It's the MBA mentality that has unfortunately taken over education (and healthcare.)
Raise prices to maximize profits until your business starts dropping because people see your product as not worth the price. Then look for other business strategies to make more profit. Then if all fails, close the college/hospital etc.
PROFESSOR-LED SMALLER PUBLIC and PRIVATE COLLEGES might be another worthy experiment.
Half the Courses Online offered at varied hours.
No Admins
Lots to think about both in the article and in the comments. I have taught in one of those 'small Liberal Arts Colleges" for over 30 years. Both my sisters teach in the public school system out west. I think one thing we would all agree on is the general failure of the K-12 system to prepare many students for college. Some of this is systemic within the many and diverse school systems (I feel there has been a real decline in preparedness since "No Child Left Behind", but that is an easy target). Some of the problems are societal. Many college -bound boomers had the advantage of a stay-at-home parent (usually Mother) who acted as an unpaid and unacknowledged "coach" who did HUGE amounts of teaching about important skill-sets for success. When it became economically and culturally difficult to have a stay-at-home parent, most of that teaching got dumped on the K-12 system,which couldn't handle it AND teach what they were "supposed" to teach. Couple that with 1) the loss of industrial jobs 2) increased pressure on "Success" being measured as "College diploma" and 3) colleges inexperienced in and unequipped to teach a really broad segment of the populace & you have a recipe for disaster. Then you throw in an increasingly competitive market for academically disengaged students who must be lured with non-academics, and once "caught" need lots of support services and, yes, many colleges are & will go toes up.
1
My parents both attended small liberal arts colleges in the late 1950s and early 60s. Both graduated with fine liberal arts educations, lifelong friends and zero debt, all for less than $1,000 per year. Today’s colleges cost in some cases north of $60,000 and churn out semi-literate, debt-burdened unemployables. It’s no wonder that kids are getting smart and avoiding these debt traps.
You mean building all those recreation centers with indoor climbing walls wasn't a good idea? Shocking.
Hmm... yes... the article makes a GREAT point about all the things colleges are offering now, like a high probability of having a job at the end of a very expensive four year degree, is something they SHOULD have been making a priority A LONG TIME AGO.
I went to Reed College for two years for general biology. Tried to find work during the summers in between and struggled even getting a lab tech job that payed minimum wage. I was told more or less that I would have to go to graduate school and spend potentially even more money in order to finally (one day!) get a decent paying job. This would be after paying $53k/yr tuition for four years.
What a joke. I dropped out my sophomore year, did some classes at the local state university for a fraction of the price, and then transferred to nursing school. After two years of again, schooling at the fraction of the cost of Reed, I now having a good living wage as a nurse.
Add icing to the cake? Reed College refuses to let traditional students enroll part time, in case they ever want to work part time in order to gain real life skills and experience.
I say, good riddance to the majority of these liberal arts college, which cost a fortune and provide very little skillset to those who want to survive in the real world.
International student enrollment in both undergraduate and graduate programs started declining in 2016, after years of growth. Depending on your source of data, it's about 4% a year.
Anecdotal evidence seems to indicate small, Midwestern religious schools are particularly hard hit.
There seems to be a perception among foreign citizens that they are no longer welcome here.
All my life I've been told that college is the ticket to a better future, and it was for me. But I'm in my sixties now, and when I went to college it cost just a few thousand a year. Unfortunately, I really can't recommend to my mid-20's niece that she think about going back college, because four years could cost easily cost her $100,000. Neither she nor the rest of our family has that kind of money lying around. What would help a lot is if the Federal government would stop guaranteeing private student loans. If the private lenders weren't guaranteed a bailout by the government if their loans went south, they'd get a lot more picky about lending. That would result in fewer private loans, and college costs would have to come down since most students wouldn't be able to get loans to cover those very high amounts. Right now colleges know they can charge whatever they want because private loan agencies will cover the rising costs. But it's the students who end up owing far more than they can ever pay back.
I'm not sure I understand why it would be a bad thing for failing colleges to close up shop and consolidate their student bodies into slightly larger and more efficient colleges.
1
I'd like to see fewer colleges and much better supported state universities and community colleges. The luxury amenities part of educational recruiting and ridiculously expensive sports programs have got to stop. I'd prefer my taxes go to more rigorous educational programs with more opportunities for students to study on-line with on campus discussion groups, more help with part time jobs and academic counseling and tutoring at community colleges. There also has to be much less dependence on adjunct professors and more on tenured staff with a larger percentage of their time spent actually teaching.
2
American corporations shifted the costs of workforce development first onto the taxpayers when the state subsidized higher education a generation ago. Now, the owners of those corporations do not want to pay the taxes for that, and are now shifting the cost onto students and their families. I don't understand why a college degree is necessary or required for many entry level jobs in corporations today. It is all a Catch-22.
" Twenty-six percent of freshmen each year fail to return as sophomores."
No surprise here. There are dozens of colleges, mostly private, that lure freshmen with the high financial aid 'awards' based on obscure criteria of 'merit', and lots of other shining objects.
Then, come year two, the scholarships almost disappear and financial aid is just a bunch of paper to sign to get loans, which means debt, lots and lots of debt.
At this point, the smart ones cut their losses and run home, enroll in a state college or, if nothing else is available, in community college. Good bye ivy-covered buildings and zombiefied cheerleaders.
I hope the percentage keeps going up and up, until the fraudster joints shut down for good.
1
Many private colleges' official all-in sticker prices are $70k per year. Even if you can bargain them down 10k per year (and that's what's required at many schools nowadays) a 4-year college education still costs a quarter of a million dollars, which comes with no guarantees of any job, particularly in liberal arts and social sciences fields.
Is it any wonder that people are turning their back on this model? First the third- and fourth-tier schools will start dropping off, but there are already signs that many second-tier schools are not getting the applications and commits that they once took for granted.
For our teenagers, such private colleges are not even under consideration. Public colleges are the only realistic option that we can afford.
Education is archaic.
As the complexity of modern business and life explode, schools still sit masses of students for lectures and sell pointless grad programs even though these and other approaches have proven ineffective.
Like businesses in the 1970's, schools are responding to new challenges not by changing their process but by changing structure and market share. They cannot improve their core process because doing so would change all their jobs and remove the bureaucratic guarantees they enjoy.
Like other historic opportunities in computing, manufacturing, and science, the Chinese will out-compete the US here. Jack Ma, among the wealthiest, resigned from business to focus on education. Imagine if he can figure out how to help China go from 200M college grads to 800M. China will own the future.
Innovation cannot come from the large universities; it can only come from the small schools who realize they must adapt or die. I am deeply saddened that they respond not with innovation but consolidation and marketing.
We need some combination of Henry James, Clark Kerr, and Bell Hooks.
Schools really need to come up with new and better ways of earning degrees, particularly for older people who want to return to school or change their careers.
I was one of those liberal arts majors from the 80s. I went to graduate school and luckily, thingw worked out very well for me. Now, 30 years after earning my bachelor's degree, my interests have changed and I'd love to explore subjects and fields that I never thought of, before. Specifically, I'd be really interested in a degree in nutrition or dietetics. But here's the thing. I don't have enough relevant coursework in the field to enter a graduate program. I'm not going into deep debt to get a second bachelors degree and even if I was willing to do that, I've found no legitimate schools that would make that easy by allowing me to focus on only the topics I need, rather than starting from scratch. And the classes offered are not at convenient times.
Do a better job of thinking outside the box, people. I have the money to pay cash for a reasonable tuition, I'm not looking to live on campus or for fancy food halls or whatever that 18 year-olds want. In an era when people need to be able to flex and pivot to adjust their career to where there's demand or where they have new interests, there's an untapped market that would be willing to take relevant classes that fit their schedules and don't cost so much they end up in debt for the rest of their lives.
28
@Josie Look at University of Arizona, they have an accredited program in nutrition and dietetics.
@Josie Look at University of Arizona, they have an accredited program in nutrition and dietetics. It is online, also what are doing when it comes to looking for scholarships?
The real point of this article is, I take it, unconsciously deployed: the head of a university as CEO.
So, sure, as the solid cultural value of actual education melts into air, your smart higher-ed CEOs will further embrace college as pre-professional training, even though the smarter people interested in workforce development know that that the inability to think, the lack of intellectual breadth, and the lack of nimble, well-structured minds in an ever-more-quickly changing business environment is what the problems are. So, like, reading about ancient China, say, is actually and literally more useful in this sense than corporate training in, say, how to create a budget. Or whatever.
But, c'mon: I should stop being coy. The way things are going, ecologically and politically, this issue will soon be as moot as all other issues. That's what destroying the environment, which will lead to war, of course, does for future planning: kills it.
2
Some "dual skill candidates" for five year programs who can be of great assistance in coordinated and cost-effective healthcare:
1) Psychiatric social worker (6 year program with masters in Health Psychology, Social Work and Counseling) in those who have certification as Clinical Medical Assistants coming out of high school - Early College High School (ECHC)
2) Tele-nurse & health care navigator - ECHC certified Community Health Workers out of high school
3) Comparative effectiveness and continuity of care facilitator - ECHC certified as Primary Care Assistant out of high school
4) Mesh-networker of HIT (Health Information Technology) & Energy - ECHC certifed as AI Programming Assistant
5) Midwife & Early Childhood Educator - ECHC certified as Clinical Nurse Assistant
1
Ok gang, let's go over it again, what history has taught us about education. It is not rocket science.
1-While college is desirable it is not for everybody. Stress should also be put on trade schools and other short term post HS schools that will prepare people for a decent wage.
2-College should be low cost, not the criminal for profit system we have today or the free let everybody go in the past like CUNY. in 1970. Either way will end in disaster.
3-History has taught us the overriding fact whether the above will happen is the interest of the parent. You can throw all the money in the world you want at education but if the parent is not interested, absent, derelict etc. a kid not prepared for life will almost certainly follow.
2
A few months ago I returned from a lengthy working assignment in Zambia. While there I tried to help a talented young man achieve his goal of studying in an American university. He was admitted to a couple but money was the overwhelming problem - the young man has almost none. It is a pity that higher education costs so much today. I suspect comments of those who see schools spending too much on high salaries, layer upon layer of administrators, assistants, grounds-keepers, physical facilities, expensive but trivial programs, etc. may be well founded. I feel sorry for noble institutions trying to fulfill the mission to educate as they try to compete with some of these glorified country clubs. And for students like my friend in Zambia who get lost in the process.
@Robert Breckenridge I work at a University in IT and have always wondered if there is a place for a bare bones college concentrating only on education with a discounted tuition. Dorm rooms would be like the ones in the 70s, no sports except for intramural, no fancy gyms etc. All money would be spent on teaching. I am not aware if such a place exists and would think that there may be a niche in the market.
4
I held CFO positions at several colleges and universities and retired earlier this year. It was very painful living through budget cuts year after year due to enrollment declines. The fact of the matter is that there are too many seats for the demand and some institutions are burning through their reserves to stay afloat. Eventually the number of institutions and seats will decline significantly. What you didn’t mention is the 20 percent projected drop in freshman in the northeast in 2025.
1
As someone who's in a second career involved in representing international students wanting to study in the US, there was one important piece missing from this article. The fact that so many US institutions have decided to significantly reduce their recruiting budgets. There are a few innovative schools out there and they're thinking out of the box, but the vast majority are locked into a parochial, elitist ideal of having a uniquely special product that they shouldn't really have to sell. Others have succumbed to the snake oil salesmen in the enrollment management industry who preach doing less and getting more. Sounds good, but doesn't work. In Asia the number of US schools that bother to show up at events in the region has continually and markedly dropped for the last 5 years. And these geniuses sit around and wonder where all their students went.
I had a good college experience but I do wonder if the school is a bit of a sinking ship. The athletic director just cut one of the sports programs. I wonder what's next. In my opinion, the leadership of the school is made up of first-class dummies. In my mind, the basic problem is that the school absolutely insists on training everyone to become an educator or go into social work or join a choir. And yet everyone graduates with a huge amount of debt. It completely rules out the chance of donating back to the school even if you wanted to. I know the school can't pick up and relocate to Silicon Valley, but the admin could modernize the education a little. A lot of employers value engineering skills or programming skills or financial skills. Yet students here take Ultimate Frisbee for 0.25 gym credit before hopping off to Philosophy of Harry Potter. Give me a break. A college education should first be for the purpose of making a living. Some things should be reserved as a hobby or learned from a book, not from a semester of class.
2
When we looked at colleges for our children we couldn't believe the amenities offered. No more college meals -- they have a food court. Gyms nicer than anything we could find. Climbing walls. Laundry service.
Entertainment was all around. Everything was getting a makeover.
They were selling the glitz!
The schools out-competed themselves, building new facilities for a trail of kids they thought was never ending. Of course, most of this was paid for by students borrowing, and burying themselves into 30 years of debt. A mortgage before they started work.
Luckily for those students in the market today, they've learned. They've seen their older sibs suffer. They know when they're getting up-sold, and they're making smarter choices when they look at the price tags.
I feel badly for the smaller schools who never played this game. They'll get hurt, but if they want to stay open they have to adjust and remember their original mission.
The thing I noticed wherever I went was the number of people in "administration." Cut that, offer relevant courses that will help get jobs, and make every effort to graduate students in four years (rather than 5 or even 6), and you'll be competitive.
The really sad outcome: students burdened by this amount of debt basically have their lives on hold. They're not buying homes or having children. What happens when THAT generation hits college age?
2
I am an emerita professor with a specialty in corporate strategy - with a focus on appropriately transferring techniques developed in the private sector to government and nonprofits. Over the last 20 years, I've witnessed what I've called "mad growth" in colleges and universities. Growth in programs, growth in administration and growth in facilities. In my experience, none of the growth decisions were ever tested rigorously to determine long run sustainability. There are simply not enough students willing to pay enough money (even with traditional student loans or employer subsidies) to keep the ball rolling. But the schools are trying to grow themselves back into solvency. In the process they just dig themselves into a deeper financial hole. One thing institutions of higher learning are notoriously bad at is understanding the concept of cost. Prospective financial models are all but nonexistent. The merger strategies are interesting - but there are costs to consolidation - if those can be managed and programmatic integrity maintained this might be a viable option for some. However, I think most institutions should seriously consider retrenching - as painful as that process is. The first step is an honest and thorough discussion about demographic trends, finances, and competition. And during the process, it's critical to develop an understanding of why that particular institution should exist now with evidence that it makes a unique and significant difference.
1
One thing that has not been mentioned is the accreditation all colleges and universities must adhere to. If the program is not worthy of accreditation, the program is either overhauled or dropped. An example of this is with counseling and accreditation from CACREP (Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs) which is recognized by the U.S. Dept. of Education and American Counseling Association (ACA). If the school does not adhere to the requirements for accreditation, the program can role up the welcome mat.
Therefore the college or university gets it from all sides: President, provost, dean, director of the program and finally the professors. The money for tuition, for the most part, is not to keep the school open for students but to adhere to an entity that controls the programs.
1
Sweet Briar College was in deep trouble long before it closed and then reopened with just 300 or so students on 3,000 acres. One person studying the college said that it was impossible to have 3,000 colleges all claiming to have "the best English department, etc." Yet that is what recruiters were doing. In fact, colleges had always marketed niche products, like horseback riding. But SBC ran out of young women interested in horses and failed to supply anything new. It looks like call colleges are now trying to find something "new" to lure students, since all seem to have "the best English department."
If college truly is a business, then college presidents need to put the house in order. Cut the fat at the top, the 6 figure salaries of copious administrators and the tenured profs riding the gravy train (they're never in the classroom anyway). Raise the pay of those minimum wage adjuncts who teach 70-80% of the courses on many campuses so they can teach in one place and spend time meeting with students, researching, creating best practices, etc. The endless supply of administrative jobs suck away education dollars. Sometimes it seems new administrators are hired simply to do the jobs of existing administrators. Meanwhile students attend classes in dilapidated buildings. Courses that should have a computer lab component don't. And stressed adjunct professors rush from campus to campus trying to cobble together the elusive living wage and praying they never get sick. Top down, the system is broken.
4
You want more students? CUT YOUR FEES.
2
Many small colleges are kept afloat by sports. The dream of playing college sports leads students to overpay for an inferior experience. They get a small "academic" scholarship to soften the blow and a letterman's jacket in trade for many hours of practice that could have been used for learning or having fun. I know many young adults who feel very foolish for having traded opportunity at a better, possibly less expensive school for a short extension of glory on the field.
1
I'm gonna get crushed here by the blow back, but as a college professor of 16 years, this piece frustrates me.
It's about dumbing down education, make it easier for students, graduate quicker, offer courses that don't challenge students to think or expand their horizons, reduce college to vocational training.
Maybe some of these colleges should close.
27
“This is a business,” Mr. Thorsett said.
Willamette University:
Tuition $51,750.00
Room and Board $12,938.00
Fees $860.00
Books $1012.00
Grand total $66,560/year
A business indeed. Perhaps Willamette is a business school?
Nope.
From their website:
"Willamette is a nationally renowned private liberal arts university"
"At Willamette, we seek to envision the future of humankind as a sustainable enterprise"
Am I the only one seeing the irony here?
5
Several years ago I was on faculty group representing faculty at a multi-campus system. A member who was a AAUP activist had been publishing a newsletter. He distributed a copy to us. It stated that over the past 25 years overhead in the system had grown from 19% to about 45%. Administration is what grew, not faculty positions. When we pay college presidents like captains of industry, students have to borrow money to graduate.
14
as long as administrators make more than twice than tenured professors colleges will continue to struggle financially.
in addition top administrators get free housing, meals, cars ... check the 990s and see for yourself.
150
@xyz Don't forget to mention that the top administrators contribution is hardly noticeable. Innovative leaders? Not a chance.
18
@xyz I totally agree with xyz. The administrative level at all US universities is totally bloated. Today there is an abundance of overpaid deans, provosts, and hot-shot professors who fill some arcane "academic" niche, teach 15 students a semester, and have every other semester off. I've seen this first hand, and it's one of the reasons I left univ. teaching in the US to teach at a university abroad. Ironically, here in SA the arts are still valued and a part of the general curriculum, regardless of the major. The students speak not just Spanish and English, but many speak a third language as well. And refreshingly, they are interested in dialogue and empowered to explore positions that would be considered non-PC or conservative in the US. Education here is not an indoctrination into the liberal agenda; rather the emphasis is on examining all the positions around a topic and fostering critical analysis and thought. Is it perfect? No, but clearly neither is the situation in the US and its institutions of "higher learning."
23
@xyz I know someone in California who had a mid-level administration career in a community college system who just retired with a $90K pension. You read that correctly. Meanwhile, the kids are taught by adjuncts who cobble together 5 classes at 5 different colleges and probably earn $30K for their work. Inequality, folks, it's everywhere.
78
Foreign students who attend small, high quality liberal arts schools in the Midwest almost inevitably praise the quality of the education they receive and their experience there. Just as importantly, they have an opportunity for the first time in their test-driven, tradition-bound lives to ask themselves questions that shape their lives in new and more satisfying directions. Yes, the market "is always right," and the Midwest "deserves" whatever sad fate is in store for those unlucky enough to have four seasons and not be on a saltwater coast. But the prim and slightly addled folks who built these little islands of knowledge and light in the prairies have gifted generations of students from across the world brighter futures than they could have found elsewhere. The sour Libertarians whistling over the bones of these institutions have nothing comparable to offer.
155
@Rustamji Chicagowalla Beautifully written.
26
@Rustamji Chicagowalla
Your writing is gorgeous: beautifully punctuated and lyrical, a delight to read. Thank you.
8
@Rustamji Chicagowalla
The same problem applies to small schools on the saltwater coasts too. It's not the location so much as the overall demographics, the price tag, and the societal devaluing of the liberal arts.
17
Would the Times please run an article of schools that ARE hoping to recruit older students? This is a big need for many people and this article sadly didn't list any
2
I have two adult children, one with and one without a college education. Circumstances were such that a divorce while they were in their teens had a big effect on this outcome, and my non-college child joined the military right out of high school, and right before another useless war. My college experience had a huge effect on forming me as an adult. I have a lot of guilt about the inability to give my child this opportunity. What a Warren or Bernie presidency could offer is equal opportunities for all Americans. Plus a system that welcomes students of all ages and income levels. This need not be exclusive of excellent technical or specialty schools. Both would stimulate the US to improve our standing as an educated and wise country. We have certainly become aware of our need to better educate during this jaw-dropping presidential administration’s circus atmosphere. But I realize that my previous college dean made much less than
I did. A close friend’s professor-husband also makes too little. I take a couple of lessons from this. One is that advanced education should become a serious priority. Instead of subsiding oil companies, and glorifying realty TV stars like the Kardashians, there needs to be a whole movement to prioritize and improve our country’s education system. So many other important benefits will occur. Mass movement to address climate change. More and easier work on defeating racism, misogyny, corruption.
3
@GGram I work in an administrative position at a community college, and to qualify for the position I am in I needed a PhD. While my salary is now decent because I have been here for a long time, it is way below what most people with terminal degrees make in business and industry. It was my choice because I love what community colleges do--help people like myself earn a college degree to better their lives.
1
Administrative bloat. I guarantee you that these struggling colleges pay their presidents seven figure salaries. And that they employ small armies of vice presidents, provosts, vice provosts, deans, assistant deans and directors of miscellaneous offices and centers. Many of these administrators have thin academic credentials (at least compared to the faculty they supervise): many senior admin jobs do not require a PhD and many administrators have no actual teaching experience.
The problem, of course, is that in most universities the only people who have the authority to cut this bloat are the senior administrators who benefit from it.
5
@Sam
And you can bet those highly-paid administrators waste even more money by bringing in consultants to make decisions they are incapable of making.
3
As a former employee of now-closed Dowling College, let me point out that when a recession hits, corporate training programs are always among the first things to get the ax. I wouldn't recommend counting on that to be the saving cash cow.
2
Most degrees at most Universities are useless. Such degrees are used by employers to determine that a prospective employee is minimally numerate, literate, and persistent enough to finish a degree. This is a fantastically expensive and inefficient way to identify such applicants. It is a tragedy. What we need are good trade schools, such as are found in Germany. To date, most trade schools in the US are for-profit fronts for raiding federal student aid and provide even less value than most Universities.
13
@Dnain1953 and what exact trade would you have this imaginary trade school prepare students for? We don't have trade jobs in America in the number required to support schools - we outsourced them all in the 90s.
@Dnain1953 We have 'trade schools.' They are called community colleges. I work in such a school. We have four different automotive programs, HVAC, electrical construction and technology, construction technology, mechanical, electrical, and civil engineering technology, architecture technology, and more. We also have a full range of healthcare degrees (xray, nursing, mortuary science, dental hygiene), business, and liberal arts (the horror) programs.
I agree with you about for-profits. They need to be reined in and made to deliver. We had a federal requirement called 'gainful employment' and every year we had to report on employment numbers and wages. Trumpie boy and his genius education secretary Betsy got rid of that. Oh well, screw poor students as long as Betsy and her family make more money.
I do not agree with you about most college degrees being useless. That's ridiculous on its face. That is a spin that Republicans are spreading to dissuade their members from becoming educated and start to think for themselves. It's sad and criminal. Our community college students already struggle financially and in other ways. They already face emotional and psychological issues being first generation students and experiencing a distancing from their family and often friends as well. Now, to compound that--to give a national voice to staying uneducated and locked into a life of financial need and not reaching their full potential is shameful.
13
@Megan I currently live in small-town New England, where across the whole region plumbers, HVAC technicians, electricians, and other tradespeople have more work than they can handle. Three different plumbers, middle-aged and older, have told me that there aren't nearly enough people coming up behind them. I believe whole-heartedly in the value of a four-year liberal arts education, and I'd also like to see more young people choose the trades (and get training at public city colleges, instead of parasitic for-profits).
7
During the "good times," when the millennials were in college, colleges could afford to be extremely picky, and were investing in things like deluxe dorm rooms, food courts, etc., like the good times would never end.
The attitude on campus tours was horrendous. The price tag was horrendous as well for families who owned a home. Full freight, paid monthly.
The emphasis on college for everyone is wrong. It has led more millennials into debt that will take 30 years to pay off than if they went to trade school and started their own business after a few years. We are desperate for tradesmen, and pay a lot for skilled labor, most of whom are immigrants. Meanwhile, useless and incomplete degrees serve only to drive people into bankruptcy.
I feel no empathy for colleges. There are a few who use their $$ to foster talent. But not many. I donate to the college my kids went to because they gave them grants. Not loans. GRANTS.
10
There were slightly over 4 million births in 2001. Please explain how the total number of students enrolled in undergraduate programs 18 years later exceeds 4 times that number. Even in these happy times, fewer than half of HS "graduates" go to college. "Duplication" clearly only accounts for a few hundred thousand of the 17 million or so "enrolled". Even with four years worth or more of active students it is still a stretch to come up with 17 million. Public and private colleges together claim 11.2 million, some few millions over the reasonable number. I daresay the two-year colleges at 5 million are stretching the definition of student somewhat.
So what's going on? Is somebody being economical with the truth?
2
You also have to factor in the very high number of international students that are enrolled as undergraduates, especially at public universities. As state funding for public higher ed continues to decrease (or remain flat), they are recruiting more international students as full-paying out-of-state students. I did a quick search and it looks like that number exceeds 1 million now...but I agree the numbers look a bit suspicious, either way.
2
@Daedalus well, it takes four years, or often more than that, to finish college, so at any given moment there will be enrollees born across four different years (or a little more).
First of all, not everyone should go to college. There are good careers in the building industry and trades. There are trade schools that prepare people to work in those disciplines. Second, many colleges continue to offer majors that do not result in good jobs. High school guidance counselors should try to point students in the right direction. Students who major in philosophy, liberal arts, communications, english, the humanities, etc. are not prepared to work anywhere. Fantasy majors lead nowhere. Some people may need graduate degrees to get a job and not everyone qualifies to get into graduate school. There is an expression that sums up the problem, it's not the college that someone goes to, it's what someone major in that makes the difference. Finally, the cost for many of these schools is prohibitive and they are not prestigious schools that can help open a door to a good starting job. Yes, higher education is a business, but some colleges are just scamming the public.
2
@HRW Students who major in philosophy, liberal arts, communication, English, the humanities become lawyers, politicians, doctors, teachers, professors, researchers, and highly paid executives. I have a bachelor's in French Language and Literature, and got my PhD in a social science field. I am able to retire quite comfortably and love my job in a community college. America has always been anti-intellectual, but with this buffoon in the white house it has gotten much worse. Students need to stick to community colleges and public colleges when they are able to and take as few loans as possible.
2
@HRW Students who major in the liberal arts and humanities are prepared to researchers, executives, analysts, consultants, in marketing, business development, project management--basically, to do anything they like. It's standard these days to denigrate the humanities for falling short when measured by neoliberal values, but even by instrumental standards, they have so much to offer.
3
@HRW Check out mid-career earnings for male liberal arts graduates. They exceed engineering majors at $131k, and overall mid-career earnings for liberal arts graduates are not far behind those of engineers. There's a sizable gap from the beginning but the gap closes. There's much more to life than money, anyway.
2
Meanwhile, the state flagships are bursting at the seams. Clearly they are offering a product that is well-valued by the 18 year olds and their parents.
It is great that these small schools are being so creative, but some should look more closely at what the state schools are doing right.
6
@Lydia
Several of the things that state schools are doing right can't be done by small liberal arts colleges: the variety of specialized programs, the excitement of big-time sports with big-time crowds (and TV revenue to match), and a wealth of dining and entertainment options on and off campus. Also, less expensive tuition is possible when there are 300 students in a class as opposed to 30 and so many classes are taught by adjuncts and teaching assistants, not tenure-track professors. And that's without factoring in state subsidies, which admittedly are a fraction of what they once were. In short, liberal arts college can't compete on price, variety of offerings, and some elements of the campus experience.
1
A key problem facing "higher education" is the realization that the value of a college education, especially a liberal arts education, is dropping since the payoff from future employment is falling. It's economics 101. The value isn't there. More people should strongly consider a community college path for a few years for their children. It doesn't have the pizzazz, but it has a better payoff. And kids who do well in community college still have the option to transfer to a four year program IF they have successfully completed significant college courses. Plus the two or three years in community college allows kids more time to grow up, have a part time job, live at home but with less restrictions and more freedom.
The windfall of colleges as a profitable business for some has reached its limit. For many kids, college is a way to get away from home, to party more, to do little, and to "grow up" slowly. That path is expensive. Risky. And often a bad investment that leads to a lifetime of debt and misery.
6
" there’s one very big supply of prospective students available to colleges: older adults who never went, started but didn’t finish, or want to get advanced degrees. Just by itself, the number who have some credits but never graduated is more than 35 million, according to the Census Bureau.
Bingo. Some 30 years ago I was in this boat. Undergrad studies and coursework required for work had me up to 90 credits. Every College I contacted to complete a degree required me to take 60 plus credits from them. So, to complete my degree, I needed 150 credits (normal degree is 120). That wasn't going to happen.
I happened upon an innovative program in Vermont that was tailored towards military and guard members that move frequently and need to collate coursework into a meaningful path. Some live instruction, some on line courses, a clep test or 2 , a hefty final paper and I graduated from an accredited college whose campus I had never set foot on. I was then in my early 30's, well read and had work experience. Why do colleges make it so difficult for working people to complete their degree?
22
The source cited does not say the number of 18 year olds is declining. It says that the percentage of 18 year olds as a proportion of our population is currently declining. The source cited for enrollment declines, on the other hand, is supportive but somewhat sloppy and short-term in presentation.
I am unconvinced that higher education is fighting population trends as a component of its struggles.
2
@CarolMB I can tell you that schools absolutely expect their admissions to be flat or declining for the next 5-10 years due to population trends - I've been in the presentations with the data. It wouldn't matter if colleges were just looking to stay stable/replace population, but with the switch to business leaders as presidents came a growth mindset in terms of spending and a lot of long term capital investments that require growth to be sustainable. Colleges got used to being able to count on year on year growth linked to demographics similar to the baby boom (after a major drop off in the 80s and 90s because Gen X was much smaller) but now the wave is receding - probably for a decade or more.
5
@CarolMB The absolute number of young people in the US is projected to remain flat for a long time and then (maybe) grow a bit.
https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/pop1.asp
1
I spoke to one of the presidents you interviewed as he entered office, before the so far successful plan you described was put into place. I told him I had argued with his predecessor that there was no point in charging prices that high if he was hardly going to make any people at all pay them. My personal observation is that many colleges, like my alma mater, drive students away with high sticker prices and most of that money spent on administrators and buildings, while tenure was being eliminated and adjuncts used willy-nilly. Faculty need to be paid living wages and benefits along with appropriate academic honors. Administrative staffs need to be cut deeply. You don't mention it, but this last reform was also instituted at my alma mater, with nonproductive administrators shown the door. Meanwhile, my own child took calculus at an Ivy League college where it was taught by an incompetent mathematician who presumed that everyone understands Russian. Fortunately, she had heard Russian for years from her grandparents and taken AB calculus in high school. For this I paid Ivy League tuition?
18
The federal government should ask colleges-- all of them-- big and small-- to publish an administrative cost analysis for all in-coming applicants...
This would say for example: Our tuition is 20,000 and of this:
1000 went to the library
4000 went to buildings and grounds
3000 went to administrative costs
4000 went to costs of teaching staff
etc. etc.
Then the student who borrows $100,000 over four years could see where this money was going exactly.
And this would help the board of trustees to evaluate its choices....
6
@Stephen Ross Public colleges already make this information public. One of the problems is that parents want to make their kids happy at all costs and don't send them to community colleges and then public universities. It's sad, but it's not really the colleges' fault.
1
How come people aren't more mad at the business sector instead of colleges? I worked in higher ed and was helping some students secure internships. I got into a discussion with a manager at Target and said how could one of our freshmen get a managerial job there. He said to get into management at Target, he had to have a degree. I said, "Really?" He said he wouldn't be hired without a degree. Time and time again, State Farm Insurance, most big box stores, small stores, etc., if you wanted to get a job -- not even managerial -- they demanded a bachelor's degree. Even as a college employee I thought this was ridiculous.
A friend of mine in a small town in Oregon is trying to get a secretarial job -- yes, secretary -- and every place she applied demanded a bachelor's degree. (She has an Associate's.)
The business sector has set the degree-only atmosphere, not the colleges. Blame them instead of hoping colleges shut down across this country.
7
@TRS But isn't this a natural consequence of our "degrees for everyone" culture? When you increase the supply of people with degrees you debase the value of degrees. Employers figure "Why should I settle for a high school graduate (or 2 year diploma or 3 year associate's degree) when there a plenty of people with 4 year degrees who will take this job because they can't get anything else?"
Are they wrong to think this?
4
@Lexington They are very wrong to think this and short sighted. The person with the degree is going to use them as a stepping stone and all their training costs and time are out the door on that more "prestigious" employee in 1 to 2 years max. Whereas if they'd hired the high school graduate or associate degree candidate, they're more likely to stick with it and make a go of a career once hired, because that person, once in the working world will find it harder to return to school and complete a degree while working.
1
@Megan
That is really not the case these days unfortunately. In most professions there are many more over qualified potential employees then there are jobs. I am in the extremely trendy STEM field and it is the case for many of the sciences. I was applying for a research scientist position at a state university and had competition of 300+ other people with graduate level degrees. This was for a job paying 34,000$. Most people have figured out they are better doing other work like waiting tables or bartending which can pay as much or more. If they find a job they are generally not very willing to just leave for something else.
1
I was employed by a small, Christian affliated school until June 2018. 21 of us then joined 45 previous employees laid off the year before, and have watched another 23 get the axe last June. Whole departments were laid off, tenured professors given a year's notice of layoff, and still the incoming classes continue to decline. The board's brilliant plan to survive and grow? Start a football team. Bring in 120 new male athletes to a school that is 65% female, and expect an instant turnaround. You see, a board member read a book, brought it to the others, and the rest is history, (perhaps in two or three years). Maybe I can re-apply for the equipment manager manager position......
3
@Phil - My college in the deep south did the same thing - started a football team to attract young men - because females were a greater proportion of the student body. Team has been playing about 3 years now.
This college has a solid student work program and a student entrepreneurial program. They have started a retirement home - hoping that alumni will return. The college's nursing students will work there. And they have deep pocket donors who are financing new buildings on campus - athletic center, physics and science buildings, to stay competitive.
Yep, who wants to send their kids to the same science lab where their grandfather studied in 1950?
I think they are doing some things right.
Rather than a 4-year graduation guarantee, a better idea may be a reduced tuition after four years. Extend this idea further, and you have continuing adult education.
I went to a small liberal arts college years ago and had an experience I wished for my children to have, not realizing the magnitude of change in colleges. Both of my sons took five years to graduate, and my daughter four years but only due to summer school. It is too late for us, but a four-year (eight semester) guarantee is a great idea. Losing the judgmental attitudes would help too: one college was very supportive (though it still cost a lot for the repeat year), the other was unreasonable--really so, as they basically had us over a barrel and slammed the boot on our faces--and terribly judgmental, because, after all, no 18-22 year old male should ever make a mistake. I believe in the liberal arts, but I hope these colleges can get their acts together and start developing far greater empathy towards the financial situation of parents and students. I will say, too, having taught returning students as an adjunct, that the overly rigid and unreasonable requirements for returning students to repeat coursework (like freshman comp!!--really?) because their credits are "too old" utterly infuriates students and with good reason. Finally, trying to compete with what are basically vocational programs offered by public colleges seems to me a losing battle. What parents and students really need is reasonable pricing and to be treated like human beings, with their best educational interest, not the schools money hunger, put first.
19
I'm surprised the article doesn't mention Hampshire College in Massachusetts. Like many small colleges they faced acquisition or merger, but the students, staff, and faculty successfully protested that path, ousting the president and board. Although there were painful layoffs, Hampshire is coalescing around a new president and a radical plan to re-imagine their curriculum to respond to global challenges. It's a big risk, and it remains to be seen if they will survive, but it's a path worth watching.
13
@CH
Hampshire is also helped by the fact they are in a five-college consortium with some very-well known colleges: UMass Amherst, Amherst College, Smith College, Mt. Holyoke College.
Those colleges can share resources such as libraries, clubs and club sports, can cross-enroll even into graduate courses, and have established certificate programs across all their curricula. They don't have to duplicate courses or professors.
4
An important part of the mix is the disinvestment of local, state, and federal dollars to support higher ed. Yes, institutions have gotten bloated, digital technology creates costs that weren't around a few decades ago, students come in less prepared and more in need of emotional support (and healthy food) but a huge driver to tuition increases is the choice by our government and we the tax payers to stop supporting education for adults and that is not going to serve us well.
23
I was on the board of trustees of a small, struggling fine-arts college that closed recently because its enrollment had dropped to around 100 students. I resigned from the board because its leadership steadfastly ignored the warnings and pleas of a couple of us board members who recognized a Titanic-type disaster was on our near horizon.
This obviously insupportable situation was largely ignored by the board because most of its members and staff had little or no experience in higher education; indeed, the last college president had no college administration experience whatsoever, but was chosen by the board because she lived locally (no relocation costs) and had a much lower salary requirement than applicants with appropriate experience.
Certainly college administrators are directly responsible and accountable for much of the financial madness observable in colleges these days. However, it is important to note that college boards of trustees are ultimately responsible for the problems their institutions are facing.
To put it another way, it is not just college administrators who must be held accountable, but the boards of trustees who which they report.
21
Excellent points. I have worked at several universities governed by board members who were aloof, condescending, and demonstrated absolutely no sense of ownership. They took no responsibility for making capital campaigns successful, and they refused to learn about the hundreds of ways universities have changed since the 1950s. Choosing the right board members is the most critical action a university can take, but few universities do it well.
18
Academe is in trouble. High costs, unrealistic union contracts, lower state funding and lower enrollment has made universities and colleges financially unsubstanable. Students want it all, rock climbing walls,cafes, dorms that look like uptown condos and they are praying the price. Thousands of dollars in financial aid, that sometimes does not guarantee a waiting job, but endless debt and the problems with it. Do not bet on loan forgiveness--banks don't make money on that scheme. Plus, the current administrator in the DOE is deaf on students problems. I have a Ph.D. in history and I am almost done with Higher Ed, been through RIFs, furloughs, terminations, downsizing. The golden age of Higher Ed is over for many.
16
@Hello very good post. I'm puzzled as to why universities went into the luxury dorm, fancy rec center business, while of course keeping their wasteful big time athletics, that is for Division I universities.
My only take is the high school kids were raised by parents, who thought their children needed all these amenities. I greatly enjoyed my college experience at a small, state regional college many years ago. No rec center, an average student union (don't think they all them that anymore), and your basic average dorm food. What I did have was great profs, fantastic friends, and an internship opportunity that allowed me entrance into my career of choice.
Isn't that enough?
18
@Hello
Students aren't demanding rock walls, but they generally don't know how to choose a college, so choose one for poor reasons. As a 17 year old, I changed my choice of college when I visited college A in the rain and the sun came out in the afternoon as I visited college B. I certainly wasn't self-aware enough to recognize that fact. But even today, teens are advised to get a feel for the atmosphere at colleges. The atmosphere is always better when it's sunny.
6
@TRS Most faculty would agree with you. A lot of students would too - they don't use the amenities and resent when they are required to pay for things like the gym or a concert series they don't want to go to. But the amenities - and things like building state of the art STEM facilities to recruit bigger name faculty who you hope will get grant funding, even if it will only directly help a handful of students - is all about the perception that schools have to do this to convince kids (and their parents) that Regional University X is their best choice. It really is a vicious cycle, and pressure from declining demographics and online degree programs is likely to make it worse for the forseeable future.
3
I wish more of the money, resources and effort that is going into saving these schools could be channeled into the community college system instead. Those that want a job and the specific skill sets required for their field could leave after the two years with an associates degree while those that want a deeper education could go on to the healthier and more viable schools remaining. These schools would be getting students with a track record of performance and more motivation to get a bachelor's or more.
5
@ckelly In other words, the heck with having an educated citizenry, a populace that enjoys refined sensibilities, awareness of history, science, etc.; let's just provide job training for employers who don't want to foot the bill themselves and cultivate a nation of drones.
8
Lots of good ideas in the comments and article, but they need to be brought together. As a former professor at a mid-tier liberal arts college, the ridiculous cost of these degrees has been clear for decades. There is an insecurity among these colleges that leads them to ape the ways [that they imagine] Ivies function, and this leads to turf wars between bloated departments and an aversion to change. It was clear that this was going to happen back when the economy went south in 2008 and I remember trying to get my college to be proactive, but it went nowhere beyond a few defensive meetings. As some commentators have noted, if and when free tuition comes along, many of these liberal arts colleges will close unless they can grasp the gravity of the situation and think radically. This could be a wonderful time for the evolution of small colleges, if only they could understand how bleak the future looks on their current paths.
7
Well, here is something to think about.
Average cost of a wedding in the US: $29000.
Average student debt in the US: $31000.
Average cost of new 'light vehicle' in US: $37000
I paid off $40,000 student debt by driving a cheap beater car for five years. Priorities people; priorities my dear entitled millennials.
36
Colleges never should have been allowed to sign naive students and their parents up for $100,000 in debt (let alone $150k) for a bachelor's degree. The administrators who did that should have been prosecuted for predatory lending.
Federal law desperately needs to be changed to prevent excessive borrowing. Remove protection from bankruptcy for any student loans in excess of $60,000. Then, with the money spigot shut off, colleges would be forced to do what they should have been doing all along -- cut costs until they are able to deliver their product affordably.
It is the easy availability of student loans (non-dischargeable in bankruptcy) that has created this problem. Fixing the bankruptcy exemption would be painful for higher education but it would solve this problem rather quickly.
36
@Tom B. Many colleges don't. The financial aid departments work directly with federal loans, and those won't generally run to much over $30K after four years. Many families take out additional private loans through banks, often at much higher interest rates, on their own account.
5
@Tom B. Since 2005 student loans cannot be wiped in bankruptsy.
1
@Tom B. Students cannot amass that kind of debt through federal loans, the yearly limit starts at $5,500 for freshmen and ends on seniors at $7,500 = 27,000 for 4 years. Anyone who spends more must do so through private loans or parent plus loans. The low limit on federal undergrad loans SHOULD redirect students to colleges they can afford, such as state schools. Those who pay more do choose to because they perceive a greater value in private colleges.
5
Of course the first question is, what is a college or university? I would submit that it is a place of higher education and not a trade school, but the article suggests the opposite.
32
I know they've already been mentioned in numerous articles, but how can this one NOT include Hampshire. It's certainly "instructive." They carved out a niche - clearly a viable one for 30 or 40 years, ... something other "colleges in peril" are being advised to do.
What happened? ... At some remove from that scene, I can't be sure what the mix of poor administration, changing fashions and probably 3 other things I couldn't even guess at was.
Just as mass transit in and near NY is on life support because there are dozens of VERY MUCH overpaid execs and an entire workforce that has worked the political system to get that workforce wildly over-compensated, ... one wonders whether an institution built on $200K compensation packages for 35 year olds with a book under their belt (vs. $60K for a teacher in a HS 5 miles away working longer and harder) IS VIABLE ECONOMICALLY.
It wouldn't surprise me if there was a good deal of covert funding for "free college for all" from colleges and their employees. From CUNY to Penn State, we now have 50 years of under-performance in terms of colleges preparing students to make a decent living ... but with ever increasing fees and salaries that resemble the healthcare industry.
But the latter is SAVING LIVES! The former gets to coast on "you need ever more years of formal schooling to make it in this economy" - apple-pie sounding, but fundamentally FALSE. Read yesterday's NYT article about Hasidic women running internet-based businesses!
3
@edTow You have a very distorted idea of what a typical academic is paid. $200K for an assistant professor? In your dreams, or in a handful of high-demand fields.
22
@edTow "$200K compensation packages for 35 year olds with a book under their belt"--outside of a few Ivy League level institutions, I would like to know what you are talking about. Any college professors reading this make that kind of money? Most institutions now rely heavily on adjuncts and grad students making perhaps $2500-$4000 per course.
39
@edTow I'm a mid 30s assistant professor at a small liberal arts college and just barely make $60K (and only after quite a bit of negotiation!)
Adjuncts at my school make less than $4K per class that they teach a semester - it's terrible
40
And here's me still thinking that the point of getting an education was to improve your mind and make you a more productive and useful citizen. Boy am I out of date.
48
@Sarah: I don't think that you're out of date at all! It's your thinking about education that needs to be seriously revisited by boards and administrators of colleges and universities. From my experience (see comment below on different topic on education) there is entirely too much emphasis placed on money in education--whether it's the highly-paid presidents or provosts ("we have to attract talent" say the boards) or the notion given to students that they will make high salaries once graduated, as though that's all that matters in getting a degree.
9
This article fails to mention the abundance of overeducated underachievers. If anything, we have too many colleges, too many students, and too much debt. The idea that somebody needs any college at all to be an insurance adjuster or other such job that used to require nothing more than so-so high school grades and a good attitude is ludicrous. Imagine those with an MFA winding up as clerks in an art gallery or shaming themselves making coffee at Starbucks.
21
@E. P. Eklund My daughter got an AFA at a local public college, then went to a year-long private bootcamp for digital art. Three years of tertiary schooling, two at low cost, one at high cost, resulted in a great job. Is she as well and broadly educated as I am, a product of an Eastern liberal arts college in the 70s? No. But better than no arts education at all, and a place in the tech economy at the end is worth it.
2
These small private colleges that are going under does not seem all that good to begin with. Long term, people recognizes which colleges are able to give students jobs related to their major and what their salary income for their respective position. Its not reasonable if that salary income is such where it will take the student 50+ years to pay it back. So in a way, I am glad these horrible colleges are closing down.
1
"Colleges are also working to reduce the number of dropouts, on the principle that it’s cheaper to provide the support required to keep tuition-paying students than to recruit more."
Isn't their mission to educate in the first place? Why are they just now getting around to doing that? Are they that desperate? Have the students wised up to their tricks?
3
@Michael J. Cartwright
Having worked in higher ed for over 15 years, I would answer that by saying that, at all but very selective top schools, what is coming in the door now is not as well prepared as 15 years ago, and nowhere near as prepared as I was 30 years ago. Students who were schooled in the No Child Left Behind teach-to-the-test era lack the research, writing, higher math, and critical thinking skills to tackle college level work. On top of that, more of them are first-generation college students, who don't come from families with the social capital (savvy regarding how college works and how to navigate in academia) to help them get through. Some face serious financial or personal challenges. More have emotional or psychological issues. As the percentages going to college have increased, less selective schools have taken in students who are far less prepared to succeed and who need much more help in order to be able to do so. Unfortunately, few consider trade school an acceptable option, and employers just won't take a chance on a high school grad anymore. So we help struggling students get through as best they can.
4
Among other issues, costs got out of control. Schools felt that they could just continue to raise tuition, etc and reap the rewards. 40-50 grand a year for a mid level school isn’t worth it, The breaking came.
10
A college degree indicates to employers that you are willing to work for a long term goal. A jam of jar today or a case of jar tomorrow. That being said a degree in French, or English literature is less useful than it once was. How about a quick business course for students about to graduate? Like excel? Pivot tables, anyone?
6
@Meighan Corbett I have been thankful my entire life for the two years of typing I took in high school. Typed all my college papers, and ultimately made my living at the keyboard, thanks to those typing classes. My liberal arts degree was just the price for entry into the corporate world where I worked.
1
As a retired history instructor who has taught at community colleges, much of the problem of freshmen not returning for their 200-level work (as mentioned in this article) is because they weren't prepared for college to begin with.
Students were arriving as freshmen to hopefully engage in a college-level course with very poor reading ability--low vocabulary comprehension, slow understanding of the meaning of what they read, and very little skill in critical thought; writing level was even worse: many of my students were very uncomfortable with writing sentences containing more than six or seven words. When it came time for a research paper, most were so lost that plagiarism became a major issue.
Most of the students were working part-time and some had children to care for and yet they were taking 15 to 18 credit hours per semester in hopes of cramming as many courses as they could to finish their degrees within two to three years. All of these features of freshmen college students are a recipe for failure with a resulting high drop rate.
To retain college students, college and university advisers need to be making connections with junior high school students, "adopting" them and staying in frequent touch to keep track of their reading and writing skills right on through high school.
With already long-established connections plus a strong feeling of preparedness, a student would likely choose that institution of higher learning where they have been nurtured.
82
@Cate Why don't we just ask K-12 schools to teach and do their jobs? Would that not be easier? Or we could give students placement tests - if they don't pass then they don't go to college. Working harder is needed. But that's the problem.
22
@Cate, completely agree. One of the worst consequences of all this business-speak used to describe higher education is the assumption that students are undifferentiated inputs (raw materials) into a production system. Nothing could be further from the truth. Very large numbers of first-year students just can't manage the concentration and workload required by college courses -- that's most of the group that doesn't return for the second year.
14
As an attorney/educator I couldn't agree more. The biggest complaint among faculty is the abysmal situation when it comes to writing.
22
Would I send my daughter to such a school ?
20 years ago , yes. You could get a good job with any degree.
In today's global economy - no.
She will need every advantage she can get. That limits the choice to either an liberal art college fashionable with the rich - in the hope she will make useful social connections - or a large University that offers courses in professions reasonably secure from future outsourcing. Law and Medicine come to mind
1
@Carol, ah you’d be surprised! The gorgeous, liberal arts campus of Willamette is developing outstanding medical opportunities (an award winning, fall service hospital is one block away), and has the best law school in the state.
5
@Susan Tanabe You either work at Willamette or are seriously misinformed. Willamette is ranked dead last out of the 3 law schools in the state of Oregon, and has the lowest bar passage rate of the 3 (all of whom should be embarrassed that they lobbied the state to make the bar exam easier to pass 2 years ago and got a significant reduction in the passing score - just not as big a drop as they wanted).
@Carol Higher education for law and medicine is extremely expensive, and no longer a guaranteed path for prosperity (especially for law).
Medicine can still pay in the end, but not always enough to compensate for being half a million in debt and living below the poverty line for 6-10 years.
Trust me that the same kinds of people who bloated undergrad costs are now the gatekeepers for these kinds of fields. They get rich off bright students' and proud parents' dreams.
I suspect part of the problem is the expectation that a college degree will lead directly into a remunerative profession, rather than being about education and knowledge-seeking. Increasing aid and acceptance into possibly linked master's programs could help. Respect for liberal arts degrees and humanities needs to be increased. Colleges could be lax with job placement services, but no more.
18
The idea that college is a business and students customers is not the solution but rather the root of many of the current problems in higher education. Prior to the emergence of this business mentality, colleges and universities were stable and could handle temporary reductions in school-age population such as the current one. In fact, there is a great deal of unmet capacity, considering that fewer than 30% of Americans graduate from college. There are also numerous ways to reconceive of higher education so as to cut costs, to make universities more efficient, and to increase graduation rates without lowering standards. They would include utilizing empty classrooms and dorms in the summers and breaks to first prepare incoming students for college prior to freshman year and then to keep them on track for a four year graduation, slashing administration and non-teaching staff, both of which have grown enormously in the past thirty years, and slashing spending on lavish facilities and athletics.
17
Current and future students' "future" will depend on how well we slow global warming, and mitigate the effects of extreme weather events caused by climate change.
It's hard to imagine any field of study where there isn't an opportunity to actively involve students in both the search for solutions and future employment. Create the focus and "beneficiaries" will pay for the students' enrollment.
For, example, offer the fossil fuel industry two options: pay for the prevention; or, pay for the damage. Or just ask any mayor or town council if they'd like to help a local college or university tailor courses to address their own town or city's specific related threats; rather than, say, suffer the consequences.
4
When President Warren or Sanders make public universities free, these private colleges will fold within a few years. It’s tough to compete with free. Can’t imagine who would take out loans and pay six figures when the government is providing no cost colleges. When private colleges fold and their campuses return to the tax rolls, government will earn extra money for free educations. In many European countries, private schools and colleges are being eliminated because they perpetuate privilege and interfere with social goals.
12
@Rick
There will never be a President Warren or Sanders so private colleges have little to fear on that account.
1
@Rick I disagree entirely - I think free colleges will increase the value of private universities. People, especially Americans, have disdain for anything free - a private university will then go back to what it originally was, a signal of being a member of the elite.
Right now people try and buy (or more often go into catastrophic debt) that signal for themselves or their children, but since it can be bought by anyone willing to put themselves into debt, it loses its value.
Time and again, as soon as society opens access to the disadvantaged, that access then loses it's value. Typical male professions that women entered, like bank tellers dropped dramatically in compensation.
If college was about the value of the education you may have an argument, but like so much else in our society, the actual value has been lost and replaced with the status associated with the symbol.
3
I am actually glad to see some of these overpriced niche liberal arts schools going under. The value of a $40k/year liberal arts degree from a small private school isn't much different than a $10k/year liberal arts degree from a state university, and neither degree is worth as much as a science degree from a reputable university, public or private.
19
@Ben Ben, what exactly do you mean by "worth"? I presume you are referring to the employment opportunities and beginning salaries that would be available to a graduate with a "science degree" as opposed to one with a liberal arts degree. And your supposition that this is true is based on... what? We could certainly look into your assumption and get some facts, numbers, but really, so what? I would hope that the "worth" of a college experience, education, and degree should be measured by more than a graduate's putative starting salary. No, laying aside the value of the deepening of a student's understanding and personal relationship with civilization, art, and the world, the reality is that the world and human activities in it are changing at an ever-increasing rate of speed. The individual who can think, dream, create, learn and understand will be of the most "worth" in the future. Both financially and to the advancement of civilization and to the care of the world and the human community.
32
@Ben Small, liberal arts colleges, for example, Macalester College in Minnesota, is far cheaper to attend than the state university, thanks to generous financial aid from the school. Perhaps if you had attended such a school, you might not jump so much to conclusions.
11
@Ben a few things to correct here: Your $40K price tag off by about $20K to $30K. Most private colleges these days are around $60K a year or more.
That said, few people are paying that full freight, even without loans. I've known a few people who have gone to Willamette University (featured in this article) and paid less than many state universities and because of WU's large endowment, and also didn't have to take out loans.
It all depends on the university, but rule one for parents should be: If I send my child to a private school, he/she has to get massive amounts of no-loan financial aid. It's out there, just have to find it.
6
Adam Smith would be quick to point out that the closing of many small expensive private liberal arts colleges represents the inevitable swipe of the invisible hand of market forces
10
This could be about any business going through a long run downturn. Indeed one of the themes is that colleges have to be run more like businesses and respond as they would--or at least the smaller and some of the middle-sized colleges won't make it. But if they focus on vocational training, amenities, speeded up process, hot areas, lowering risks--fine to a point, what makes them educational institutions anymore?
I see nothing about the major educational concepts such as: creation of new knowledge, critical thinking, broadening one's horizons. No mention of becoming better and more confident writers, researchers, and public speakers, or working with others with very different backgrounds and perspectives. Also nothing on other educational concepts, such as lifelong learning, learning styles, double-and triple-loop learning, interdisciplinary learning, co-learning, unlearning and trying to catch when what one thinks one knows isn't true, or when one doesn't know what one doesn't know. Oh, and nothing on preparing future thinkers to participate, and come up with new ways to, address the painful and wicked problems of society and the world. If colleges don't still have that purpose, then who does?
64
Outside of all the macro trends in higher education, I would never recommend merging a flagging enterprise with a failing enterprise.
Mergers with two successful enterprises almost never achieve their stated goals and more often than not fall far flat of expectations.
It will be interesting to see where this goes but it does take the executives eyes off the going concerns of the core business, to integrating a failing business into the operations.
Hopefully this isn’t the beginning of the end of two wonderful schools.
8
@M.M. Agree. Before these execs-turned-administrators get too excited about emulating the business world, pay closer attention to what actually works. M&A almost always produces a near-term bump followed by long-term disappointment. But, in the private sector, at least shareholders enjoy the quick hit. In higher ed, if it doesn’t meet the long-term need then there is no upside at all. A better strategy would be to pursue true innovation. Unfortunately, colleges, like most companies, find this very difficult to do. This article is proof: How innovative is it to copy 100-year-old business strategies? Yet these “bold moves” are being celebrated as something remarkable.
5
Two losers don’t make a winner.
Many of these very small colleges and universities have simply outlived their usefulness and need to look at the handwriting on the wall. They don't have a large enough endowment to give out substantial financial aid, and students are a bit more wary of paying full fare with high debt attached in order to go to a small no-name college.
That figure of 26% if freshmen who don't return as sophomores is caused by two things. The first, and probably the biggest, is that many are encouraged to go to college, get there and realize they have no idea what field interests them and they just don't belong there at all. I don't think I've had a plumber or electrician in my house in the past 20 years, that hadn't gone to our local state university for a year and realized it was a mistake.
Then there are those who simply are not ready for college, often socially. With no dorm hours and few restrictions, they party and flunk out. It's always an enormous shock to them when this happens. Perhaps if we quite treating at least freshmen and sophomore as "adults" and treated them the way they act (like children who limited self-discipline), there would be less of this happening.
My grandson goes to an Ivy - 2nd year. He lives in a suite of 6 this year and was worried about the single shower stall in their shared bath. No worry - he's the only one getting up early and taking a shower and going to an 8 o'clock class! And this is an Ivy!
53
The higher ed sector is unprepared for what Carleton’s Nathan Grawe termed the “Birth Dearth”, which will profoundly affect colleges but also institutions like the military.
In a nutshell, the birth rate for middle class white and black people, particularly in the northeast and Midwest, plummeted during the recession and is not projected to recover. These are the families who have, for the last thirty years, fueled the growth or sustainability of small colleges throughout those regions. All of a sudden, there won’t be enough students to go around.
Starting in a couple of years, it’s going to be pretty easy to get admitted to Kenyon (OH), Lawrence (WI) and Earlham (IN). No one will pay anything close to sticker price. It will spiral quickly.
NH, which stands to lose 20% of it’s 18 year olds by 2030 (Grawe) will see the closing of most of its regional public state colleges.
There’s not much to be done.
32
@Cousy Actually, until the present administration in Washington, higher ed in the US could count on increasing numbers of foreign students to make up for any declines in domestic enrollment. But between making the US hostile to foreign students generally and reducing support for education and learning, we now have a government actively impeding participation of American institutions in the global education "market."
25
Nice job Jon. Well written and researched as usual.
Is college even really about education,learning and ideas any more? Has it become just a money making opportunity - only a business?
When I was in college the most educated and knowledgeable person I knew never went to college - he was self educated.
He knew about opera and certain areas of art, math, literature,history and many other things. He was well rounded owned his own business.
He explained to me a degree doesn’t mean you are educated or even smart. It means you can run through a maze without much thought If you can read you can learn anything you want to know about.
He devised his own curriculum.
Nowadays you need that degree “sheep skin” because people can’t fathom you might have knowledge and be educated without it.
Colleges have priced themselves out of the market
Before the tech bust of the early 2000s self taught computer kids were forgoing college to run computer start ups
We need to figure out what colleges should be about and what a reasonable price one should pay to attend.
I wonder how higher education is in England France Norway
10
I worked for a major public university for 25 years and have watched as some colleges scramble for students. The key fact in your article is that "enrollment is down by more than 2.9 million since the last peak." The demographics tell it all. There are too many tiny, liberal arts colleges out there that just don't have much appeal anymore. They are overpriced and can't offer the variety of subjects a student needs in the 21st century. The solution is to close more schools--not try to repackage the existing ones by dumbing down the courses and offering more amenities.
63
For the 1966-1967 year, average tuition and fees were $1,233, or about 15% of the median household income of $8,303 (both in 1967 dollars, not inflation-adjusted). 2017-2018 tuition at Willamette was $47,870, or about 78% of the 2017 median household income of $61,372.
If colleges want to avoid going under, maybe they should take a look at how unbelievably overpriced they are, and start trying to offer a better value to future students as a way to induce them to enroll. The shortage of incoming students might have more to do with the fact that the current generation of parents is still paying off their own student debt, and advising their children that the even more outrageous current tuition and fees might not actually be worth it, than it does with low unemployment luring 18 year-olds straight into the workforce.
76
@Joe Blow 7314, You are comparing apples and steak. You cite the national average tuition for 1966-1967 and compare that to the 2017-2018 tuition at one small school. I just Googled current in-state tuition for a couple of decent public universities. UMass Amerst costs just under $15,000. Ohio State costs just over $10,000, very close to the same 15% of median income you cite for your 1966-1977 numbers.
That said I have a feeling that were you to compare apples to apples, that is average tuition as a percentage of median income, or steak to steak, that is smaller college average tuition as a percentage of median income, you might well find that those percentages have increased. That is still a bit misleading because the real comparisons should be of the actual annual cost to the average student which includes room and board but is reduced by scholarships.
12
@carol goldstein I compared it to the tuition at the school that was the subject of the article, the one cited as having trouble enrolling new students. You in turn are not comparing apples to apples, by comparing the average of all institutions in the 60s to specific *public* institutions today. While I cited Willamette in particular since it's the subject of the article, you appear to just be cherry-picking more affordable schools to support your argument.
I left out room and board because not everyone lives on campus, and the rising costs of living anywhere - on or off campus - are not within the control of universities and are a whole separate skyrocketing cost of living in many areas. However, schools *can* control tuition and fees, and the fact that the particular college that's cited in this article as struggling financially represents 78% of median household income - that's household, mind you, not per capita, and certainly not specifically for those in their 20s fresh out of college - probably has a lot to do with why they're losing students.
14
@carol goldstein
Many colleges have artificially jacked up their prices, then offer large “merit” scholarships equal to the difference. The students think they are getting an expensive education from a school that considers them to have high merit. Just a marketing ploy.
15
Dumbing down college even more is not the answer IMHO. We have made college too easy and we graduate kids who have zero skills to be successful in the real world. We need to get rid of a lot of schools, make college much harder than it is, and make the entry process more difficult. Those who are not college material can go to trade school, become medical technicians, painters, carpenters, car mechanics or tradesmen. Plumbers make a lot of money. So do good carpenters and painters.
88
@Sarah99 Most medical technician jobs require at least an associate's, and B.A.'s are increasingly in demand to stay competitive.
1
I have always thought that a better approach to collage is to tailor a 2 year program without the assorted "requirements" set by the educational mind set.
A finely tuned 2 year program would go far to eliminate most of the enforced junk I had to take. Music 5 and tennis will forever be remembered bad experiences. It puts an additional financial burden on students who only want to get a specifically targeted education in fields that will lead to good jobs.
28
@CH How about Health, Bible and Phys Ed? I predict that most education will be online, very soon. Forget dorms and proms.
1
@Su Ling Saul I went to a small, state school, inexpensive, took a lot of so-called classes that I wasn't supposed to like, like Music (it was awesome), Anthropology (even better), Economics (it was tough, but I learned a lot) and many other liberal arts classes. Maybe I'm an outlier, I'm not sure. I also did like the Phys Ed classes I was required to take, and English Lit and Physics were tremendous.
Then again, my tuition was cheap, so I could take a lot of classes and explore. The difference is I liked college and wanted to work at it. I also lined up my own internship, which led to a nice career. No way would've I had wanted to leave after 2 years.
I hope most education won't be online as I met many life long friends in the dorms and had girlfriends, and learned the heartache of breaking up with girlfriends. I learned as much from my mistakes as my positive experiences. (I understand that today's parents and their kids want to avoid life-lessons/mistakes at all costs and provide soft landings at every turn.)
Too bad many in this world think the answer is to sit in front of a lifeless, soulless computer, and think that's getting an education.
35
@CH
What you are talking about is a certificate program, and they do exist. A certificate program is typically one year compared to an Associate's degree, which is two years. Certificate programs are intended to teach only specific skills for a specific purpose.
The two year degree is intended to introduce some more content that broadens students' horizons, teaches critical thinking, and gives them cultural background. A good four year degree includes more of that. Before you sneer at those courses, consider that Steve Jobs considered a calligraphy course one of the most enlightening things he ever took, because it introduced him to concepts of design he would later use in Apple's signature products. I for one hated my philosophy requirements, but I ended up loving most of the other General Education requirements and find that broad background very useful in my career as a librarian. Also, Nursing used to be a two year degree to get your R.N. license. Now it's a four year degree. Not all fields consider a basic certificate enough.
2