Student Satisfaction Levels at Swat

Colleges and Universities A-Z Swarthmore College
41

<br>


<br>

<p>Except that with a Mercedes you're not usually paying for an extra wheel or an extra set of windshield wipers. The dirty little secret of an LAC having a billion dollars in endowment is that they really don't have a whole lot to spend it on.</p>

42

<p>
[quote]
I reiterate, not once in nearly three years of CC board surfing have I heard a 17 y/o say, "I'm going to Williams (or Amherst or Haverford) because they're more highly endowed than Middlebury and Bowdoin."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course not. However, they do choose colleges based on a range of qualities that are direct results of per student endowment: academic prestige, USNEWs rankings, facilities, strength of faculty, and so forth.</p>

<p>BTW, of the top 25 LACs, only five have student faculty ratios of 8:1.</p>

43

<p>
[quote]
The dirty little secret of an LAC having a billion dollars in endowment is that they really don't have a whole lot to spend it on.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Au contraire, mon ami!</p>

<p>The real dirty little secret of LACs is that it is expensive as heck to educate undergrads on such an intimate, boutique scale.</p>

<p>It is vastly more expensive to have an Intro Econ course capped at 25 or a freshman Physics seminar with 12 students rather than a lecture hall filled with 350 students.</p>

<p>It is vastly more expensive to have a tenured professor making $100,000 a year conduct discussion sections and write comments on student papers than some indentured TA who would be making more working at McDonalds.</p>

44

<p>Name one top twenty LAC with 350 ppl in an Intro Physics class.</p>

45

<p>There aren't any LACs with 350 students in an Intro Econ lecture. That's my point!</p>

46

<p>So, Williams was NOT hurt by doubling in size in the late eighties? I think that <em>was</em> your original point in post #32.</p>

47

<p>I take that back; that was MY original point, with which you now seem to agree. ;)</p>

48

<p>By the way, my son looked at the endowment figures per student when he decided to apply ED to Swarthmore, as he felt that was an important factor in choosing an LAC. These statistics are widely published, and although reflected indirectly as in the factors that id mentioned, are also obviously a direct influence. </p>

<p>It is so expensive to run an LAC successfully and money only can help the quality of the education available at Swarthmore, which is a superb institution.</p>

49

<br>


<br>

<p>I just think that it's a shame that a thread supposedly about things that are great about Swarthmore can't proceed for more than six posts without someone (usually, but, not always, Interesteddad) mentioning that it has a billion dollar endowment (which I'm not even sure is true, anymore,btw.) Does this mean that when the stock market has another correction (which it inevitably will) that Swartmore will no longer be prestigious?</p>

50

<p>"Does this mean that when the stock market has another correction (which it inevitably will) that Swartmore will no longer be prestigious?"</p>

<p>I think that Swarthmore's investors are smarter than to put the endowent in high risk ventures, could be wrong, but my guess is that it is highly protected money.</p>

<p>The money behind a school is reality, and it will be more to Swat's credit if they keep it safe.</p>

<p>What would you like to know? The quality of the food? the dorms? the students? I think this has been covered in many threads, but hopefully you will get the answers that you are looking for, john</p>

51

<p>It seems to me that there comes a point where the endowment per student is so great that increasing it even further raises the quality of education only slightly.</p>

<p>If a college has an endowment of $500,000 per student and another has an endowment of $1 million per student, you can't say that the richer school will give an education that's twice as good. I think everyone would agree on that. I wonder if it's safe to say that going from $500,000 per student to $1 million only will provide a very small increase in the quality of education?</p>

<p>I know next to nothing about higher education, but it seems to me that when dealing with top schools that all have enormous endowments, an endowment is more an indicator of how financially successful the alumni have been, and how willing they have been to give back instead of necessarily how good the education will be.</p>

<p>ID's analogy:</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>This assumes that a $69,000 Mercedes is worth $69,000 to the buyer. Say that, for example, a $40,000 unnamed car would work for a prospective buyer. To the buyer, a Mercedes is only worth $2,000 more to them. In that case, the Mercedes is worth $42,000 to the buyer. I mean if Swarthmore spent, for example, $50,000 on a piece of equipment and school B only had the money to spent $25,000 on a slightly cheaper piece of equipment, is this really such a big loss? Will it even impact the quality of education of the student at school B at all?</p>

<p>My (perhaps naive) take can best be explained by exaggerating things. Say school A spent $200,000 per student, and school B spent $210,000 per student. This increase is really so small as to much such a minor difference in things. When Swarthmore has $69,000 to spent per student and another school has "only" $60,000 or $55,000 per student, is this really as substantial an increase as we make it out to be?</p>

52

<p>grad06, you are absolutely right, and my son did not apply to Swat vs other LACs only because of the higher endowment. He was aware of it and it was a reassuring factor, but mostly he likes Swarthmore, and that is why he wanted to go there.</p>

<p>I think if you are looking at schools of similar size that have a MUCH larger endowment, that factor may make a difference, but maybe not, because, for instance, they could have unique programs, religious affiliations, locations, etc., and have a lower endowment but still really appeal to students. I wouldn't think Swarthmore would be the best place for Marine Biology. Some of those schools may also have dedicated funds for various programs, anyhow. In addition, the large endowment doesn't make Swat or other schools cheap, and other schools that provide excellent educations can be much cheaper.</p>

<p>Per your statement: "I know next to nothing about higher education, but it seems to me that when dealing with top schools that all have enormous endowments, an endowment is more an indicator of how financially successful the alumni have been, and how willing they have been to give back instead of necessarily how good the education will be."</p>

<p>It may also reflect how well the endowment is handled by the financial advisors, but that is a whole other story. Having a very large group of rich alums (see Harvard and Yale) also helps over the years. Lots of very rich students pretty much went only to a few schools for generations, so imagine that wealth!</p>

53

<p>Anyhow, I'm not sure how many students are looking at this site over the summer, but I think the original intent of this thread was what you like and don't like about Swarthmore?</p>

<p>Any takers on that question?</p>

54

<p>Grad06:</p>

<p>You make good points. One thing we have to consider is that we are only talking about a very small slice of schools that have any meaningful endowment money to spend. Most of the 1000s of colleges and universities do not.</p>

<p>Perhaps four examples of solid schools in Swarthmore's general area would help illustrate. These numbers are all from the 2003/04 academic year Financial Reports for consistency:</p>

<p>Swarthmore:</p>

<p>Per student charges: $26,585
Per student spending: $68,304
Per student spending from endowment: $29,155</p>

<p>Haverford:</p>

<p>Per student charges: $28,877
Per student spending: $54,233
Per student spending from endowment: $14,423</p>

<p>Franklin & Marshall:</p>

<p>Per student charges: $34,566
Per student spending: $41,461
Per student spending from endowment: $7,790</p>

<p>Muhlenburg:</p>

<p>Per student charges: $26,151
Per student spending: $27,355
Per student spending from endowment: $1,492</p>

<p>I'll leave it up to each person to decide if, overall, Swarthmore is "better" than Haverford. If Haverford is "better" than Franklin & Marshall. If F & M is "better" than Muhlenberg. That's certainly the order that general concensus would rank them.</p>

<p>Note that the "per student charges" are important to consider. They represent the ability of a college to enroll diversity because this figure is net of financial aid discounts. A college that needs to maximize revenues to balance the budget will offer less financial aid discounts. Thus, if a college has a reputation as a "rich kids preppy" school (like F&M), that reputation may well result directly from budgetary necessity, i.e. the college simply has to focus on enrolling full-pay students. Thus, the seeming anomoly of F&M charging the average student considerable more than Swarthmore, despite much lower per student expenditures. If you could get in both places, would you pay as much to attend Muhlenberg as you would to attend Swarthmore?</p>

<p>These are all issues that derive directly from "per student endowment".</p>

55

<p>ID - I think you're exaggerating the gulf between per student charges and per student expenditures. You can't subtract financial aid as a discount in one column and then put it back in as an expense in the next; that's counting the same phenomenon twice. :p</p>

56

<p>
[quote]
You can't subtract financial aid as a discount in one column and then put it back in as an expense in the next; that's counting the same phenomenon twice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Financial aid is not counted as an expense item in college financial reports. There is no financial aid included in the "per student spending" figures above. </p>

<p>Financial aid is accounted for as a discount or reduction in "per student charges" in all of the figures above. That's why, for example, Swat's average "per student charges" above are $26.5K rather than $42K per year. "Per Student Charges" are the total of revenues from tuition, room/board, and fees minus financial aid discounts, i.e. the total dollars actually received from the bills sent to students for the year.</p>

<p>Years ago, financial aid was treated as an expense item. Colleges would count the full sticker price as their revenues and then treat financial aid as an expense. But, accounting practices changed because financial aid is dollars that the college never actually received. Accountants balked because the revenues being declared were imaginary. Thus, it is currently treated as a reduction in revenues.</p>

<p>The "per student spending" is the annual operating budget divided by enrollment. It does not include capital spending (i.e. the cost of a new building), however it may include annual interest payments on money borrowed to build a new science center. It also does not include fees and costs associated with managing the endowment investments.</p>

57

<br>


<br>

<p>I was afraid you'd say that. Because if fin/aid is not included in per student expense and, in the case of Haverford at least, the student/faculty ratio is roughly the same, that leaves only one other big ticket item to explain the difference -- ADMINISTRATION.</p>

58

<p>
[quote]
I was afraid you'd say that. Because if fin/aid is not included in per student expense and, in the case of Haverford at least, the student/faculty ratio is roughly the same, that leaves only one other big ticket item to explain the difference -- ADMINISTRATION.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It depends what you mean by "administration". I suspect that Swarthmore does spend more on student support activities -- deans, study abroad office, health care, counseling centers, libraries, etc.</p>

<p>There are also some significant differences in academic offerings. For example, Swarthmore has Engineering, Art History, Theater, Dance, Education, and several language departments that Haverford does not offer. Likewise, Swarthmore operates several study-abroad programs (France, Ghana, Poland); I don't believe Haverford operates any. </p>

<p>More difficult to pin down would be money available for student research stipends, summer abroad programs, internships, etc. Knowing how much money is available at Swarthmore, I'm guessing there's probably a difference. For example, my daughter has already gotten a couple grand stipend from Swat for summer community service. She expects to get another $3500 for thesis research abroad the summer before her senior year. This stuff is easy to get at Swarthmore in most departments.</p>

<p>Also, I don't think anyone would compare the physical plants of the two schools. For example, Haverford doesn't even have a swimming pool -- let alone the spectacular arboreteum landscaping, fancy academic buidings, performing arts center, and so on and so forth.</p>

<p>From a faculty standpoint, there is some stuff that helps Swat attract and keep a first rate faculty, including one of the most generous sabbatical policies in the country. Teach six semesters and you are guaranteed full pay for the seventh semester sabbatical. Additional endowed funding turns the seventh semester into full pay for a full-year sabbatical for many, if not most, tenured faculty. A year's sabbatical after every three years of teaching keeps the faculty fresh, energized, and enthusiastic about teaching. It's also expensive as heck for the college.</p>

<p>This is not to take anything away from Haverford. It's a great school and you can certainly offer a fine eduction for $54,000 a year....just without some of the luxury touches you can offer if you spend $68,000 per year.</p>

59

<p>This whole discussion per comparing Haverford and Swarthmore is based on conjecture, unless you actually examine the budgets of both colleges. Ditto for comparing any LAC. You are not including any data for administrative costs and other overhead, and are only guessing where the money is spent. However, you say that the spending per student includes these administrative costs.</p>

<p>If any of you actually have the budgets to examine, then there would be more validity. </p>

<p>As to which school is best to attend, I'd say the jury is out on that. They each have strengths, weaknesses and happy and unhappy students and alums. I have met some very loyal, successful and grateful Haverford alums. </p>

<p>Although enthusiasm for one school is very sweet, I think it behooves us all to realize that there are lots of happy students everywhere, including schools in all tiers of US News and World Report.</p>

60

<p>Collegialmom:</p>

<p>Here's Swarthmore's detailed Financial Report for 2004/2005.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.swarthmore.edu/Admin/investment_office/FinancialRpt_04-05.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.swarthmore.edu/Admin/investment_office/FinancialRpt_04-05.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Page 11 breaks down expenses by accounting category.</p>

<p>Page 18 breaks down expenses by "natural classification" and is somewhat more useful is looking at where the $100 million operating budget goes.</p>

<p>The last five years' financial reports are available here:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.swarthmore.edu/Admin/investment_office/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.swarthmore.edu/Admin/investment_office/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>