Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    The Week

    Skyrocketing tuition: Is punishing expensive colleges the answer?

    President Obama tries to pressure colleges into taming their wildly soaring tuition costs. Good luck with that, say dismissive critics

    In his State of the Union address in January, President Obama put colleges and universities on notice: "If you can't stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers will go down." College "can't be a luxury," he added, and affordable tuition is "an economic imperative" for families and the nation alike. Obama has since backed up his words with proposals, including "scorecards" that would let students better compare schools' costs and value, and continued threats to shift federal dollars away from schools that don't control costs. Should pricey schools really be punished?

    Obama's plan won't work: "'Punishing' schools that don't control costs" is futile, because most rising costs have nothing to do with the colleges themselves, say Michael McPherson and Sandy Baum in the Chicago Tribune. The main cause is the decision by cash-strapped states to slash higher-ed funding. "Everyone would like a magic bullet that would dramatically reduce the cost of educating students." But the truth is, high-quality education costs money, and nobody wants to pay for it. Obama can't punish schools into changing that reality.
    "Can we keep colleges affordable?"

    It would work if Obama went farther: Oklahoma State's Vance Fried found that schools can "provide a first-class undergraduate education for only $6,700 a year," says Daniel Freedman at Forbes. His recipe — slash university administrations, increase class sizes, and separate research from teaching — won't be popular. But if colleges want federal money, they need to prove Prof. Fried wrong. And Obama should boldly challenge them to do so.
    "The Obama deal: Harvard for $6,700 a year?"

    Let's give transparency a try first: Obama's threat to cut federal funding to schools that don't control tuition costs is "premature" at best, says the Albany, N.Y., Times Union in an editorial. But we applaud his "call for greater transparency" on the value of different colleges. Using a scorecard that compares schools by the amount of debt you'll incur, your chances of graduating, and the odds of getting a job is a no-brainer. Once would-be applicants are armed with that data, the marketplace might impose "an adjustment in college cost inflation" on its own.
    "Cheer, cheer for Transparency U."

    View this article on TheWeek.com Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

    Other stories from this topic:

    Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter

     

    23 comments

    • Larry Dickson  •  San Diego, California  •  3 mths ago
      A better solution is APPRENTICESHIPS that pay wages instead of pile up debts, and lead (if successful) to good jobs. Good jobs should include a sabbatical (like military retirement) around age 40, when people can go to college for a REAL education, not just an overpriced license to work.
      • Windriver 3 mths ago
        I went through one when they were still around years ago. It set me up for productive jobs right up to today.
    • Windriver  •  3 mths ago
      Here is the ENDOWMENTS of:
      Harvard $32 BILLION
      Yale $15.2 BILLION
      Columbia $5.1 BILLION
      Brown $1.8 BILLION
      Princeton $11.2 BILLION

      That a lot of tuition!
    • Philip  •  3 mths ago
      News flash: it doesn't take a college degree to hire people, run a restaraunt, manage a store, etc. Fire degree creep and the cost of education will be forced to correct itself. We don't need more psychology majors flipping burgers, either.
    • Dom  •  3 mths ago
      Education, particularly undergraduate education, is not a major priority at most Universities. One of the reasons that “research” is prioritized far higher than education is that most faculty research is subsidized by “grants” from the government, via agencies such as the NIH and NSF, and increasingly, from private industry. These grants not only pay the salaries of faculty, graduate students and technical staff who receive them, but also come with “overhead” (often approaching – or even exceeding – 100% of the “direct costs” of the grants itself) that goes directly to the institution. Universities are entirely addicted to and dependent on these overhead costs to sustain their operations, and to the grants themselves to subsidize their faculties (for a faculty member with a grant, the University does not pay his salary – the grant does). This is why external grant support is the major criteria by which faculty are judged at Universities (more important even than publications, although the two are related since publications often lead to grants and vice-versa). Undergraduate education is a mere afterthought – often looked upon as a distraction from the real work of “research” (and acquiring grant support) and a burden to be shirked as much as possible by the faculty. With grant support from an increasingly strapped government drying up, there is only one other source of revenue for the Universities. That is why tuition is going up everywhere, but don’t expect more educational bang for your buck!
    • Topkick  •  3 mths ago
      Too much money, for too long, with no accountability to anyone except their peers, has given the College and University Administrators "God Complexes." No need to trim any of the fat. Just ask for and receive more money. They'll be amazed how much can be done for less when a budget means something!
      • Joseph 3 mths ago
        Yes, let's cut faculty salaries, stop building facilities, and offer open enrollment to all... those Gods you mention deserve to be punished...AH
      • Windriver 3 mths ago
        Joe, if you took the average salary of a professor, extrapolate it out to 40 hours a week like most people work, they make the equivalent of the top 1% since they work so few hours.
    • A Yahoo! User  •  Atlanta, Georgia  •  3 mths ago
      Quit cramming colleges with students who don't belong there. Colleges are suffering from being coerced to accept students that don't have the academic rigor or commited interest to be there. A good job does not necessarily depend on a college education. Some people are far more suited to being in a trade and we should be promoting a diversity of post secondary education rather than punishing colleges for raising tuition to be able to recoup some of the remediation costs of accepting unqualified students who don't belong there in the first place.
    • Jon Soto  •  Encino, California  •  3 mths ago
      The tuition problem is caused by wastful spending at the universities, no accountability, and ridiculously high administrator pay checks. They spend money on bronze macot statues and the like instead of for more classes. When schools pay $100,000+ on a statue, then you're asked to pay $300+ a unit and they cut classes you need, as a University student, I feel ripped off. Tuition and parking cost amount to piracy. Yes, piracy is the best word to describe those prices.
    • Mike  •  Columbus, Ohio  •  3 mths ago
      Hey OBAMA you need a "call for greater transparency"
    • Joseph  •  3 mths ago
      Some people can afford a certain college and others can not... it has been that way for generations... now at least financial aid is available... my Dad was accepted to Med School years ago but could afford to go... he succeeded in another arena very well and was happy.
    • Constance  •  3 mths ago
      Most students can't afford any college tuitions, and when they get a degree, they still can't make enough to pay rent, car payment, car insurance, med insurance, student loans, etc. Insurance companies are eating a hole is everyone's wallet.
      • Windriver 3 mths ago
        What about all the millions who didn't go to college and are doing quite well today? More DON'T go to college than do. Bill Gates didn't graduate form college did he?
    • Dan  •  3 mths ago
      The death of industry and the general change to a financial based economy in the US has largely caused these problems. Not everyone is cut out for college, and the fact that anymore college is more or less a requirement for most good jobs makes it difficult. It devalues the college degree and causes all those who actually choose to go to college to start their life off in debt afterwards. It doesn't make for a very productive society. The reality is that college needs to be more exclusive, and better efforts need to be made to train new workers in more labor intensive jobs (as well as bring many of those jobs back into the country). America is becoming too top heavy, and it's affecting everyone.
    • greenman939  •  3 mths ago
      They should really look at these schools to see if they are actually non-profits or if they are running it for a profit. The ones running themselves properly will have lower tuitions and should receive state/federal aid. The others should have their non-profit status revoked and receive no aid. That would get them all into the habit of controlling costs and offering an affordable education.
    • Synical1  •  3 mths ago
      Here are some thoughts...
      If you want to make college less expensive, start by...
      1) Admitting students and hiring professors/staff that speak fluent English.
      2) Don't allow or offer remedial courses - if students are not smart enough to pass the basics, they're likely not going to do well in anything else.
      3) Eliminate forced electives. Do students really need a racquet ball or pottery class to earn an accounting degree?!?!?
    • Richard  •  3 mths ago
      Punishing expensive universities will work as well as punishing oil companies has reduced the cost of gas.
    • ELKE  •  3 mths ago
      Leave obama alone, people make deceisions fo them selfs to get a degree.
    • Obama's Stash  •  3 mths ago
      The problem is that our government hands out loan money to students regardless of whether their chosen field provides a likely prospect of ever making enough to pay it back.

      In other words, the student going to Harvard majoring in social administration can get the same student loan as the student majoring in pre-med. If our government wants to insert itself into student lending, they need to start acting like a bank and stop acting like a grandmother who can't say 'no'.
    • v  •  3 mths ago
      What's wrong with the government trying to spend its money as efficiently as possible when helping people finance a college education? The feds ought to try to get as many people educated as possible for a given number of dollars. If the government can't figure out which colleges have the best outcome per dollar spent, it's because the colleges don't want anyone to know.
      • Windriver 3 mths ago
        "What's wrong with the government trying to spend its money as efficiently as possible when helping people finance a college education? "

        Other than the fact they have no legal responsibility to do so? Or it is not one of the 17 Enumerated powers delegated to them by the people?
    • Obama's Stash  •  3 mths ago
      Why don't we immediately implement a 22% pay cut on all professors at colleges who accept federal aid. That's what Obamacare proposed doing to doctors seeing Medicare patients. If Obama thinks slashing doctor pay is the way to 'control health care costs', why wouldn't slashing professor pay be similarly effective in controlling tuition costs?

      Something tells me that will never happen though, since most doctors are Republican....and most professors are Democrats.
      • Mary Farris 3 mths ago
        First, according to an article from Dec, 2011 called "Medicare doctors fed up with Washington"

        "Federal law requires that reimbursement rates be adjusted annually based on a formula tied to the health of the economy.

        That law says rates should be cut every year to keep Medicare financially sound.

        But Congress has blocked those cuts from happening 12 times over the past decade, and could still do so this year."

        Based on that article, the Federal law has been in place at LEAST a decade (and I'm guessing longer) - but if it's only a decade old, GUESS WHICH GOP PRESIDENT SIGNED IT INTO LAW - PERHAPS IN HOPES OF KILLING MEDICARE/MEDICAID?

        Second - the professors don't make the "big bucks" at colleges and universities (in fact, as full time tenured professors retire, they are most often being replaced by part time instructors not eligible for tenure). It is the athletic coaches (football and basketball coaches often make MILLIONS per year) and administrators who make at least $250,000/year that are making the money - and many of those are proud members of the GOP!

        Next pro-GOP rant, please? They're always to easy to debunk!
      • James 3 mths ago
        You clearly have no understanding of how medical insurance works.
      • Obama's Stash 3 mths ago
        James: with a spouse who is a practicioner, I actually understand it pretty well.

        Mary: if you knew anything about the Affordable Health Care Act (aka, "Obamacare"), you would know that Democrats included in the CBO 'score' for the bill the assumption that those so-called 'doc fixes' for Medicare would actually happen....even though, as you correctly point out, they haven't....and likely never will. Even though Obama would make them happen if he thought he could get away with it.

        But Democrats couldn't claim that Obamacare would reduce the deficit unless they counted hundreds of billions of 'savings' from those planned doc fixes.....so they counted them as 'savings' to pay for Obamacare. It's completely accurate then to say, as I did, that Obamacare assumes 22% cuts in doctor pay....even though you and I both know it will never happen, which also means Obamacare will increase the deficit, not reduce it.
    • Norm  •  3 mths ago
      All students should walk away and stay home for a semester or two. When they return, college will be cheap.
    • Dapper Dan  •  Raleigh, North Carolina  •  3 mths ago
      Obama is such a loser. Everything he says shows he's only worried about making sure the poor get something. Statistics show that poor kids don't perform well whether they are in elementary school or college so work on rebuilding the family unit and we'll produce less poor and less poor producing kids.