 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
About the Author
Bob Zemsky describes himself as being old and round enough to be mistaken for a pooh-bah. He was a member of the Spellings Commission and, as an author and researcher, has focused on making colleges and universities mission-centered and market-smart. He has focused on what globalism might really mean for higher education, on what technology has not accomplished, and how to make learning important to the higher education market. Bob currently serves as professor and chair of The Learning Alliance at the University of Pennsylvania.
About Brainstorm
Mark Bauerlein
Marc Bousquet
Laurie Fendrich
Dan Greenberg
John L. Jackson Jr.
Stan Katz
Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
Brainstorm Alumni
Marty Nemko, guest bloggerBob Zemsky
Recent Posts
Lessons From the Cost-Quality Curve | Comment [2]
Quality -- Reform's Fourth Horseman | Comment [4]
Access to Success | Comment [2]
Is Access Still the Question? | Comment [3]
Affordability: Devil in the Details | Comment [2]
Featured Articles By the Author
Affordability: Devil in the Details
Exactly how to make a college education more affordable is among the most intractable of the dilemmas facing higher education. Initially those who worried most about a college education’s affordability focused on public institutions and the fact that their increasing prices were directly related to per-student reductions in public appropriations by the nation’s 50 states. It seems unlikely, however, that the states will dramatically increase their support for higher education. What the states have discovered, in good times and bad, is that students and their families will pay more for their college educations, thus allowing the states to promote other spending priorities including the lowering of taxes.
More recently its has been the outrageousness of the tuitions of the nation’s most selective institutions that has drawn the media’s and policy makers’ ire. The problem is that these critics have no better answers to higher education’s 50-year cost-price spiral than do the college and university presidents whose inaction they so vociferously decry. Those who call for greater efficiency sooner or later stumble over the fact that most of the costs they find wasteful — climbing walls is one favorite target — are in fact responses to student and family demands for better service and additional amenities. Those who study the shifting allocation of funds within the academy regularly point out that instructional costs are already a shrinking proportion of the average college or university’s budget. Were calls for lower prices to succeed while the costs imposed by regulation and the need to supply ever more amenities increased, the result would be institutions less able to fulfill their educational missions. The alternative, of course, would be to pay the faculty and everyone else in the institution lower salaries which, ironically, is the strategy most often employed by underfunded elementary and secondary schools.
Sooner or later the price spiral in higher education will have to be addressed. My guess is that breaking the gridlock on costs will require some kind of dislodging event that leads to a substantial reduction in the going price of an undergraduate degree. What won’t reduce costs or lower prices are tough or inflammatory speeches demanding that colleges and universities cut out the frills, make their faculty work harder, and learn from businesses the discipline of outsourcing.
Posted at 08:40:10 AM on May 27, 2008 | All postings by Bob ZemskyComments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Defining Affordability
Next: Is Access Still the Question?
Elite independent institutions can’t compete with the highly subsidized prices of good-to-excellent public uiniversities, so they must offer extra amenities and advantages, positioning themselves as luxury goods.
The decline of the dollar relative to other currencies, together with growing wealth in some countries with weaker higher education systems, will tend to put off the point where college costs at the elite level “hit the wall.”
Until we have real need-blind access (with low income students equally likely to attend college), a low tuition strategy represents a regressive subsidy.
Aid/financing for students and their families, not cost control, remains the most important means of addressing college costs.
— Mr Punch · May 27, 12:38 PM · #
Let’s just make it through the summer to the fall enrollment time – to see just how the impending student loan crisis plays out. The market funding crises may force some “crashes” in the ever-expanding, debt-financed beasts of higher education.
The problem, of course, is that “access and affordability” are not primary goals of most of American higher education; expansion is – with “access and affordability”, at best, just stepping stones along the way.
We all know what happens when an institution’s financial reach exceeds its grasp. With possible apologies to Browning, there is no fiscal “heaven” on this earth.
— Anti-hypocrisy advocate · May 27, 01:56 PM · #