<p>very interesting arcadia, thanks!</p>
<p>Wow, it's hard to believe that a generation ago that Duke, Cornell, Georgetown were considered on a par with Bennington, Denison and Hobart.</p>
<p>That Wesleyan was above Brown.</p>
<p>No core curriculum and pass/fail option instituted in the early 1970's really seems to have put Brown on the map, literally, as they list it in MA in 1969.</p>
<p>The Middlebury administration, unlike a number of posters on this d-board, seems to be well aware that Middlebury's rise in prestige is recent and that it must work extra hard in the fund-raising department to keep up with its new peers, all of which are better endowed than Middlebury:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The 2007-2008 comprehensive fee, just below Wesleyan University's, exceeds the NESCAC average by $552. More significantly, however, it also places the cost of attending the College at an average $1,348 more than the pricetag of its top four competitors: Dartmouth, Williams, Amherst and Bowdoin Colleges.</p>
<p>"The schools with which we most compete now for students are better endowed on a student-by-student basis," said President of the College Ronald D. Liebowitz. "The College has risen in the rankings, and so the overlap group has changed quite dramatically over the last fifteen years."</p>
<p>Dean of Admissions Bob Clagett explained that Middlebury's smaller endowment on a per-student basis is part of the motivation behind the College's anticipated five-year, $500 million capital campaign.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This quote is from an article in the latest issue of the Middlebury student paper bemoaning how high the cost of attending Middlebury has risen. Here's a link to the full story: <a href="http://media.www.middleburycampus.com/media/storage/paper446/news/2007/04/25/News/Latest.Tuition.Increase.Exceeds.Nescac.Peers-2878064.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://media.www.middleburycampus.com/media/storage/paper446/news/2007/04/25/News/Latest.Tuition.Increase.Exceeds.Nescac.Peers-2878064.shtml</a></p>
<p>Middlebury needs to work harder than its peers to keep up with per student endowment figures because the college has added 500 students since 1990. No other NESCAC school has come close to growing its student population by that amount in such a short time period.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No other NESCAC school has come close to growing its student population by that amount in such a short time period.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I doubt that Middlebury's post-1990 increase of about 27% in its student body explains the endowment disparity between Middlebury and the schools that Middlebury considers to be in its peer group. I suspect that all of the previously all-male NESCACs (I think that that list consists of Amherst, Bowdoin, Hamilton, Trinity, Wesleyan, and Williams) have increased their student bodies by a greater percentage than Middlebury has in the post-coeducation era. Most of the NESCACs handled coeducation by increasing their student bodies (rather than decreasing the number of men) in order to accommodate the influx of women. Since Middlebury was already coed, it did not have to go through that costly and transforming transition period that many of the other NESCACs did. Bowdoin, for example, has more than doubled its student body (an increase of more than 100%) since the advent of coeducation in 1971, increasing its student body from about 800 in 1971 to about 1700.</p>
<p>In 2000, Middlebury's per student endowment figure was $295,429, and Middlebury had 2,278 students. That same year, Bowdoin's per student endowment figure was $295,225, and Bowdoin enrolled 1,603 students.</p>
<p>In 2005, Middlebury's per student endowment figure was $308,346 and the college enrolled 2,455 students. In 2005, Bowdoin's per student endowment figure was $345,817, and Bowdoin enrolled 1,661 students.</p>
<p>So in 2000, Middlebury's per student endowment was slightly higher than Bowdoin's. Between 2000 and 2005, Middlebury added an additional 177 students, while Bowdoin added an additional 58 students. In those 5 years, Middlebury grew by 7.8%, nearly double the rate that Bowdoin grew (3.6%). Those extra students cut into the per student endowment numbers. All things considered, Middlebury's per student endowment isn't too far off from Bowdoin's when you consider growth in enrollment.</p>
<p>The current per-student endowment figures are $388K per student at Bowdoin and $329K for Middlebury for a difference of $59K per student. This is based on the most current information: endowment as of the close of FY 2006 and enrollment numbers as of the fall of 2006. The FY 2006 endowment numbers are $782M for Middlebury and $673M for Bowdoin while the full-time student numbers are 2,372 for Middlebury and 1,734 for Bowdoin. There's not a huge difference in the numbers between the two schools but an extra $59K per student is likely to produce about $6000 in additional resources per student per year at Bowdoin. That's probably not inconsequential in the view of the Middlebury administrators who have to make the numbers work each year . .</p>
<p>A substancial difference in returns on investment is one reason for the widening gap in endowments. Bowdoin's endowment grew at a greater rate than Middlebury's endowment over the past few years primarily due to the fact that Bowdoin's investment managers made some good choices. Also, Middlebury spent considerable money building a new library, 3 new dorms, and 2 new dining halls. I understand that Bowdoin will be constructing some new facilities in the next few years as well. </p>
<p>Over the last year, however, Middlebury has made up some of that ground it lost. I don't have the most current endowment numbers for Bowdion, but in February of 2007, Middlebury's endowment stood at $887 million.</p>
<p>bowdoin just finished renovating 6 freshmen dorms, and building a new concert hall with a ceiling which can eletronically adjust to maximize acoustics. it will also finish renovating the muesuem</p>
<p>
[quote]
Bowdoin's endowment grew at a greater rate than Middlebury's endowment over the past few years primarily due to the fact that Bowdoin's investment managers made some good choices.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is very true. In 4 of the 5 past years, Bowdoin has done significantly better than Middlebury in terms of return on its endowment. Bowdoin is known for its savvy investment managers. Middlebury has had only one good year in the past 5 years - there were 2 years in which it experienced a negative rate of return (2002 and 2003). </p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, Middlebury spent considerable money building a new library, 3 new dorms, and 2 new dining halls. I understand that Bowdoin will be constructing some new facilities in the next few years as well.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Recently Bowdoin has built 2 new dorms, completely renovated 6 dorms, is rebuilding and expandings its museum (to be finished in the next few months), and is building a concert hall (also almost done). It will be breaking ground for a new hockey rink in the next few months. And it had a bunch of other construction projects in the late 1990s . . </p>
<p>In any event, college dorms are typically financed through revenue bonds and other construction projects are financed through capital campaigns so neither type of construction should directly affect the college's endowment.</p>
<p>Exactly. Why does endowment per student matter when colleges spend so little of it?</p>
<p>I would think that the college with the highest spending per student (which is what the USnews financial resources ranking asses...where midd places 4th, Bowdoin 7th, and Carleton 20th), students will receive the "biggest bang for their buck."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Exactly. Why does endowment per student matter when colleges spend so little of it?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First, endowments are where scholarship funds come from.</p>
<p>Second, colleges use their endowments to cover costs that are not covered by tuition and fees. If the endowment fund is well managed, it kicks off income every year that is used to cover those costs. In Bowdoin's case, about 50% of its operating costs are covered by endowment earnings.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I would think that the college with the highest spending per student (which is what the USnews financial resources ranking asses...where midd places 4th, Bowdoin 7th, and Carleton 20th), students will receive the "biggest bang for their buck."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's probably a flaw in the USNW methodology as it means that Middlebury is digging much deeper (in comparison to Bowdoin and other schools in its peer group) into its endowment to cover its operating costs. But you're correct - the student is getting more bang for the buck but to the detriment of the long-term fiscal health of the school.</p>
<p>I think it's an overly strong statement Torasee. The long-term fiscal health of a school depends on a host of factors, most of which are irrelevant to this discussion. It certainly doesn't appear that either school is digging so deeply into its endowment to endanger its fiscal health. </p>
<p>Middlebury and Bowdoin are both excellent schools with a great deal to offer their students. I'm not sure why there is this continued need to attempt to place one over the other.</p>
<p>lol, and isn't this thread about carleton and middlebury?</p>