actually less opportunity in the "Land of opportunity" than in many other countries. Your chances to climb the socioeconomic ladder is considerably higher in Canada or Denmark.


----------



## dmg (Sep 13, 2009)

Sometimes donors to colleges leave stipulations, such as 'you must build a flower garden with the specified flowers that must be changed out at the appropriate times of the year'. That was an actual stipulation from a donor who left a local university several million $$.

That pond was not one of those things.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

The most gigantic rip-off of the American Schooling System (I suppose one has to still call it that :-/ is the fact that our 'colleges' are extensions of high school.

That should be clarified for our European members: about 60% - 65% of undergraduate unit credits for an American Bachelors degree are "General Education" courses, that's right, nothing directly pertaining to the major 'what ur Bachelor's diploma sez ya gotta degree fur.'

Europeans have that all under their belt by the end of Gymnasium / High-School / O-levels or whatever they call it.

Ergo - 60%-65% of all the money spent on college / university in the states is spent on what, elsewhere, high schools have provided their students before they even applied to upper level institutions.

Before ca. 1980, the conservatory student could rely on four years of solid training directly related to their major. Somewhere around the late 1970's, early 1980's, many a conservatory and art school, the private ones, also changed over to including those general education units as part of the bachelor's requirement. Currently, with few exceptions (perhaps Juilliard or Curtis, etc.) almost all arts students are similarly busy with, and paying for, something they 'should' have been provided via state-given education by the time they graduated high school.

Of course, it is exactly the same dilemma for all students in all academic majors.

In the early 1980's, many a state college or university was nearly dirt-cheap, the fees affordable to all. Specifically, in one state I know of, the per semester fees began to ramp up in the very early 1980's - one year the fee was ***, the next year it had doubled, the following year, it had doubled yet again.

Apart from making it that much more difficult for those from lower income families to send their kids to college, even if the student went part time and helped with their tuition by holding a part-time job, the incredible inflation of college costs are the cause for another very sad development: students are not willing to get a good classical education in undergrad, nor are they quite so eager to pursue the more abstract and less practical of disciplines in the arts or letters. If you are going to go so many tens of thousands of dollars in debt for a bachelor's degree worth, relatively, tissue paper when you go to the job market, it had better be in something practical with an eye on a job. The first to be checked off the practical list is the arts, philosophy, (though philosophy is one of the better undergraduate degrees if one wishes to later pursue law) etc.

Americas best state universities and many a top-ten Ivy League School have become trade schools, not places of higher learning.

Ivy league, the 'top ten' and prestigious private universities are often now between $40,000 an $80,000 per annum! Guess who are the only ones, apart from a tiny minority of scholarship students, who will be a music majors at Yale? To those from less fortunate economic demographics, the costs for state colleges are relatively proportionate to those Ivy League tuition costs, the difference being they will not go that far in debt on such a gamble, and the parents can't just readily write a check for the full amount.

The only start of a solution I can imagine is the unimaginable - a nation wide solidarity movement where all high school graduating seniors do not even apply to any colleges or junior colleges, but instead, stay at home and flood the workplace with job applications, and that entire population 'just saying no,' while suffering a wait of at least several years while slinging hamburgers, working in warehouses, etc. [There, at least, is a whole crop of the citizenry who would be willing to do those low-paid jobs all the immigrants, legal and non, now perform.] That 'solidarity strike' would have to run several years or more until the economy of the system -- and the nation -- is so shaken that both the American population at large and its governors wake up and make some adjustments.

Right. Sci-Fi script, that one.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Chrythes said:


> No free higher education in the US for those who get high results from SAT and other tests?
> Here every profession in the University has got state-financed places for those who succeed well during the State Exams, those who has less luck need to pay if they want to study that specific subject (of course, every subject has got it's minimum score for those who want to get into state-financed places - medicine requires a very high score, so there's always an intense competition between the students).
> But on the other hand there's UK, which gives you a loan for your studies, but you have the possibility to never pay back if you don't earn a certain amount each year, and the studies in Scotland or Denmark are free, so it's even better.


The national average on the SAT verbal scores, in the 1980's, dropped 100 points: in the 1990's, the national average scores dropped another 100 points. Essay samples, writing at all, is barely part of that test. It is now almost entirely multiple choice format....

Along with the program which admitted minorities with lower grade point averages over better-qualified non-minority students, which gave an opportunity but yet was not overall a success, the nations 'grade curve' in all universities, since the 1980's and a bit before, has been radically 'dumbed down.' This INCLUDES many of the more prestigious and expensive 'top ten private' universities. A literal deflation, then, of the worth of grades, test results, and diplomas.

Add the exorbitant price for what is now, post 1970, a very much lesser quality education, and you've got a slight picture of the real mess U.S. education is in.

ADD: We now have business firms hiring tutors for their newly employed, who have MASTERS DEGREES, to teach those employees how to write a cohesive brief memo! There is another growing side industry sprung up as a result - many of those same college-educated employees are having their work returned to them as 'not satisfactory.' The employees reaction? A major pout and display of 'hurt feelings.' The solution? COUNSELORS, who both tutor the employee to improve their unsatisfactory work while stroking their hurt feelings. [Is there anything wrong with this picture?] END ADD.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

science said:


> If I had a large company that needed moderately skilled workers I think I would try to hire out of high school and train them...


The UK is probably in the same place as the US. I am doing a little work in universities in Gloucestershire and Birmingham as a visiting lecturer (in their business schools) and it is interesting the way that the unis are only too well aware of their need to provide courses which best suit the students to their subsequent careers. I was working with third year students in one uni earlier this week, and these people have had two years' study, a year's work experience and are now in their final academic year. I can't help wondering whether they would be more successful with two years' apprenticeship with an employer (as Science suggests), an academic year in college to give them a broader perspective and a more objective learning, and then a final year's apprenticeship at work.

The only reason this model wouldn't work is that not all employers are big enough to run three year apprenticeships. (The uni specialises in the leisure and catering industry - it is a former polytechnic, for our UK readers.) But then there is no reason for the uni not to offer the hands on training in partnership with employers.


----------



## Krummhorn (Feb 18, 2007)

starthrower said:


> . . . and college sports coaches are getting paid way too much money!





Vaneyes said:


> Just one example--University of Alabama president makes $512,000/yr, while the football coach makes $5.62M/yr.


I don't know how it works in other state universities, but here in Arizona, ASU and the U of A pay their coaching salaries solely from ticket proceeds and private donations.

Seems the ticket revenues from basketball and football more than cover their expenses and also subsidizes most other sports on those campuses. 
​


----------

