<p>Gotta say, my experiences in college have been pretty different than yours schaden.</p>
<p>Good. I hope the bubble bursts. The education-industrial complex needs to have a rude wake-up call. </p>
<p>Also, I agree with the posters who say online courses can replace most in-class lectures. There’s no reason why a large lecture hall is better than an online course. Most professors are there to do research, not teach, and it shows.</p>
<p>
For a single course, I agree. But don’t you think you would miss out on something if all of your classes were taken online? Meeting other students, …?</p>
<p>All of my courses? Maybe. Obviously some portions (labs, etc.) would need to be in person. </p>
<p>Sitting in a classroom to talk to other kids isn’t worth $1000 a week, sorry. Neither is “the college experience.” I could probably have just moved near my college and made friends that way. In my experience, the “college experience” includes pretty much everything that doesn’t relate to academics: living in a new place on your own, etc. Why pay $1500 a class when there are cheaper, more effective alternatives available?</p>
<p>College should be a place to get inspired. I don’t know about replacing education with online resources and stuff, but I’d pay a significant amount of money for any program/person/thing that can provide me with inspiration. The ever so rare awesome professor is the best source in my opinion (besides parents). They will be a lifelong mentor.
Btw, I do think dorms are nice tho, b/c the best way to make friends is to suffer together. It’s hard to say whether it’s overpriced or not. Depends on how you price you friendship :p</p>
<p>this is why i refused to go to the “top” schools. When FA is taken out of my bill i still have to pay about 10k in loans, i’d love it if they would just cut that in half.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, a good teacher is wonderful. However, the vast majority aren’t, and I certainly don’t like taking 7 crappy professors for the 1 good one. In addition to that, in a class with more than 20-30 people, the benefits of the professor are extremely limited. Having a discussion is pretty much impossible when there’s 150 other kids in the room.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please. Like any sane person needs to be jammed into an overpriced concrete block to make friends. For those of us who have social skills, the dorms are hardly the only place to meet people. </p>
<p>Some people will justify anything if they’ve paid for it…</p>
<p>
Well, that assumes that other people are still paying for college. That works right now, but not if you want to reform the entire education industry.</p>
<p>Young people have to live somewhere. If universities still require some courses to have in-class time, I don’t see why students couldn’t just continue to live in the nearby areas.</p>
<p>Schaden, to be fair, if your school’s football is actually nationally ranked, it is safe to assume that they have a lot of revenue and are self-sustaining. Texas’ football team and athletic department actually make so much they donate millions back to the university, and many other schools do the same.</p>
<p>…and then the university uses said millions to build grand stadiums.</p>
<p>So… what does this mean for low income students in the near future, say those who graduate next year? </p>
<p>Is my graduating class completely screwed if the bubble bursts?</p>
<p>I think we could maintain the academic framework of college and cut costs dramatically by cutting non-academic expenses. Just as an example, the average student at UNH subsidizes varsity athletics with $2,000 a year (that’s already accounting for athletic revenue). I think I would rather save those $2,000 and attend a school without athletics, thank you very much.</p>
<p>UNH spends $12,000 per student per year on instruction, academic support (e.g. technology, libraries), administration and maintenance. One could run an academic institution on that, but it constitutes only a fraction of the operating budget of the university.</p>
<p>And they receive $8,000 in state grants per student. So, theoretically, they should be able to offer an education for $4,000 tuition per year, which seems very reasonable.</p>
<p>If they are academically-strong students, they’ll probably be fine.
If they are not academically-strong and don’t have the funds nor can get the credit, they’ll probably have to re-evaluate their plans.</p>
<p>The hater comments to this post seem strange to me, given that most of the readership is considering a big investment in college. </p>
<p>If you think college is a terrible investment, then just keep your damn hand on your wallet. Or, introduce yourself to the community college system. </p>
<p>Lord knows you don’t have to worry about forced participation in a significant public commitment to higher ed. The University of Michigan, to name one example, gets a whopping 12% of its funding from the state of Michigan. </p>
<p>I agree that tuition is too expensive and the economic model behind colleges needs to be reconsidered. But the return on a college is education, especially a liberal arts education, is substantially greater than a good party scene. Don’t believe me? Find two people in your office, or factory, or fast food joint, who can write a sentence to save their lives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s an easy thing to say. Considering that most students aren’t informed enough and are marketed relentlessly by colleges, it’s a little too easy to say “oh, well then just don’t go.” A good percentage of college kids shouldn’t be in college and probably don’t want to be there. Obviously they are there from societal pressure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Care to provide the statistics? And all public schools receive federal funding. Ever notice how federal income tax is a huge amount more than local? </p>
<p>Also, doesn’t Michigan get a significant portion of its income from OOS students? Once that money train stops flowing, who do you think the school is going to ask for money?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Greater than a good party scene? Obviously. Greater than other, comparable alternatives? Probably not. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A) These skills should be taught in high school, not college. Three Rs, remember? Unless you’re advocating college as a remedial process, which contradicts your wishes to get everyone educated. How can you expect fast food workers to write a coherent sentence when
- They weren’t taught well enough in HS.
- College is out of their price range</p>
<p>B) That still doesn’t prove anything, and as of late, people in offices, factories, and fast food joints are increasingly filled by liberal arts majors. Why am I not hearing “Greetings fine sir, would you like thinly-sliced, salted, fried potato crisps with your order?” more often? :D</p>
<p>^^^Where did you expect the college graduates to work if not in an office or factory?</p>
<p>^You’re missing the point. Chnews implied that people at “offices, factories, and fast food joints” are missing the skills provided by a college education. If college grads are the people in these jobs, obviously something has gone wrong.</p>
<p>No, his point was that a liberal arts degree does offer these skills to graduates–and then went on to say that office, factory, and fast food joint workers wouldn’t have those skills.</p>
<p>So where are the liberal arts graduates with apparently great writing skills working? At home?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most of the public funding comes from state grants, actually. That’s why there’s a distinction between in-state and out-of-state tuition.</p>
<p>The majority of federal income tax dollars go towards military expenses. Only a tiny fraction goes towards education.</p>