11–20 of 64 posts
Points #1 and #5, though, would likely not go over well with current university faculty. Reshuffling of faculty roles seems much better designed by those with classroom/advising experience. And who's to judge which are similar or niche fields of study, besides departments themselves?
How? Lower prices. Tuition+Fees used to hover around 10k total at public institutions.
Since it is easy to get a loan, people will borrow as much as needed to get to the highest tier institution that will accept them. The private ones can thus increase their prices, and lure the staff with higher salaries. Now the public institutions need to level up salaries of professors and administrators, or they will leave for the private institutions.
That has been happening over the last 20 years. Remove the government guarantees for student loans and make them dischargeable in bankruptcy (that is, return their status to a normal loan, from the special status that they have now) - and all of a sudden, lenders will start caring about making reasonable loans, people will have less credit to spend on education, and the prices will go down significantly to a reasonably supported level.
(It is likely to cause an implosion of the higher-ed bubble in the US in the process. So be it - popping this bubble is long overdue)
How? Lower prices. Tuition+Fees used to hover around 10k total at public institutions.
I, along with many people I know, got paid to go to school this way.
Why people are paying tens of thousands of dollars a year/semester is beyond me.
I know the price (i.e. tuition) is increasing, but this is due to colleges increasing tuition rates to make up for shortfalls as state budgets for higher education are cut. But I haven't seen any data showing that the costs have risen.
It's also worth noting that the #2 suggestion is mostly just an accounting trick that would increase the price to students, not decrease it. If "perks" like room and board aren't provided out of tuition, students will have to pay for that somehow anyway - they're necessities, not perks. And removing state subsidies for those things means that students will be paying even more, if you add up tuition + room + board.
Also, Coursera, Udacity, OCW, Kahn and iTunes
Pluses of going legit:
- dorm life is a unique experience unlike any other, worth it just for that
- parties
- according to Thomas J. Stanley, college is by far the best place to meet a quality spouse
- monetize pizza [0]
- pedigree if it's a big name or hipster elite school
- paid internships
- hustle yourself into a paid ugrad research assistant gig
- connections
- meet potential cofounders
- alcohol spending
- textbook costs (buy used and sell them back)
- dorm food -> "freshman 30"
- all-nighters
- unpaid internships
- min wage jobs on campus
I think the real trouble is that college is still awesome for people who can afford it. It's like anything in capitalism, whatever the people who can pay want is what happens. I read an article awhile back that discussed how one of the private schools in NYC was building new luxury student housing and sending limos to pick students up from the airport, that's about as far from these recommendations as you can get.
The point is that change isn't going to come from the elite schools, not real change. They may offer online programs and such, just dabbling really, but they have no trouble attracting wealthy students and donors, so they have no real incentive to radically change what they are doing. At best, they may tack on some extra programs under different names that just further cement the inequality in education we have in the US.
So, change needs to come from the bottom, from the small state schools and community colleges whose students are struggling to fund their educations. But state schools are on strict budgets, and small ones have small endowments. So real change won't come from there either because those institutions can't afford to make such radical changes, they literally don't have enough money. All they can do in many cases is what they've been doing in the past until they can't do that any more and then they can close up shop.
Either way, I personally have a pretty bleak view of the future of higher education in the US.
How about go to an in-state school, get a scholarship (many go unclaimed every year), and get an on campus job? I, along with many people I know, got paid to go to school this way. Why people are paying tens of thousands of dollars a year/semester is beyond me.
I'd prefer to get an online bachelor's degree if they existed.
This is what it cost me in New Zealand - with the fairly notable exception of the taxes I now pay to help others though their degrees.
May I ask how much your taxes are? People in NYC or California making $200K/year often pay >40% (getting close to 50% if you are in the $300K/year range) of their salary in taxes (33-35% federal, 8-13% state, and then there's sale tax. And estate tax) and get no reasonable-cost tuition nor reasonable-cost healthcare. Every time this discussion comes up, US people are quick to quote federal tax rates but when I compar…
The NZ Government provides free student allowance (a few hundred dollars per week living allowance for your first 4? years of tertiary education, means-tested against your parents' income, not paid back) as well as interest-free student loans (for as long as you stay within the country).
This -- and other similar -- ideas are great and certainly feasible. Unfortunately, it'll never happen because there's simply too much money involved in the academic world. The people running the educational institutions, the people running the corporate world, and the people running government are all good friends and none of them want to do anything to screw over the other.
But ultimately, if you can manage a nearly-as-good (or in some cases, better) education, for $10K true out-of-pocket cost rather than $200K+, then eventually a lot more people will complete, and be loyal to, the $10K system than the legacy $200K+ one.