Colleges spend more on Recreation than Instruction

<p>Hah, suddenly the commonplace $50k a year REALLY doesn't seem worth it.</p>

<p>"'This is the country-clubization of the American university,' said Richard Vedder, a professor at Ohio University who studies the economics of higher education. 'A lot of it is for great athletic centers and spectacular student union buildings. In the zeal to get students, they are going after them on the basis of recreational amenities.'"</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/10/education/10education.html?_r=1&ref=education%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/10/education/10education.html?_r=1&ref=education&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I’m not surprised. When you visit a college, most of the time you dont get to see much (if any) of the actual teaching that goes on, you normally just get a tour of the campus, which sometimes doesnt even include a classroom. If everything looks like crap (or isnt as nice in comparison to other colleges) you aren’t going to want to go there. </p>

<p>You have to live at college, so of course this is a huge factor…I mean honestly, as long as the college has your major and a few classes your interested in, your safe to check it out. When you have a list of colleges that offer the classes you want, it comes down to which ones look the nicest, cost the least, or have the best “recreational amenities”. I’m not into sports, but I doubt someone who dedicated their time at high school to sports would want to go to a school that doesnt maintain a good gym.</p>