The High Cost of College
Here’s another story about the high cost of college.
The cost of college has far out-paced inflation over the past five decades, making it harder for students to work their way through college and come out debt-free, or even with manageable debt. Tuition, books and living expenses for an in-state student living on an adequate but moderate budget is estimated at $22,542 at UW-Madison for 2011-12. It was $1,430 in 1960, which equates to $10,867 in 2011 dollars, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
It’s an issue that leaders at both the state and national levels are looking at closely. President Barack Obama unveiled a plan Friday to tie a college’s eligibility for federal aid to the institution’s success at improving affordability. The UW Board of Regents will discuss how to keep costs down at its February meeting.
The reporter tells the tale of a young lady who is struggling to pay for school at UW Madison as the costs continue to go up. It’s an important issue with a lot of layers. How much should taxpayers subsidize college education? If so, how much control should the taxpayers exert over universities? Why are costs going up so much faster than inflation? Etc. There were two things that caught my eye about this particular story. Here’s the first one:
“It is much harder to work your way through college than it was,” Baum said. “That said, there didn’t used to be all this financial aid.”
Hmmmm… that’s interesting. So is the availability of “all this financial aid” driving the price of college? Generally speaking, when one is having to work to pay for something, they are generally more particular about what classes they are willing to pay for. Is the availability of “free” money (and I say “free” including borrowed money which many college students never think about how they will pay it back) resulting in colleges expanding into unwise areas just to soak up those dollars? It wouldn’t be the first time that “free” money created an entire industry designed to get it.
Perhaps that sentence in the story caught my eye because of the second part of the story that got my attention:
Ohlinger is double-majoring in horticulture, and community and environmental sociology, with a certificate in global cultures.
That’s the lady whose story weaves throughout the article. OK… so here we have a young lady who is struggling to attend UW Madison. She admits that she’ll be $40,000 in debt after college and, on her 5th year, she’s easily going to spend $100,000 or more for her education. What’s the ROI on a $100 degree in Horticulture and community and environmental sociology? Might I suggest that if she is struggling to pay for school that she attend a less expensive university? Or get a degree in something that has better job prospects? And if there wasn’t so much “free” money available, would UW Madison even offer a degree in community and environmental sociology?
I say increase financial aid for anyone who is smart enough to go to college and can’t afford it but also is not able to enlist and take advantage of the GI Bill.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 1345 hrs
For those confused by the name of the program (as I was, even as a alumnus), the Community and Environmental Sociology program was renamed from Rural Sociology in 2009. The program itself was founded over 80 years ago.
Also, a big part of the problem, which the article mentions in this girl’s situation but not in detail, is the growing difference between what families can actually afford to contribute out of pocket and what government assumes they can afford.
And both parties are guilty of using the UW System as a scapegoat over the last decade rather than deal with the areas of the budget whose unchecked growth is causing the problems (MA and K-12). This ongoing shell game of cutting state aid to the UW System and raising tuition to compensate can only go so far.
It’s like that old saying about cheap, good, and fast, pick two. Present constraints dictate that a university can be great and affordable, affordable and selective, or great and selective. As it is, UW-Madison has moved away from great and affordable in the last decade and, out of necessity, in the direction of great and selective. Whether that’s good or bad is for the people of Wisconsin to decide.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 29, 2012 at 1410 hrs
Not to worry. The State of Wisconsin will employ that young graduate in some harebrained Department which requires a double-major in AgSoc and Hort.
Read their job specs….
Posted by dad29 on January 29, 2012 at 1428 hrs
“Trying to double or triple major, perhaps more common today than it once was, also delays completion time.”
From experiences of other students I know, this is a big part of the increase in costs, as doing so really does delay to the degree.
Better that students be counseled to complete the standard single major and minor, then come back for the second major—four to six more courses in the minor—while working fulltime and/or for better pay. Students need to talk with/listen to advisors and to read the catalog to know their options like this one.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 1518 hrs
Supply and demand with a little injection of government interference and you have a recipe for cost explosion.
Everyone thinks a college degree is the golden ticket. Perhaps once upon a time, it was more-so, but now that between media, the government, politicians, schools, and everyone else driving college, college, college into the brain of every high-schooler, we have colleges where demand is spiking.
And we’ve got the government getting involved with all the pandering to the masses with financial aid and government grants to continue to flood the market with artificial demand.
Of course now we have skilled trades that can’t find workers because no one wants to actually work with their hands anymore. Everyone thinks a degree and you’ll sit behind a desk with your feet up for the rest of your working career.
Today’s college graduates (in aggregate) have horrible skills (I know, I have interviewed them) and are wholly unqualified because they had the financial aid to pay for school so instead of going to school, working to pay for it, and drive yourself into a career with a skillset, they just enjoy the “college experience” living on financial aid and loans and don’t develop the same drive/skills. (but hey they can play beer-pong with the best of them!)
So we have a flood of people with worthless degrees, no skills, but a boat-load of student loans to pay back… Oh and no jobs because industry is waiting for the most business-unfriendly president in the history of the country to get booted out of office.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 1905 hrs
Yeah, costs are rising because financial aid is available….or perhaps because the taxpayer support for the university has been in the 50% range and has droppped to the 25% or less range. Why would taxpayers support one of the premier research univerisities in the country that proivided an education at a relatively afordable rate for Wisconsin residents? And if colleges are not doing a good job with the graduates produced I am sure that cutting aid, making it less afordable and forcing cuts within the various departments will help boost the quality of graduates. Boy, it’s sure lucky you guys were not around at the end of World War II to put the kabosh on the GI Bill that allowed that greates generation to receive college educations at little cost. That had no benefit on the nation for the next 40 years, did it? The shortsightedness and greed of those who do not see benefit to our country of producing another generation of college grads will help to speed up what is already a push by the TeaPublicans to destroy the middle class.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 1942 hrs
When MATC appeared before our County Board, the President bragged about how much they pay their teachers. Could the high priced help have anything to do with the high cost of education?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 2046 hrs
Gee: While there might be some general relevance to your comment, it certainly doesn’t apply to UW-Madison or to this story. First, UW-Madison doesn’t offer minors. There are certain majors where one can add a concentration specific to another major (e.g. a content area “minor” for students enrolled in School of Education programs). But one cannot, for instance, do an Econ major with a Spanish minor, or a Political Science major with a Sociology minor. It’s been that way at UW-Madison for ages.
Also, a typical major at UW-Madison is a 30 credit minimum, which is about 7-8 classes. That’s only about 10-12 credits more than the typical minor program anyway. And many UW-Madison students are carrying considerable numbers of AP credits into their first year, so the working the extra 2-3 courses for a second major into one’s schedule is usually not a problem.
Finally, UW-Madison has very specific rules about returning to complete a second undergraduate degree. The course of study has to be considerably different than the one originally pursued, and the student needs to earn a minimum of 30 credits beyond what was originally earned. One can return as a “special” student on a course-by-course basis but those credits can’t be tacked on to any previously completed degree.
Food for thought.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 29, 2012 at 2220 hrs
The government decided it needed to subsidize three industries. Healthcare, Higher Ed and most recently Housing, in the name of making it affordable (or financeable) for all.
Interestingly enough, the costs of all three have skyrocketed to the point where people are struggling with “affordability”. All three industries are on the verge of collapse or have collapsed.
Get the government out of the market for all three, and costs will drop. Quality may improve.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 29, 2012 at 2227 hrs
With the population getting older, the government needs more money, thus I don’t think the fees will not go down in any way, and it is also the main reason why it is so high….
Exotic MontrealPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 0338 hrs
Looking at the big picture, universities have three primary functions:
1. Passing on knowledge (teaching).
2. Creating new knowledge (research).
3. Credentialling (awarding degrees).It’s long past time to take a hard look at how technology might improve productivity, and whether these activites need to take place in the traditional college campus.
Most undergrad teaching surely could be done with distance learning, or even with a stack of DVD-lectures plus a syllabus with required reading- at least for motivated students. Students who want to pay $$$ per credit to sit in a classroom may prefer the traditional format, but it surely is not necessary to learn most of what’s found in practically all undergrad courses.
And credentialling could be done with comprehensive exams instead of the required seat-time (credit-hours).
Much research is already being done off-campus and outside the university and in any case the real crisis is the dismal and declining teaching productivity in higher ed.
Of course, the present higher ed. establishment has no incentive to change anything so long as the money keeps coming in. Indeed, college accreditors will punish any school that gets too efficient as it requires minimum teacher-to-student ratios.
But surely change is coming. There’s no reason why an excellent AND low-cost college education (complete with credentials) should not be available to all with the ability and motivation to persue it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 0907 hrs
I worked my way through school almost 30 years ago. No aid, no scholarships, no loans, no help from home. Now my kids could never do without student loans what with costs what they are. What my son pays for one semester of tech school is roughly what I paid for 2.5 years of college. Of course I lived pretty cheap (some would argue like a hobo) and that option is gone as well what with rules and regs. I doubt he could live in a basement like I did.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 0928 hrs
Recess Supervisor, please reread my post. There is a difference between a second major and a second degree. Those who do not realize that there is a difference, and that it is an option (at many campuses; my point was not specific to the Madison campus alone, just as the story was using this case only as an example; the story is about colleges and their costs in general), generally are foolish and ought to get master’s degrees instead of second degrees. But the second major for a returning student is less costly in time and money and often is a good resort for those who find their first majors not useful on the job market and/or not a field of interest for them, anymore.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 1048 hrs
Albigensian, that is the first comment I have disagreed with any part of in a long time. While I vehemently oppose all of the courses (mainly the 101, gym, art app. classes) that promote ‘socialization’ as their true prime purpose at a College level, I think the internet has already had a significant negative impact on man as a social animal. College kids should learn and interact with others their age and form long term relationships there. They just should not get credit for it. I still think if the bozo classes were removed entirely and (less) Professors were paid just to teach and research rather than all of the other activities they proudly mire themselves in, the costs would plummet. 30 credits for a major is a fair number, it is the 100 ‘general’ credits that unnecessarily help skyrocket the total costs.
I don’t think an internet high school and an internet College degree will produce nearly as many people that employers will want to hire than a traditional college experience.
Dumbing down the College entrance requirements and the host of courses that were added for lower achievers (and athletes, let’s face it) has been a major driver in costs. Another has been the loosening of the requirements for Government money.
No public run anything has ever ‘saved money’ allocations grew so they did. A College board has an extra 100k? What do we expand first? Education, like Government etc., has never made any plan for ‘less money’ coming in to the coffers, despite there never being a long lasting national economy in history that has not gone through expansions and contractions. And the Daves of the worlds continue to mindlessly harangue everyone: Cut spending just because there is less money to spend? You selfish bastards!!!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 1231 hrs
I’m just going to leave this here. As someone currently majoring in electrical engineering, I found plenty of internships and jobs available. My friends in liberal arts classes struggle to find jobs to match their degrees. They’d be better off going to a tech school or just trying to enter the workforce.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwyxluyRyO1qgl2cyo2_400.jpg
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 1243 hrs
As someone currently majoring in electrical engineering, I found plenty of internships and jobs available.
True dat. I never had any trouble getting an internship during undergrad or grad school. Although I did turn down my first few internships to work on a production line since being a welder paid so much more. But then again I was a math TA during undergrad during school.
There is a difference between a second major and a second degree.
I double majored, but my majors were both STEM so it didn’t matter much. I wound up taking 4 extra courses that I really liked anyway. It got me a job offer to be an actuarial upon graduation, which would have paid better than the typical engineering offer by a fair chunk.
So a double major can be a nice adder, but going far afield isn’t the best idea to try and make yourself more marketable. If you’re having trouble being marketable you should reconsider your target earlier.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 1453 hrs
So, when I went to A&M, class of “86 whoop, I paid $12 an hour, plus about 500 for football tickets and lab fees. My total fees were damn cheap and I had friends working and paying off their tuitions as they took classes. They graduated with a few thousand dollars in debt, due to cost of living and car expenses.
My son is a freshman at Texas A&M. We pay $15,000 dollars a semester for out of state tuition, room and Sibisa food. If he were in state tuition that would be closer to $10,000- $12,000 a semester. For us, Wisconsin residence with a kid that scored 32 on his ACT, and had a GPA of 3.8, that is $30,000 a year for a Texan that is 20,000 a year. The average full time working American is making $28000 a year. If a student works 40 hours a week at minimum wage…no wait $10 an hour (which neither of my teenagers make, but just to prove my point) that would be 19,200 a year and would still not cover the cost of college and rarely do kids work 40 hours a week to cover the cost of college.
In 1986, I worked at a nursing home and covered all living expenses while my parents covered tuition. My brothers worked and lived at the pig farm to cover living expenses but my parents covered tuition cause it was a couple thousand bucks a year. The difference is kids cannot work and pay off most of their college expenses today, because the cost of living and tuition is higher than what a kid can make in a year. Reality sucks….my son could stay home and go to MATC to get a degree and save money, but he works his butt off at school and works a job and only makes $12,000 a year and made all A’s and one B at Texas A&M. I guess he is a slacker…..........Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 30, 2012 at 2121 hrs
Gee: I know there is a difference between a second major and a second degree. My point, if it was missed, is that UW-Madison doesn’t allow students to graduate and then later return to complete coursework for a second major to append onto the original degree.
I won’t speak to other colleges since I am less familiar with their processes. And I concur that a second or third major is often not a terribly worthwhile investment, especially if it requires students to spend an additional year as an undergraduate. You’re right - part-time graduate study is probably a better investment of time and money.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 31, 2012 at 0000 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134054
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 01:25 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 119
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 01:45 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).