People love to complain about college costs

Parents Forum
61

<p>Thus, for example, while I believe that in general affirmative action for affluent white women is wrong in principle, I never criticize an affluent white woman for taking advantage of such a program.</p>

<p>lol…that is hardly an example. If an affluent white woman hasn’t been complaining about the program, then there’s nothing wrong with her taking advantage, so you shouldn’t be criticizing her. She doesn’t have to follow the standard that you’ve set up for YOURSELF. However, if the affluent white woman is outspoken against a program and then partakes when it’s NOT necessary, well, that just smacks of hypocrisy. The outspoken affluent white woman could decline or give that money to the needy.</p>

<p>That said, you still haven’t responded to:</p>

<p>*then state funds must be used to pay for things for which the private money would otherwise be available.</p>

<p>And, what would that be that would satisfy you?*</p>

<p>My horse must be quite high…I don’t set up hurdles (anti-merit) that I then run around.</p>

<p>skrlvr…that may be eventually…I wasn’t referring to the top profs with endowed chairs.</p>

<p>But in the meantime, attracting better profs means being able to demonstrate that you’ll have “smart kids” in the seats. When you’re not a HYPS-like school, getting the better profs to choose your campus over another can mean showing that you have excellent facilities and high stats students.</p>

62

<p>Profs at any level are going to look at reputation of the graduate program, support for research, etc.; it’s not just the top profs with endowed chairs. Stuff like teaching load, salary, tenure requirements, etc are also very important.</p>

63

<p>I have no problem with a state school offering a merit scholarship to an OOS student, and my kid happily accepted one. Schools don’t hand money to out-of-state kids out of the goodness of their hearts. They’re doing it to accomplish some goal, whether it’s keeping the seats full, raising the stats, improving their reputation, enhancing the pool of skilled workers for state employers, increasing diversity, or something else. And these days, many states are cutting funding to their universities (some state contribute only a small percentage of total funding), making it more important for the school to have other sources. Increasing stats or bringing in more students (including from OOS) may be an important component of getting funding from other sources.</p>

64

<p>The most successful public universities have always placed a high priority on being successful universities, in addition to (not instead of) being instruments of domestic education policy in their respective states.</p>

<p>I have said before (and will say again, I’m sure) that I find the whole obsession with in-state and out-of-state this or that bogus. It’s completely insensitive to the kind of lives American families actually live in this century, with lots of interstate mobility, not all of it completely voluntary. And states with attractive universities benefit enormously from out-of-state students coming to study there and staying to raise families and pay taxes. People talk as if any subsidization of out-of-state students is the equivalent of stealing food from their children’s plates. But they applaud when state governments spend enormous sums trying to entice businesses to relocate to the state. In the long run vibrant universities and the “immigrants” they pull in do a lot more to create real business growth than tax-subsidized relocations.</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>So folks who believe social security and medicare should be modified are hypocrites unless they adjust their bennies on their own as they believe the law should read. That makes about 50% of retirees hypocrites … with a huge pipeline of hypocrites coming.</p>

<p>Personally, I don’t see the problem with holding two beliefs simultaneously … I will take advantage of the rules as they are written … and I also believe there is a better version of the rules and hope they are modified.</p>

66

<p>

</p>

<p>Interesting question … trying to chase this one down would be interesting. Big issue with cofounding variables though.</p>

<p>What public schools have attracted a lot of students with NMFs scholarships? Bama whose USN rankings has moved along with the program. Oklahoma, Arizona State (or is it Arizona), Kentucky, etc … hmm for these guys their USN rankings hasn’t moved so much (I think).</p>

<p>Bama has also invested a ton in facilities, faculty, and growth. No idea if the other NMF scholarship schools invested in a similar fashion.</p>

<p>So … I wonder if the bigger lever is the NMF scholarships or the campus infrastructure spending? Clearly Bama believes their model is working for them … interesting more haven’t copied it though. It’s great we live where there are lots of different models for schools to pursue and students to consider.</p>

67

<p>

</p>

<p>Assuming 1) that they do in fact stay – many do not; 2) that their productivity would be “enormously” better than the instater that they replace.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not me. :)</p>

68

<p>

What’s interesting is that Alabama’s research expenditures have actually decreased and are among the lowest of any public flagship in the country (although this is partially offset by UA-Birmingham and UA-Huntsville). How much have the building of facilities actually helped longer term job prospects in Alabama except for the training of more engineers?</p>

69

<p>So folks who believe social security and medicare should be modified are hypocrites unless they adjust their bennies on their own as they believe the law should read. That makes about 50% of retirees hypocrites … with a huge pipeline of hypocrites coming.</p>

<p>???</p>

<p>This is hardly an appropriate comparison. First of all, retirees have contributed to the program…it’s their own money. Secondly, those who want modifications aren’t saying that they shouldn’t get the money at all. They want sensible reform so that the program doesn’t go broke. lol Crazy analogy!</p>

70

<p>*What’s interesting is that Alabama’s research expenditures have actually decreased and are among the lowest of any public flagship in the country (although this is partially offset by UA-Birmingham and UA-Huntsville). </p>

<p>*</p>

<p>I haven’t seen the numbers, but are the numbers calculated “per student”? If so, then the low numbers are likely related to the fact that the school’s enrollment numbers have exploded within a very short-time and the research dollars haven’t yet increased enough to compensate…so some lag time is going on, which would be understandable when a school has essentially doubled its enrollment within an amazingly short time. </p>

<p>Certainly the recent building of 900,000 square feet of new STEM academic and research space and the hiring of many more profs will eventually lead to more research opps.</p>

<p>How much have the building of facilities actually helped longer term job prospects in Alabama except for the training of more engineers?</p>

<p>It’s probably too soon to tell since the enrollment explosion is rather new, so not many of these enticed students have yet to graduate. That said, it’s not only eng’g that has seen an explosion. The College of Nursing, the B-school, and A&S have seen large enrollment growth.</p>

71

<p>*Quote:</p>

<h1>And states with attractive universities benefit enormously from out-of-state students coming to study there and staying to raise families and pay taxes.</h1>

<p>Assuming 1) that they do in fact stay – many do not; </p>

<p>*</p>

<p>Actually, many do stay within the state because that’s where they’ve often done internships and co-ops so that’s where they often find employment. Plus, if the state is one that actually has jobs available (rather than the home state that is losing jobs), then staying becomes very attractive. Also, the fact is that many students “find love” in college and aren’t willing to return home and be away from their SO. </p>

<p>Those who do return to their home state become ambassadors for their alma mater. So, either way, it’s a win.
*</p>

<p>2) that their productivity would be “enormously” better than the instater that they replace.</p>

<p>In the case of Alabama, the OOS student isn’t replacing an instater. The instate enrollment has increased, not decreased…which is why the school opted to radically increase enrollment rather than shut-out instate students. </p>

<p>The state needs BOTH…instate and OOS grown employees.</p>

<p>The issue was that the state is home to the second largest research park in the nation (Cummings Research Park (CRP)) and it constantly needs a supply of STEM and business grads to hire. And, as the population grows because of this, the state also needs more of the other grads (nurses, doctors, bankers, teachers, etc.) </p>

<p>the federal gov’t recognized the need to supply CRP with STEM folks, which is why it funded much of that 900,000 sq ft new state of the art STEM complex. </p>

<p>As someone who was moved across the country because of CRP employment, I know how hard it is for companies to move people (that could be another thread!!), so it’s best to just get them right from an instate university. </p>

<p>*
Quote:</p>

<h1>But they applaud when state governments spend enormous sums trying to entice businesses to relocate to the state.</h1>

<p>Not me. *</p>

<p>As a Californian who is seeing jobs fly out of your state, you should. Someone has to pay taxes.</p>

72

<p>I don’t know what is meant by research expenditures, but UAB attracts significantly more external research dollars than UA. Part of this is due to the presence of the medical school at UAB.</p>

<p>And for what it’s worth, the average ACT for incoming freshman between the two institutions is not that different–UA has an average of 25.8, and UAB has an average of 25. The US News rankings differs significantly, though, with UA at 86 and UAB at 152. All this about merit money attracting the smart kids, attracting the better profs, more research dollars and rising in the rankings doesn’t seem to hold in this particular case. </p>

<p>Getting back to some aspect of the main topic of this thread, all that building, merit money, rise in enrollment, rise in out of state enrollment, etc. at UA has not helped at all in terms of affordability for low income students. UA now has a 16, 685 dollar net price for families making between 0 and 30,000 dollars. UA puts very little to none of its scholarship money for need based aid–the majority of it is put in merit. money. This is the real shame of this particular model of higher education funding. This particular model has been in effect for about 10 years now at UA and shows no signs of changing.</p>

73

<p>I meant in terms of raw research expenditures. In FY 2013 Alabama managed to generate only $26.5 million in research expenditures* putting it on par with some of the better CSUs, California institutions which explicitly focus on teaching rather than research**. I’m not a big fan of merit aid, especially when it goes to OOS students at the expense of in state ones, whose parents contribute in the form of tax dollars, being able to afford to go to college without heavy debt load. </p>

<p><em><a href=“http://osp.ua.edu/site/ResearchReports/13ThirdQtrExpByDepartmentResearchComparison.pdf[/url]”>http://osp.ua.edu/site/ResearchReports/13ThirdQtrExpByDepartmentResearchComparison.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
*</em><a href=“http://www.grants.calpoly.edu/3_Reports.html[/url]”>http://www.grants.calpoly.edu/3_Reports.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

74

<p>but UAB attracts significantly more external research dollars than UA. Part of this is due to the presence of the medical school at UAB.</p>

<p>Not “part of this”…it’s “most of this”. The med school which sits on that campus is a top 30 SOM and gets a bunch of research dollars.</p>

<p>*average ACT for incoming freshman between the two institutions is not that different–UA has an average of 25.8, and UAB has an average of 25. *</p>

<p>Bama more cares about the top quartile because that’s where the STEM students are. Bama has raised its top quartile significantly (ACT 31+) in the last few years. (UAB’s top quartile is only 28+…that is more of a significant difference!!) The avg probably won’t change all that much because Bama is determined to keep its high AA numbers…and, nationally, the avg ACT for an AA student is well below 20.</p>

<p>*UA puts very little to none of its scholarship money for need based aid–the majority of it is put in merit. money. This is the real shame of this particular model of higher education funding. *</p>

<p>True…but Bama isn’t done with its plan. For all we know, getting to the point of offering better need-based aid is part of the plan. It’s hard to “start with that”. It’s better to improve the school first, and then tackle that issue. I know that people think you can start with that, but really you can’t and improve the school.</p>

75

<p>While I don’t intend to make this a UA focused debate, seeing as the OP discussed luxurious accommodations at a public school which adheres to a much different educational philosophy, UA-Birmingham has a much higher percentage of African American students ([26%](<a href=“College Navigator - University of Alabama at Birmingham”>College Navigator - University of Alabama at Birmingham)</a>) than UA-Tuscaloosa ([12%](<a href=“College Navigator - University of Alabama at Birmingham”>College Navigator - University of Alabama at Birmingham)</a>).</p>

76

<p>But UAB enrolls over twice the percentage of AA students that UA does (26% to 12%). So I’m unclear about how any of what you say follows.</p>

<p>There is currently no plan to increase need based aid at either UA or UAB in the near future.</p>

77

<p>

</p>

<p>Off point, but this is just not true and never has been. The funds from current retirees and other SS beneficiaries comes from today’s workers and corporations.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, it is popular – but false – misconceptions like these that hurt any discussion of public policy.</p>

78

<p>I wasn’t claiming that UA enrolls more AA students than UAB. I was explaining why the avg ACT at Bama won’t likely see a huge rise…altho the upper quartile has seen big rise.</p>

<p>*Quote:
First of all, retirees have contributed to the program…it’s their own money.</p>

<p>=======================
Off point, but this is just not true and never has been. The funds from current retirees and other SS beneficiaries comes from today’s workers and corporations.*</p>

<p>Retirees have contributed to the program. Period. And, even the employer contribution is still part of one’s hidden paycheck. And the comparison isn’t a good one. If a rich retireee is insisting that SS benefits be means-tested, but then collects, then he could be accused of being similarly hypocritical…which was the issue (but the rich retiree did contribute)</p>

79

<p>

</p>

<p>Sure but what you said was:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>And that clause that is just plain wrong.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I was making no comment on whether the comparison is good or not.</p>

80

<p>“The avg probably won’t change all that much because Bama is determined to keep its high AA numbers”</p>

<p>It’s hard to see 12% as high in a state that is +26% African-American, especially when the competing flagship, Auburn, is only around 7% AA. If you mean that Bama doesn’t want the percentage to drop, then I’m sure you’re right.</p>