<p>As to basketball--here's the story on our star player. You should do so much.</p>
<p>"In constant 2005 dollars, the per student operating expense at Swarthmore has increased from $24,000 in 1980 to $69,000 in 2005, an increase of 287%</p>
<p>Sticker price (in 2005 dollars) has increased from $17,000 to $39,000, an increase of 229%.</p>
<p>Average financial aid discounts (in 2005 dollars) have increased from $5,800 to $21,000, an increase of 362%. The percentage of students receiving financial aid discounts has increased from 39% to 50%.</p>
<p>Operating costs (in constant dollars) have increased faster than sticker price and much faster than net price. Net price as a percentage of operating expenses is a much better "deal" today than it was 25 years ago, on average "a better buy", albeit for a more expensive product."</p>
<p>You wrote a great post with lots of information. I appreciate it. I do like numbers.</p>
<p>I look at it more like the way I look at baseball salaries.</p>
<p>Around 25 years ago, the best baseball players were making around $1 million. Now they make around $15 million. If it was just inflation, the players would probably make around $3 million today. </p>
<p>As a fan, I have to pay for the increase in salaries. I'm getting a $3 million player and I have to pay for a $15 million player. I'm not getting to watch a better player. (Did you see the World Series?) I am not getting as good a deal.</p>
<p>(I know you can argue that with cable tv and other outlets,we are getting a better deal because we have more access to the game. This is one reason baseball salaries have gone up so much). </p>
<p>How much did a full ride at Swat actually cost in 1980? And what was the true cost in 1980 in 1980 dollars?</p>
<p>What happened to Idad?</p>
<p>
[quote]
What happened to Idad?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No. It took me a while to find this link for you listing the average combined SAT scores for 86 top NCAA IA football programs, including UWisc (SAT combined = 870)</p>
<p>UFlorida doesn't seem to be on his list, but I am sure it is even lower.</p>
<p>So, yeah. There are exceptions to every rule and solid students on these football teams. But, who is kidding who? Do you think your son or daughter would get into University of Wisconsin with combined SAT scores of 870. Please.</p>
<p>Look, I have no problem with NCAA Div1A football. In fact, I think it's great. I've suggested repeatedly that the NCAA should just drop the pretense and allow colleges to pay these athletes, the way it was done before the charade of pretending that top revenue sports athletes are real students, following the same kind of admissions and academic track as the general student population.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How much did a full ride at Swat actually cost in 1980? And what was the true cost in 1980 in 1980 dollars?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In 1980 (in 1980 dollars):</p>
<p>Operating exp. per student (not inc financial aid): $10,330
Gross revenues per student (fees): $7,080
Per student grant aid (avg for ALL students): $1142
Net per student revenue: $5,938</p>
<p>Multiply all of those by 2.35 to express in 2005 dollars.</p>
<p>In 2005:</p>
<p>Operating exp. per student (not inc financial aid): $69,212
Gross revenues per student (fees): $39,408
Per student grant aid (avg for ALL students): $11,137
Net per student revenue: $28,271</p>
<p>BTW, the historic data is provided in each year's annual financial report. See page 4 of this PDF (you have to calculate the adjusted dollars multiplier, it's only listed for certain items):</p>
<p>Regarding the hiring of more faculty- it's quality, not quantity that matters. More average faculty is not as impressive as having some superstars- eg UW is struggling to keep stellar faculty who can earn more elsewhere (a recent alumni magazine article showed how much effort was spent finding a way to fund and establish a research facility for one researcher who will help generate future benefits to UW), many have chosen to stay with a bit less salary because of the city/university's environment but without competitive salaries quality would go down. It can be hard to explain to the taxpayers why so much should be spent on faculty salaries unless they think of the supply/demand economics (since academic salaries are so much below that of industry there will probably continue to be salary increases and increased college costs). Florida can have a S/F ratio of 1/1 but unless they are known for excellence it doesn't help. </p>
<p>Do not equate high SAT scores with family finances, my SATs would have been poor instead of being a NMS; translated into good education with son who has both brains and money. The rich NMFs will not choose their school based on money, the schools offering merit aid will attract students who need an affordable education- the students give up some quality to get money. If enough students can be attracted it will improve the quality of the student body, encouraging more top students. Cutting back on the merit aid in an average school would discourage top students who can afford to choose a school with more of their peer group.</p>
<p>BTW, UW Madison does not attract good students with its excellent sports teams, they are an incidental benefit, and if the athletics can help fund the rest of the university, great. It's interesting how alumni giving can be influenced by sports, one reason so many game tickets (and the best seats) go to nonstudents.</p>
<p>Most UW students take the ACT. That data covers a few out of state players from over 10 years ago. Ron Dayne was one of them from NJ. I know he was not a great student but he graduated and did win the Heisman so he did OK for himself and the UW.</p>
<p>When UW played Stanford in the Rose Bowl around that time Jay Leno did a little Quiz Bowl between SU and UW players. UW smoked them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I look at it more like the way I look at baseball salaries.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not sure baseball is the best analogy. Perhaps luxury cars would be a better analogy. Not only do you have inflation, but you also have consumer exectation for more content: multi-valve fuel injected engines, ABS braking, airbags, better gas mileage, 6 speaker 200 watt CD players, leather seats, power sunroofs, GPS systems, and so forth.</p>
<p>Or luxury homes. Not only do you have inflation, but you have consumer expectations for 3-car garages, Subzero gourmet kitchens, jacuzzi tubs, and so forth.</p>
<p>There is a LOT of content provided by luxury colleges today that was not provided in 1980. My dorm, for example, did not have internet, public computers, or a big screen HDTV. My college did not have a writing center, Asian studies, extensive counseling services, or a science center with a sushi bar. </p>
<p>Just think what has happened to the cost of providing a 24/7 walk-in health care facility for 1400 students over that time frame.</p>
<p>
[quote]
xiggi, I don't do the IPEDS work here, so I don't know about their requirements. However, I believe barrons described it well--specific breakdowns for different type of faculty, etc. . I presume US News and World Report used the The Common Data Set formula.</p>
<p>The student-faculty ratio, as reported, isn't a really good measure of anything--it's weighted at 5% of a larger measure that figures into the ranking with a weight of 20%. This is not an indicator on which a ranking could be made or broken.</p>
<p>I don't work for Chicago and can't speak to their issues. I suppose numbers could be fudged, but it's a dangerous game with very little payoff for the risk IMO. Sometimes definitions aren't clear, that's true--I believe some colleges include athletics ticket "premium" programs when they report alumni giving rates, for example. But I just don't see what large public colleges like UF have to gain by behaving in a sneaky way on faculty ratio.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hoedown, my point was that, if the ONLY objective is to jump in the USNews rankings, Bernie Mache*n* might find a couple of shortcuts in the successful --and never penalized-- manipulation by others schools. The possibilities are endless, ranging from marketing the peer assessment to death, fiddling with alumni donations, misreporting SAT scores, counting withdrawn and incomplete application, and the list goes on. </p>
<p>If all fails, one might start campaigning to land the post of Editor for one of your alumni. It sure works for one Ivy!</p>
<p>Let's not even get started on the charade of basketball eligibility. I recommend this Washington Post article:</p>
<p>
[quote]
By most every basketball measure, Lutheran Christian Academy in Philadelphia is among the most successful high school programs in the nation. More than a dozen of its athletes are currently playing at Division I colleges, including Georgetown and George Washington. And it has a 92-11 record over the past three seasons.</p>
<p>But among some college coaches, the private school has become a symbol of what they believe is one of the game's growing problems: prep schools with questionable academic programs that help players with deficient academic performances become eligible to play Division I sports.</p>
<p>The school does not have its own building or formal classrooms, and it operates out of a community center in a ragged North Philadelphia neighborhood. It has just one full-time employee: the basketball coach, a former sanitation worker who founded the school. One former student, who attended the school for three months, said it did not use traditional textbooks and that the coach, Darryl Schofield, was the only teacher.</p>
<p>Yet Lutheran Christian graduates remain a hot commodity for college recruiters.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Schofield said the school has four part-time instructors: two former players with bachelor's degrees who returned to teach at Lutheran Christian and two women. One of them, Tamara Casey, has listed her residence as one of the houses Schofield said he owns. One current player said Casey taught him in three courses. Property records show that house is owned by Schofield's parents. When asked for the name of the second instructor, Schofield couldn't recall it, calling her "Mrs. Robinson." None of the players he asked could remember Robinson's first name, either.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Interesteddad, I read your posts 45 and 48 and the luxury car or luxury house analogies are good too.</p>
<p>I guess my point is you can't say that because the operating expenses are $69,000 and my costs are $39,000, I'm getting a good deal. It depends what makes up the operating costs of the $69,000.</p>
<p>dstark:</p>
<p>Look. What it costs is not the issue. It's what a school can charge, and that's an issue of supply and demand. It's the most basic of economics. If you want to complain about the price of something, don't buy it if you don't think it's worth it. But, clearly, a number of people do think it's worth it, or Swarthmore and other schools couldn't charge as much as it does.</p>
<p>On the issue of keeping football players eligible, here's a NYT story on Auburn.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess my point is you can't say that because the operating expenses are $69,000 and my costs are $39,000, I'm getting a good deal. It depends what makes up the operating costs of the $69,000.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I guess it's all relative. Since colleges in the same market niche attempt to offer pretty much the same stuff, I would say that you are probably getting a pretty good deal compared to spending $39,000 at a school with $45,000 in per student operating expenditures. Especially, considering that by far the largest expense category is faculty and staff compensation. From what I have seen, the net price tends to fall in a fairly narrow range at the selective privates ($20k to $28k), while the per student expenditures vary widely ($40k to $70k). Interestingly, there is not a direct relationship. Some of the schools with lower per student spending fall in the higher net price range. Both numbers are driven, in large part, by per student endowment.</p>
<p>Obviously, you should look at the institutional priorities of each school as those priorities will be reflected in the spending. In this particular case, the school really only has one institutional priority -- the undergraduate experience. I can't think of any spending included in the $69,000 per year operating expense that isn't directly or indirectly contributing to a higher quality undergrad experience in some way. It is much more difficult to make that comparison between schools in different market segments. For example, undergrad education may be a small part of the corporation's revenues and expenditures, so a simple per student spending number may not mean much if you are evaluating the value received by an undergrad student.</p>
<p>Tarhunt, thanks, I know a little about economics.</p>
<p>I want to know why other people think its worth it. And when people mention numbers, I like to look at numbers too.</p>
<p>"Especially, considering that by far the largest expense category is faculty and staff compensation"</p>
<p>Interesteddad, this is one of the issues that bothers me and why I used the baseball anaolgy.</p>
<p>Here is an example...</p>
<p>We start out with something costing me 10 bucks and the guy receiving the money gets 10 bucks.</p>
<p>Now, years later, because of inflation, my cost rises to 25 bucks. Then the guy who is receiving the money gets 25 bucks. </p>
<p>Except what is happening is instead of paying 25, I have to pay 40. So my costs of gone up higher than inflation. Then, instead of the guy receiving the 25 or even 40, he receives 70. </p>
<p>So I pay 40, he receives 70. Then he tells me what a great deal I'm getting because I only have to pay 40 instead of 70. If it was just inflation it would have been 25 and 25. It's 40 and 70.</p>
<p>Is that a good deal? I guess it is if I am getting more than $15 of extra services with that money. And if I want those services.</p>
<p>And do those extra services add to my education?</p>
<p>I hope this isn't too confusing.</p>
<p>You wouldn't happen to have Deep Springs numbers would you?
I wonder how much it costs to educate somebody at Deep Springs?</p>
<p>dstark:</p>
<p>On the issue of prices, it's important to note for any new readers that sticker price is largely fictitious. In economics terms, the number consumers really have to look at is the net price (after tuition discounts, commonly referred to as "financial aid"). As I mentioned above, the most selective schools are clearly moving to a progressive pricing strategy where wealthier customers pay more to subsidize lower income students. If a customer is not comfortable with that, shop elsewhere. There are plenty of schools moving to the opposite model: charging low income students more and reducting the price for wealthier students (it's called "merit aid").</p>
<p>I agree with the larger question you raise. Are the luxury frills that are driving up the cost of a college education necessary? The answer to that is "probably not". But, there is no doubt that consumers are demanding those luxury frills.</p>
<p>"Are the luxury frills that are driving up the cost of a college education necessary? The answer to that is "probably not". But, there is no doubt that consumers are demanding those luxury frills."</p>
<p>That sticker price isn't fictitious to me. :(</p>
<p>Why do my kids need fancy dorms and 150,000 square foot rec centers? They can sleep in sleeping bags and run around a track. :)</p>
<p>Deep Springs spent $47,477 per student last year with a total operating budget of just under $1.25 million. The school does not charge tuition room and board (although I strongly suspect there is an expectation of significant sustained annual giving from families).</p>
<p>Of course, it is a very unusual model. A two-year residential learning experience with 26 students, three permanent faculty positions, and three short-term professors and no effort to offer some of the expensive stuff -- the hard sciences, languages, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why do my kids need fancy dorms and 150,000 square foot rec centers? They can sleep in sleeping bags and run around a track.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why do they need Japanese? Why do they need Arabic? Why do they need a Classics department? Why do they need a diverse student body? Why do they need 15 students in a class when other schools can teach in lecture halls with 500 students? Why do they need a 24/7 health care center? Why do they need counseling services?</p>
<p>Those are ALL questions that would be asked if the assignment were to reduce the operating costs of selective private colleges.</p>