<p>"No one else is going to tell you this, so I might as well. You sit here today, $30,000 or $40,000 in debt, as the latest victims of what may well be the biggest conspiracy in U.S. history. It is a conspiracy so big and powerful that Dan Brown wont even touch it. Its a conspiracy so insidious that you will rarely hear its name.</p>
<p>Move over, Illuminati. Stand down, Wall Street. Area 51? Pah. Its nothing.</p>
<p>The biggest conspiracy of all? The College-Industrial Complex." ...</p>
<p>Then add the fact that schools are hiring so many adjuncts and paying them poverty level wages (my sister is on food stamps, while teaching at an expensive private U.) So the students go deeply into debt, the instructors are on public assistance…where is the money going?!</p>
<p>Too many universities have changed their primary non-profit objective from educating a new generation to maximizing revenue generation as a non-profit. If the federal government will back the loan, or issue the loan through the Dept. of Education, then the colleges can raise tuition. The students (except the extremely wealthy) don’t have to have the money to pay the new high tuiton rates. They just go into debt. the non-profit schools generate more revenue. If the students graduate with too much debt - someone else’s problem.</p>
<p>This is why we are seeing so many middle-class families direct their kids to community college for two years and then on to state universities. Four years at state flagships and private colleges are out of reach for many of the middle-class unless they are willing to sign the loan documents. Many do so without a clear view of their earning prospects upon graduation.</p>
<p>Supporting the lifestyles of research and publishing divas, maintaining organized sinecures for the tenured, adding levels upon levels of administrators tasked to identify problems for solutions that are in vogue, and spending lavishly on the “well-being” and entertainment of students. </p>
<p>All in all, being more worried about the 153 hours of leisure than about the mere 15 hours of learning per week. And for about 30 weeks per year … in theory.</p>
<p>But all those things are what the middle class customers of higher education wanted. The prestige, the college experience, the support system, etc.</p>
<p>Because many students and their parents tend to cut colleges from their list rather quickly if they don’t keep up with the others in dorms/food/leisure options. Just take a look at many visit reports - both real and in threads like “Colleges Cut from the list after a visit.” People want college resorts with endless options & tutoring, health services that are 2nd to none, specialized dining, etc, then complain about resort pricing. The college version of Motel 6 has a tough time competing with older rooms/dining halls and few amenities.</p>
<p>So the author rants about the costs and loans, and then wonderfully adds this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But nowhere does he mention in the article that part of the rise in tuition is because the taxpayers are paying less of the bill than they did 20 or 30 years ago.</p>
<p>And then, in the same line he takes a pot shot at the taxes that he paid once he started work that, essentially, pay for the ‘free’ education. </p>
<p>Why do we listen to people like this? There is so much nonsense about higher education funding, and ‘conventional wisdom’ about it that abounds in these articles that often turns out to be misleading or just plain false.</p>
<p>I’d be more than willing to adopt the Oxbridge system of higher ed here, as well as the National Heath System that I’m sure helps keep costs down for higher ed. I can’t see that happening, though. Even people on this forum scream ‘socialism’ when there’s talk of need-based aid.</p>
<p>The Oxbridge system has changed over the last two years. I was speaking to a friend whose kid was starting college last year and he said the students now have a higher tuition tab but they are automatically loaned the money by the government.</p>
<p>I have colleagues whose kids went to college paying very little for tuition as late as 4 years ago.</p>
<p>I have dug through the rates and found that since last year someone in UK pays 9000 pounds for computer science. They follow a fixed tuition policy and so someone who might have started in 2005 paid around 1255 pounds through graduation.</p>
<p>We’ve put colleges in a situation in which they have little incentive to compete on price; are we then surprised when they all jack up their prices and compete on the “quality” that appeals to a 17-year-old on a college visit?</p>
<p>If colleges would look at their students’ 30-year-old selves as the customers, things might be different: a 30-year-old wants to look back on a great education with real career prospects and little debt so that she’s living better now than she was back then. But colleges have dumbed down the curriculum (see: appealing to 17-year-olds), upped the levels of administration (see: no need to compete on costs and operate efficiently), and increased the ‘extras’ like fancy gyms and nice dorms (see: appealing to 17-year-olds). </p>
<p>Actually annual tuition fees for most English universities are currently 9,000 pounds or $13,638.84 which on the high side compared to many state universities in the U.S. In addition the contact time with professors is much more limited. Free tuition ended in 1998 when the government pushed increased access to university. More people attended which drove up the cost which could no longer be supported by the taxpayer. Ironically degrees in England are now devalued as they are much more common, and jobs which previously required “O” level, “A” level, or GCSE exams (taken in High School) now require a degree.</p>
<p>I believe the problem starts in HS. My kid’s school (private I admit) promotes kids to study out of state; anywhere out of state. The parents buy this illusion of college experience and pay thousands because they believe it is the ticket to success. When I told them that I wanted my son to study at our local University ( top 50 Nationwide) and live at home, I heard an earful about the importance of giving an opportunity to the child to grow up and that he would learn invaluable lessons at the dorm.I then calculated that just in room and board I would have to pay an extra $20,000 a year. Living within one’s means is a lesson I prefer to teach my son and that will be more valuable in the future that learning to share a room with someone.</p>
<p>I get so tired of the over-used ‘scam’ allegation. It is one thing to criticize the high cost of higher education, but it is entirely a different thing to accuse higher ed institutions of operating scamming operations. Students who emerged from expensive private colleges with big loan debt and poor job prospects might feel scammed, but if so, those students scammed themselves. Who told them to attend a school they could not afford and major in a subject that yielded few employment opportunities? </p>
<p>If a driver looking to purchase a car ended up with a Ferrari, whose fault would it be that he can’t keep up with the loan payments or the high maintenance costs? The dealership? He should have bought a Honda.</p>
<p>Likewise, students who attend state-supported colleges (not as well-supported as in the past, but that is another story) emerge with less debt, and students who select more employable majors find themselves more employable (who knew?).</p>
<p>I agree with skrlvr, the main problem, at least with public institutions, is the decrease in support from the public. Even if costs remained the same, tuition would rise as the amount of cost subsidy decreases.</p>
Rant time: I absolutely LOATHE when people say, “It’s an invaluable experience, so empty your wallet!” No, dumbas–es, it’s “invaluable,” i.e. not able to be valued, so don’t pay for it if you can’t afford it.</p>
<p>It would also be an “invaluable” experience to climb Mount Everest, and you can buy this “invaluable” experience for $65k from a touring company, so why not climb Mount Everest and learn about yourself, get an incredible experience, have bragging rights, and learn how to cope in extreme situations? Oh, wait, because “invaluable experiences” do not, by definition, pay for themselves.</p>
<p>Why on earth people mix up money with non-money-related matters is beyond me.</p>
<p>I caught that on Marketwatch and thought it was an interesting read. </p>
<p>My son was admitted to UOP and a hand full of CSUs for next year. UOP was just short of $20k for tuition and fees per semester. CSUs vary from about $5500 (CSU MB) to about $8800 (CP SLO) per YEAR! Count on about twice that for a UC (Davis says $14k this year). For the truly needy, there are tuition waivers. Room and board add to that total but, you need to eat and sleep no matter where you live. For the budget concious, there’s probably a CSU (23 in all) close enough to 98% of CA’s population for a reasonable commute.</p>
<p>Despite all the headlines, California’s public colleges are a screaming deal. A motivated student could put themselves through without incuring much, if any debt. 20 hours a week at Starbucks will cover tuition and books and then some at a CSU. </p>
<p>We didn’t see the value in UOP so, it was quickly removed from consideration.</p>
<p>It’s a massive marketing machine, brain washing students into cult like belief that the only hope for a successful life it is to have a college degree from an expensive and prestigious university. The holistic arm of Adcom is the gear that fuels the desire. Under the spell of holistic fairy dust the colleges are nearly manufacturing applications. Under the extreme pressure of so much demand, the truly qualified are reduced to paying whatever the college demands and brainwashed into believing that they are lucky to be admitted.</p>
<p>As the saying goes, “A fool and his money soon part”</p>
<p>Having fallen for the scam with child #1, will NOT with 2,3, or 4.
School #1 went to, #2 also applied, and the BS mailings about post grad employment, placement, etc. ad nauseam trying to convince enrollment made us more angry. Now we know the truth, the lies and the reality of todays market. Go as cheaply as you possibly can, incur no debt and don’t believe half of what any school tries to sell you. </p>
<p>Even the professors know it, one which my kid keeps in contact with, told us they do not prepare the students for any meaningful employment in todays world. He is/has been trying to revamp curriculum making it more marketable but meeting with tremendous opposition from old school professors who do not want to change.</p>
<p>Walk with your money in your pocket to the schools with the lowest price tag.</p>