Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For-profit and online institutions generally spent less than half of their tuition revenue on instruction, according to the report. By contrast, public and private nonprofit institutions generally spent more on actual instruction than they took in for tuition. Spending patterns varied widely among private nonprofit schools.
Quote:
The report found that schools with higher online enrollment rates typically spent the least on instruction per-student. In the 2014–15 academic year, Western Governors University, an online, nonprofit school, spent almost 40 percent of its tuition on instruction, but other schools, such as Colorado Technical University, a for-profit school with over 90 percent of its students enrolled online, spent less than 10 percent on instruction.
On average, public colleges and universities spent $1.13 on instruction for every dollar brought in from tuition. The authors of the report concluded that online colleges could afford to reduce their tuition rates.
There are plenty of administrators in the higher education system who work about 5 hours per week in "meetings" and make $150K+. Plenty of faculty members who work about 5 hours per week or less teaching the same classes they have taught for 10+ years pulling in over $100k+. Not many people know about these realities in higher education. Unless you work in it and see it on a daily basis.......
There are plenty of administrators in the higher education system who work about 5 hours per week in "meetings" and make $150K+. Plenty of faculty members who work about 5 hours per week or less teaching the same classes they have taught for 10+ years pulling in over $100k+. Not many people know about these realities in higher education. Unless you work in it and see it on a daily basis.......
The parts you leave off this analysis: There are thousands of college instructors -- many with graduate degrees from reputable institutions -- scraping by as adjuncts, working two or three jobs at different schools, and maybe a non-academic job as well, with meager if any benefits, and likely never to attain tenure anywhere. This is far more often the case than the lazy tenured professor making a hundred grand.
Many of the tenured professors who do not spend a lot of time teaching do, however, spend a great deal of time doing research. The fruits of their research can be obvious in the sciences, medicine, or engineering, for example. But research can also be valuable in non-STEM areas, as much as some like to denigrate those areas. Economists, political scientists, sociologists, linguists, historians, law professors, art historians (Who do you think is being called on to help restore Notre Dame?), and many more make serious, if sometimes unrecognized contributions to human life with their work.
And the administrators exist precisely so that the faculty is not burdened with administrative tasks, especially those relating to government regulation. There are also many collegiate functions that have to be taken care of by administrators, like admissions, finance, development (recent scandals notwithstanding), human resources, public relations, and on and on.
I am the first to admit that there can be waste and mismanagement in high education. I've seen it a few times myself. (And I am not an academic, though I work with academics often.) But for the most part I think the above view is too narrow to account for what really ails higher ed, which is mostly not enough state support for public colleges, burdensome loans for students, and for-profit schools that at best are overpriced, and at worst unscrupulous and academically trashy.
The parts you leave off this analysis: There are thousands of college instructors -- many with graduate degrees from reputable institutions -- scraping by as adjuncts, working two or three jobs at different schools, and maybe a non-academic job as well, with meager if any benefits, and likely never to attain tenure anywhere. This is far more often the case than the lazy tenured professor making a hundred grand.
Nationwide, only 51% of professors are FT. 49% are part time adjuncts.
One of my local state schools has 419 faculty. Only 117 are tenured. Another 71 are on the tenure track. The other 231 are not on the tenure track at all.
Yeah, academia is not as cushy as many people think it is. If you're fortunate enough to even land a tenure-track position, you'll work hard to get tenure, and that takes years. A lot of tenured professors take on additional duties such as being program coordinators and deans.
In my field, associate professors (those who just got tenure) start out making about $60k to $70k. It takes a while to get to full professor; those are the ones making around six figures, and they're the minority in most departments.
On average, public colleges and universities spent $1.13 on instruction for every dollar brought in from tuition.
I just don't know how this could be true from my experience. Let's use me as an example. I was an adjunct at a large state university while finishing up my PhD.
Instance 1: I taught a satellite campus course of 40 students:
My Pay: $5,000
Course: 3 hours
Cost per credit hour: $160 (assuming all are in-state)
Total amount taken in: $19,200
Difference on "instruction": $14,200
Instance 2: I taught a 400 person lecture hall on the main campus
My Pay: $5,000
Course: 3 hours
Cost per credit hour: $160 (assuming all are in-state)
Total amount taken in: $192,000
Difference on "instruction": $187,000
I'm sure there are a few courses where this is true, but most of the courses until your final 1 or two are at a ratio of 40-50:1 at the two large state unis I've gone to.
My wife took a marketing class at a large uni where there was one professor for 1200 students. They told her not to even come to campus for the lecture because the hall only held 500. At least that was taught by a tenure track faculty though.
I just don't know how this could be true from my experience. Let's use me as an example. I was an adjunct at a large state university while finishing up my PhD.
Instance 1: I taught a satellite campus course of 40 students:
My Pay: $5,000
Course: 3 hours
Cost per credit hour: $160 (assuming all are in-state)
Total amount taken in: $19,200
Difference on "instruction": $14,200
Instance 2: I taught a 400 person lecture hall on the main campus
My Pay: $5,000
Course: 3 hours
Cost per credit hour: $160 (assuming all are in-state)
Total amount taken in: $192,000
Difference on "instruction": $187,000
I'm sure there are a few courses where this is true, but most of the courses until your final 1 or two are at a ratio of 40-50:1 at the two large state unis I've gone to.
My wife took a marketing class at a large uni where there was one professor for 1200 students. They told her not to even come to campus for the lecture because the hall only held 500. At least that was taught by a tenure track faculty though.
On the other end of the spectrum, I teach an instrumental methods laboratory course that is capped at 8 students. Lab space, chemicals, instrument maintenance, my salary, and lab tech salary are a whole lot more than what the university gets from a 1 credit hour lab. The university has to make enough on big introductory lectures so that it can afford to take a loss on upper level resource intensive courses. The pedagogy research suggests that the majority of high-value learning occurs in these types of experiences.
One way to stop it is to put limits on where students can use financial aid. For-profit colleges should have to prove that the education they are providing is in every way comparable to that of a traditional college and that outcomes for their graduates are equivalent to that of graduates from traditional colleges before they can receive federal funds. In a free market people have a right to buy and sell but when it comes to federal funds being used in those transactions the people have a right to have oversight.
Study on 5,000 Colleges: Where does your money go?
Though not necessarily on topic with regard to this study, I would like to know to what extent the rather large amounts collected in full (as opposed to subsidized) tuitions go to fund "diversity" efforts or pet causes of professors or administrators. I have raised the same issues regarding fees charged by other "non-profits" such as synagogues, even the one to which I belong. I believe people develop a greater devotion to causes and big-hearted generosity if they are using someone else's money.
Though not necessarily on topic with regard to this study, I would like to know to what extent the rather large amounts collected in full (as opposed to subsidized) tuitions go to fund "diversity" efforts or pet causes of professors or administrators. I have raised the same issues regarding fees charged by other "non-profits" such as synagogues, even the one to which I belong. I believe people develop a greater devotion to causes and big-hearted generosity if they are using someone else's money.
I’m sure those data are next to the Coca-Cola, KFC, and Dr. Pepper secret recipes, aka, we’re never going to see them because the truth would be too shocking.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
