What's Next for Public Colleges?

~ Laura

The former president of Miami University (Steve’s alma mater) is not too optimistic about the future of public colleges.

I think there’s a crisis in higher education. I think it’s a very severe crisis.

I see a large majority of public universities, the non-flagships, are sort of living hand-to-mouth right now. And they live off their meager state appropriations and their physical plants are getting run down and their faculty are discouraged. I don’t think they’re fulfilling the kind of opportunities that Americans expect from their colleges and universities.

At the other end of public spectrum, the selective publics are just getting more and more and more expensive. And they’re pricing out large segments of the American population.

Published by Laura

12 thoughts on “What's Next for Public Colleges?”

  1. He’s absolutely right. That’s why all these discussions about higher education that don’t get specific about what type of higher education they’re referring to are basically useless. Those who are working in privates and flagship publics are really working in a different world than I am, and while their costs may be rising needlessly, because of amenities or the building boom or what-have-you, our costs are rising for one reason only: decreasing state appropriations. We have few smartboards (I can’t use the internet at all in class), terrible facilities, and have laid off workers to the bone. There are people who would destroy access education in this nation, and that is why I get furious whenever I hear memes from the new war on higher education for the masses–it is part and parcel of a class war.

    I highly suggest readers take a look at the comment section for the food stamp articles in the New York Times over the past week. They are disturbing in the extreme. Radicalizing. I am the daughter of sixties liberals, and although I am a good liberal I have always been somewhat to the right of my parents. I feel angry in a way over the food stamp issue that I have never been before.

    Like

  2. WSJ says http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304672404579186153175094892?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories that “… freshman enrollment at more than a quarter of U.S. private four-year schools declined 10% or more, according to federal data … The trajectory reflects demographic and technological changes, along with questions about a college degree’s value that are challenging centuries-old business models. The impact is uneven: Some wealthy, selective private colleges are flourishing, while many others suffer…“I think it’s fair to say 30% of these private schools won’t exist in a decade,” said Jonathan Henry, vice president for enrollment at Husson University… “A lot of these schools will have to learn to live with less.””

    It’s not just the publics! A lot of lives will be up-ended in this shrinkage of the academy. As you have pointed out (Middle Class Panic!) there’s a much less clear path to a good future for kids these days, and less confidence that the road should lead through college.

    Like

  3. What is interesting to me is that there doesn’t seem to be a market for low-cost, no-frills, academically rigorous higher education. Or if there is, no one is supplying that market. Aren’t there students who want to learn physics, or Greek, but who don’t care about food courts and sports facilities? Or is that food courts and sports facilities are not actually major drivers of costs, and that the real driver of cost is administrative bloat, which administrative bloat is mandated by the government as the cost of running a university of any kind? I really don’t understand this industry.

    Like

      1. The fact that this is all being done with other people’s money (mom and dad or the bank) and that the customer is 17 or 18 years old means that there’s not going to be a lot of value shopping. The human mind (particularly the immature human mind) doesn’t really understand debt because it’s just too abstract, and it doesn’t feel like real money is being spent. I think debt causes malfunctions in a lot of markets (for instance housing a few years back).

        Also, have you ever notice how differently even little kids spend your money versus their money?

        Like

      2. But what’s the market solution to that known behavioral issue (18 year olds are immature and they only have other people’s money to spend? )

        Like

      3. bjag said,

        “But what’s the market solution to that known behavioral issue (18 year olds are immature and they only have other people’s money to spend? )”

        I think that federally insuring student loans for 18-year-olds and making them unbankruptable is kind of nuts. The result of that is that if the 18-year-old makes a predictably bad decision, the taxpayer and the student borrower himself are the ones to suffer, while the lender does not suffer at all. Crazy!

        It’s really weird to look at that situation (which would never occur in nature) and say “market failure.”

        I would (with ample warning) remove both the federal insurance and the special no-bankruptcy status of federally insured student loans. If lenders want to lend $100k to college students, go right ahead. But don’t be expecting that the taxpayer is going to make you whole or to protect you if it turns out that the borrower’s future income is incompatible with repayment. Who could have known that the creative writing students and/or MFAs would struggle so much with repayment? Everybody, that’s who.

        http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2012/08/14/student-loan-debt-how-i-got-in-deep/

        http://www.afterthemfa.com/archives/a-small-list-of-things-i-wish-i-had-known-ten-years-ago.html

        (The second one is actually rather inspiring, because the author decided mid-way through an MFA to work full time and do the MFA part-time, with much better financial results.)

        Take away the oxygen of student loan money and college tuition inflation and lifestyle expectations for student life will rapidly moderate.

        Like

  4. The Miami U article is telling who will survive — the schools that market themselves as country clubs. Which is pretty dangerous for folks who think that the turmoil/pruning will result in efficient education.

    A big part of the market for university education is signalling, and, so, I think that anyone who is looking for an academically rigorous higher education is also very interested in everyone else knowing that’s what they’ve gotten. That, in turn, requires selective admissions criteria which in turn means that you have all the pressures that require you to make your university seem like a hot item to everyone.

    And, I suspect that there are abut 200 people who want to learn Greek in an academically rigorous university, and not so many who are capable of learning physics in an academically rigorous environment, so probably not a very big market.

    Like

    1. That’s so strange. We’d be much happier to hire someone who had spent four years studying Greek (or physics) in an academically rigorous environment than someone who spent four years studying communications at a country club. Of course, our entry level jobs don’t pay that great, and I gather that graduate and professional schools prefer the 3.8 communications major to the 3.7 physics major. Obviously academia and rigorous discernment aren’t regular companions.

      Like

  5. Small problem with your first line. It’s Miami University, not Miami College. Big difference, particularly to locals and alumni. Just ask Steve.

    Like

Comments are closed.