<p>I think all schools should charge an application fee, and it should be in the $50-70 range. If a student wants it waived or reduced, they should have to provide some “mini fafsa” or something that really justifies the reduced fee. My s’s school (one whose tuition plus fees is in that outrageous category, but fortunately he has a scholarship) anyway, they offer a no fee online application. If they had charged, say $60 for all applications, they’d have over $2.5M extra to spend. That could go a long way to reducing enrolled students fees!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To add to your list–do you get a library–which includes the cost of new books, journal subscriptions, subscriptions to databases, several librarians, the support personnel for the library (circulation), the maintenance of the library etc.? </p>
<p>There are all sorts of services that universities provide in addition to what is mentioned above: disability support services, study abroad services, writing centers, math centers, someone to coordinate internship opportunities etc.</p>
<p>I’m sure there’s more to add here.</p>
<p>jym, it’s changing rapidly. S1 had only one school that waived an app fee three years ago, S2 just finished his and only one school actually charged an app fee. He’s also being hounded via e-mail and phone by schools that he has decided he will not apply to. He’s told them, but the mail, e-mails and phones keep ringing and coming. Why they would expend the energy and manpower to keep after kids that have already said no they are not going to complete an app is crazy to me. Fish where the fishing is good for goodness sake. It’s a wacky system and not sustainable as a business model over the long term in my opinion. It will be interesting to watch #3 go through the “system” in 3 years and see what happens.</p>
<p>Reinstating fees would also help stem the craziness of kids applying to so many schools, but I’m not sure that’s what the schools want.</p>
<h1>14: the biggest single expense of any enterprise is likely to be salaries, but faculty salary is not driving college costs up. Yes, you can hire a Ph.D even part time for less than 50K. I see it happen all the time. Adjunct faculty teach two courses per semester (half a full-time person’s course load) for 4-6K per semester (depending on discipline). Of course, they’re not being paid to do scholarship, student advising, course development, or university service, but still…universities rely very heavily on adjunct faculty to keep costs down.</h1>
<p>A more relevant factor is an explosion in university administrator positions, support service personnel, and facilities expansion in the last 30 years. When I was in college (cue the cranky oldster tone), we didn’t have a huge psych counseling service, or tutoring services for every area, or giant student life programs. The dorms were spartan and the food was bad. That was what college meant (and I went to a prestigious LAC that is now in the top 5 of the USNWR national rankings). Now, colleges must be like resorts with all sorts of supports and amenities. We expect colleges to do more. In addition, the easy availability of credit and the extreme class anxiety of the American middle class (of which I am a proud member) have combined to permit colleges to get away with charging increasingly ridiculous fees.</p>
<p>I agree I don’t see the “faculty” as accounting for the inflation other than the fact that even the smallest schools have an amazing variety of majors compared to a few decades ago. I do see, after going through this with two. unbelievable athletic facilities, unbelievable unions, amazing dorms at many but not all campuses. The economy has probably tanked alot of the rennovation/expansion plans temporarily. This will be a watershed year as I’m assuming many middle class families will take a very hard look at the cost/value equation regarding college education.</p>
<p>newhope33 asks,taxguy - This is off-topic, but …</p>
<p>I’m looking for a two-bedroom condo in the DC area. It’s got to be on the Metro line, and I’ve got $125,000 to spend. Any suggestions?"</p>
<p>Response: I don’t think you will like the type of condo that you would get and wouldn’t like the area that it is in. A decent condo in a good area near a metro would probably be at least $175,000- $200K. If I were you, I would contact some realtors.</p>
<p>Salaries includes more than just faculty salaries, and salaries are more than just wages–also benefits like healthcare and pensions, both of which have risen much faster than the salaries themselves. </p>
<p>From the Harvard Annual Report: “Operating expenses totaled $3.8 billion, an 8% increase over fiscal 2008. Salaries, wages and benefits represented 49% of the University’s total operating expenses in fiscal 2009 and increased by 11% to $1.8 billion.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The claim was not 1 PhD but 5.</p>
<p>^^^Sorry, my misreading. Just as a thought experiment, though, a college administrator can (depending on discipline) hire 5 PhDs as adjuncts fall and spring semester, each teaching 2 courses per semester (20 courses total fall and spring) at 2500K per course, for 50K a year. No benefits, no pensions. Assuming that each class contains 20 students, that administrator has just funded 400 student seats that year for 50K. That is exactly how freshman comp programs are staffed all over the place, even at selective institutions.</p>
<p>I’m not advocating the use of adjuncts as a cost saving measure. Overreliance on adjuncts is a national scandal. I also understand that the cost of benefits for employees has increased tremendously across the board not just in academe but in all industries. However, I do not believe that the 50K p.a. fees that some colleges charge can be justified by pointing to increases in labor costs alone. For one thing, the overproduction of PhDs has fostered very stiff competition for faculty jobs, which should keep salaries lower than they otherwise might be. For another, we have the huge pool of adjunct labor.</p>
<p>My kid’s school beats the drum about how the actual cost of educating one student is more than $80,000; so even if you pay full freight, you’re only paying 60% or so of the true cost. The school uses its endowment to make up the rest.</p>
<p>I assume this true for many schools.</p>
<p>I’m sure it varies by field. For most PhD’s, there are far more lucrative careers than teaching. Universities aren’t just competing among themselves for talent. </p>
<p>There is also a huge cohort of senior faculty than is getting ready to retire, so job prospects for current graduate students may not be so bleak.</p>
<p>As for adjunct faculty: I’m sure different schools use them in different proportions. Some are truly cheaper added labor. Others are hired as replacements for faculty on leave. Those aren’t a net savings in salary cost.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not a “sucker” because my child is full-pay at one of these schools. </p>
<p>I live in a wealthy suburban area. I don’t understand why people I know feel they need to take a multi thousand dollar trip to Disney on a yearly basis, buy a Porsche instead of a Honda, live in a 6000+ square foot house, etc. But if they are not asking me to pay for it, it’s not my business. H & I have chosen to put the money into education. We are very fortunate to have that option (and I know that most people don’t) but we are not “suckers”.</p>
<p>Agreed with FallGirl…our kids were practically full pays at two schools which were above $50K for the total COA. We too felt that our money was better invested in education than in some of the other things we could have been spending our money on. We both work full time in professional jobs. Both kids got some merit aid (one better than the other)…but still…in the end, we’ll have paid almost $300,000 for their college educations.</p>
<p>FallGirl and thumper1- Doesn’t it feel like you are being taken advantage of when you know you are part of the minority that is paying full or almost full cost?</p>
<p>You are correct that it’s just wrong to blow lots of cash on expensive toys and then not want to invest in education. But consider that lots of people (I think) spend conservatively, drive modest cars, etc. yet will not/can not attend a top school because they can’t afford to pay full cost, don’t believe in massive debt or just don’t want to transfer most of their assets to the university (which itself may already have more money than many small countries). The choice feels like that of financing a college education for both my child and another the school designates (who is receiving full need aid) or just not attending.</p>
<p>^^
</p>
<p>Can’t answer for FG or thumper>
We felt that we would rather be the family that had a choice of schools regardless of aptitude, reputation, or cost. We would rather be the family that does the subsidizing than be the unlucky kid that does not receives adequate financial aid and thus unable to attend. FA/Adcom are a capricious bunch.</p>
<p>When my daughter attended Syracuse’s pre-college art program, It REALLY ticked me off to find out that 25% of the attendees paid nothing, zilch, nada, and I paid $5,000. I really did feel like a sucker for a number of years thereafter.</p>
<p>However, I guess I would have preferred that situation to being the unlucky kid, that Longprime noted, who can’t attend at all and has few choices because of inadequate finances. We were lucky enough to have saved for years in order to pay for most college expenses without my kids incurring any debt. Does it bother me that some spendthrift parents are getting a lot of aid where I got very little? yes! However, again, I did feel lucky to have had the foresight and ability to pay for college for my kids without debts.</p>
<p>We have two $50K+ kids in college - it’s interesting to get the fundraising calls from these schools touting that the money we give goes to support the half/two-thirds/three-quarters- take your pick of the student population that don’t pay full freight. If indeed the majority of students don’t pay the $50K, there’s a cost of subsidy component in the 50K. Reminds me of healthcare where the “list” price is some lofty amount that is basically irrelevant, with the commercial insurances paying more than cost to subsidize the medicaid and self-pays who contribute less than cost.</p>
<p>Agree with longprime-
We are strong believers in education, and think it is a far better investment than a car or some other luxury. To us, education is a different kind of “luxury”, and we too wanted the luxury of not being limited by cost. Sure, we wanted to spend our savings as wisely as possible, leaving the kids with no loans to repay, nor any debt ourselves. But we also promised the kids they could go anywhere they wanted, and we meant it. I am not ashamed that we wouldn’t qualify for need-based aid. S’s went for merit aid, and got some. One took the big merit package and is saving the rest of the savings for grad or professional school. </p>
<p>What chaps my craw are the people who claim to be poor, to have serious need, who claim the can’t afford to pay much of anything at all and want to know how to get all the aid they can, yet spend their money on luxury vacations, cars, hobbies and clearly have plenty, PLENTY of expendable cash. Cry me a river.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No…I do not feel taken advantage of…I am also paying for MY kids’ educations. One is a graduate and the other a senior of these pricey schools. We value what their colleges offer(ed) them. And we would do it again. BTW…both were accepted at less expensive options. Sometimes it’s not all about the money.</p>
<p>AND…one graduated in four year…and the other WILL graduate in four year (the second one with TWO bachelor’s degrees). Neither ever had a grad assistant teach a class. They had outstanding accessibility to professors. They never had trouble registering for a required or elective class. They were on a first name basis with all of the faculty in their departments.</p>
<p>While the “majority” (66%) of students get some sort of financial aid, this statistic includes merit aid, work study and loans (subsidized and non subsidized), not just grants. [Fast</a> Facts](<a href=“http://nces.ed.gov/FastFacts/display.asp?id=31]Fast”>Fast Facts: Financial aid (31))
</p>
<p>So, while about 1/2 of students get some sort of grant, overall, this averages to only $4900 (2007-8 data - is this before some of the changes in grant policies at HYPS?) Even if it doesnt include the free money at HYPS, the average student who can’t afford to pay their estimated cost of attendance will be taking out loans, working, etc to pay for college. We all know that what we think we can afford and what the college FA calculators think we should pay often differ wildly. We didnt have to take out a single loan, we didn’t have to refinance our house (our mortgage will be paid off in 6 mos), and the cost of attending any college our s’s wanted didn’t have a stranglehold around our necks. So who is the sucker again???</p>