Should Colleges Pay Players?

[methomps]

That's a popular opinion and argument. But unfortunately the numbers don't add up. ($8000 * 20 students/class)/(15 hours/wk * 15 weeks) = $711/hour of actual classtime provided. That's in-state tuition, btw, so you can bet that number probably goes up to about $750. If we're really paying a bunch of master-degree liberal-arts hack "lecturers" and grad students (almost all the science classes are taught by grad students with a doctor "supervising" 5 classes or more.) then some people are getting overpaid. More likely that money is profit.

So you think that the only expense of providing an education (excluding those covered by fees) is the salary of the lecturers?

Don't tell me most of that money goes to facilities, or any other side projects either because I, and all 25,000 students, also pay general fees, technology fees, and fees for anything else imaginable (including using the Clinic). The University also has all sorts of little scams, like charging gullible students $200/yr to park and selling at least twice as many passes than there are parking spots. Or the textbook scam, which I won't even get into -- but is brilliant in its simplicity and elegance. They'll even charge you a surcharge to get your own government loans, because the loan is deposited in your student account, and if you have any leftover -- they take 5% off the top and send you a check. If you actually think it costs $100 (most kids will have at least $2000 leftover) to wire the money to a bank, I have some ocean-front property in Colorado for you. Or the scams they'll pull to keep you there for more than 4 years. ("Ohh, we updated the degree program -- you'll need to take these extra courses that have nothing to do with your degree before you can graduate." And then if you don't have proof of your original agreement, you're screwed.)

That the university screws you in many other ways does not mean that tuition covers all the expense of teaching you.

Trust me, the Universities are making tons of money.
Allow me to be the first to break the news to you: almost all US Universities are not centered around providing an education

Perhaps the first in the last five minutes.

-- but around making money. There are a few out there that aren't, but the large majority -- especially your average public institution, they're just in it for the money.

Making money through research. Not through tuition.

 

[sandgk]

That $711 figure does seem like your wallet is open for Ohio State 24/7, but try doing that computation in the converse skidoo.
Tote up all the non-research money that is being brought in by tuition fees. Make that number X. Now tot up the number of faculty at The Ohio State University, not the TA's or grad students, but just the faculty. Give them all $150K as a a conservative personnel cost. Next apply upwards of $30K plus overheads and supplies for all the Post-Docs, there area lot of those. Then whatever the TAs and Grad students get on stipend. Next, make another cost pool - the one that has all the scholarships, academic or athletic, these will also have to be deducted from your pool of tuition fees. (It's just exchanging dollars). Next to last make some reasonable assumption about the number of full time employees of Ohio State in Maintenance, ground-keeping, support services etc - there are a lot of them. Finally, make some sort of assumption about the cost of building and keeping up the physical fabric of the University, and all those special needs (oh, like lab equipment).
I know that $711 basis seems high, but trust me, it will swiftly dwindle to virtually nothing.
Allow me to be the first (EDIT methomps first sandgk second) to break it to you Skidoo - Ohio State's books are an open and audited item. Their tuition costs have gone up over the years for a variety of reasons, some good, some natural, some bad (political if you prefer) but they are far from out of line and eminently defensible.

 

[23Skidoo]

So you think that the only expense of providing an education (excluding those covered by fees) is the salary of the lecturers?

Forgive me for excluding 1 building manager (for the entire science and engineering department), the 3 secretaries that do all the paperwork for my department of several hundred students, the 20 secretaries that do paperwork for the entire student body, and the mexican janitors. Feel free to cut that $750/hr down to $700/hr.

That the university screws you in many other ways does not mean that tuition covers all the expense of teaching you.

You can hold onto that antiquated and oft-thrown-around opinion if you want. But I feel confident that it does.

Perhaps the first in the last five minutes.



Making money through research. Not through tuition.

They make money every way they can, just as I described in many boring and lengthy examples. Those were just the ones that came to my head.

 

[23Skidoo]

That $711 figure does seem like your wallet is open for Ohio State 24/7, but try doing that computation in the converse skidoo.
Tote up all the non-research money that is being brought in by tuition fees. Make that number X. Now tot up the number of faculty at The Ohio State University, not the TA's or grad students, but just the faculty. Give them all $150K as a a conservative personnel cost. Next apply upwards of $30K plus overheads and supplies for all the Post-Docs, there area lot of those. Then whatever the TAs and Grad students get on stipend. Next, make another cost pool - the one that has all the scholarships, academic or athletic, these will also have to be deducted from your pool of tuition fees. (It's just exchanging dollars). Next to last make some reasonable assumption about the number of full time employees of Ohio State in Maintenance, ground-keeping, support services etc - there are a lot of them. Finally, make some sort of assumption about the cost of building and keeping up the physical fabric of the University, and all those special needs (oh, like lab equipment).
I know that $711 basis seems high, but trust me, it will swiftly dwindle to virtually nothing.
Allow me to be the first (EDIT methomps first sandgk second) to break it to you Skidoo - Ohio State's books are an open and audited item. Their tuition costs have gone up over the years for a variety of reasons, some good, some natural, some bad (political if you prefer) but they are far from out of line and eminently defensible.

Just to let me clarifiy. I live in Colorado, I cannot afford out-of-state tuition, and my grades out of HS were nowhere near academic scolarship consideration. So I unfortunately do not attend Ohio State, though I would kill to be able to at this point. They have an excellent engineering program, the heart of both sides of my family is located nearby, and I have many friends who have attended and graduated.
Having said that, the large majority of positions that come with a full-blown University have little to nothing to do with what I and many other students pay for: several hours a week in a classroom getting lectured by a person who only has a BS or MA/S (anyone with more than a BS will be doing this in a lecture hall with 100+ students), some administrative clerks (predominantly students on minimum-wage supervised by a real secretary), a building manager, a computer admin and a couple of more students on minimum wage, 2-3 professors to oversee the operation (my department has about 10 Professors -- but they all have research operations and devote the large majority of their time to those), and some mexican janitors. If you can think of anything else, please feel free to tell me.
A lot of the other stuff going on, has far more to do with dormlife, high-paying jobs to manage the monster that the University has become with so much research and other things going on, etc.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Great post, HTM. Hmmm, I wonder if this is the first GPA a Michigan fan has got here...

Thanks. Quite a distinguishment (is that a word?? probably not) if so.

As for the question of tuition and money, here's a link: http://www.virginia.edu/Facts/Glance_FinanceEndowment.htm

Tuition and fees account for just 26.6% of the academic budget. "Other" accounts for 60%. Though I imagine that parking fines and books and on-Grounds housing and myriad other things that students pay, all fall under the Other category, even all that doesn't even approach the tuition you pay (out-of-state: $26,000; in-state, $8,000). The total cost to an out-of-state student is about $34,000. Given the budget listed, that doesn't even come close to covering the university's costs. They're not making money off the students. Donations and the endowment are a HUGE part of the income.

By the way, just think of the cost of a single class. The student has to get to class, so he leaves the dorm, which is cleaned by hired help, and crosses the quad, which is taken care of by hired landscape crews. He hops a University bus, riding for free because he is a student. The school pays for bus maintenance, gas, and the driver. The school must also maintain the roads that the bus drives on. The student gets off the bus and walks across more grounds which are taken care of by the landscaping crew. He enters the building, which is heated by a central heating plant operated by the university. The building is cleaned by a janitorial staff. The professor, who is paid six figures, begins his lecture and introduces the five paid TAs. The syllabus was typed up on the university network, using university computers and printers and printed on university-provided paper. The class curriculum is approved by a department chair paid a higher six-figure salary than the professor.

I could go on and on.

 

[23Skidoo]

Thanks. Quite a distinguishment (is that a word?? probably not) if so.

As for the question of tuition and money, here's a link: http://www.virginia.edu/Facts/Glance_FinanceEndowment.htm

Tuition and fees account for just 26.6% of the academic budget. "Other" accounts for 60%. Though I imagine that parking fines and books and on-Grounds housing and myriad other things that students pay, all fall under the Other category, even all that doesn't even approach the tuition you pay (out-of-state: $26,000; in-state, $8,000). The total cost to an out-of-state student is about $34,000. Given the budget listed, that doesn't even come close to covering the university's costs. They're not making money off the students. Donations and the endowment are a HUGE part of the income.

I'm sure they only get a fraction of their revenue from students. But they also only devote a fraction of their resources to students. Personnel (Professors, secretaries, various levels of staff, etc.) probably constitute the largest area of expenses. Professors and the higher-end staff taking the brunt of that. All those professors will have their own research project, and almost guaranteed to be funded, and devote a fraction of their time to the school aspect. If you cut down the expenses to the amount actually spent on personnel and resources devoted to school alone (ie: all those Professors and upper management are essentially part-time, at best) -- I think you'd find it to be more in line with the tuition & fees charged.

 

[sandgk]

Here is the summary from Ohio State - unsurprisingly, it is close to the U-Va student fees to total cost ratio. In fact, a shade lower.

Budget, 2006-2007 (as approved by Trustees)
Total income $3.76 billion State appropriations $510 million Other government $374 million Student fees $671 million Hospitals $1.34 billion Auxiliaries (residence halls, Athletics, etc.) $250 million Other income $620 million Total expenditures $3.72 billion Instructional & General $1.21 billion Separately budgeted research $386 million Public service $129 million Scholarships & fellowships $182 million Auxiliaries $261 million Hospitals $1.33 billion OSU Physicians* $223 million *Included separately for the first time in FY06 all funds budget.

 

[sandgk]

But they also only devote a fraction of their resources to students.

Would you say that resource allocation is say 20-30%, or even perhaps above that range? Either way, they are devoting a precisely metricated proportion of their resources to students.
OSU was founded to be a Research Institution. That is where the bulk of the resources are funded, where the bulk of the resources are spent. There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[23Skidoo]

By the way, just think of the cost of a single class. The student has to get to class, so he leaves the dorm, which is cleaned by hired help, and crosses the quad, which is taken care of by hired landscape crews. He hops a University bus, riding for free because he is a student. The school pays for bus maintenance, gas, and the driver. The school must also maintain the roads that the bus drives on. The student gets off the bus and walks across more grounds which are taken care of by the landscaping crew. He enters the building, which is heated by a central heating plant operated by the university. The building is cleaned by a janitorial staff. The professor, who is paid six figures, begins his lecture and introduces the five paid TAs. The syllabus was typed up on the university network, using university computers and printers and printed on university-provided paper. The class curriculum is approved by a department chair paid a higher six-figure salary than the professor.

I could go on and on.

This part wasn't here when I originally responded. All the dorms I've seen are some of the trashiest unkempt and unmaintained buildings I've ever seen. They're maybe a shade better than the barracks. Maybe.
All the landscaping and such is also predominantly done by students (and Mexicans in the academic offseason) getting paid close to nothing. Not every campus has a bus -- let alone a free one. Mine certainly doesn't.
I've already discussed bona fide professors ad nauseum. They rarely do much teaching, if any. They "oversee" grad students and lecturers who actually do the teaching, and get paid far less. If a department has a lot of professors I guarantee its because they have a lot of research grants, and the head of the department is far less worried about classes than he is about the research departments and bickering "border wars", as I call them, anytime a research project encompasses more than 1 field (quite often).

 

[23Skidoo]

Would you say that resource allocation is say 20-30%, or even perhaps above that range? Either way, they are devoting a precisely metricated proportion of their resources to students.
OSU was founded to be a Research Institution. That is where the bulk of the resources are funded, where the bulk of the resources are spent. There is nothing wrong with that.

I never said there was anything wrong with that. Research is a great thing. I'm just saying these Universities are full of bs when they claim the cost of tuition is $35,000 because they have 10 Physics professors on staff -- when none of them is even close to devoting his full-time attention to the classroom side of business. Between them all, you MIGHT get 2 full-time professors in respect to the classroom. So claiming the full brunt of their salary is part of the expenses paid is a bold-faced lie.
Let me restate this: Research is good. I love research. Misrepresenting information to paint your budget the color of your choice is not a good thing.

 

[HailToMichigan]

This part wasn't here when I originally responded. All the dorms I've seen are some of the trashiest unkempt and unmaintained buildings I've ever seen. They're maybe a shade better than the barracks. Maybe.
All the landscaping and such is also predominantly done by students (and Mexicans in the academic offseason) getting paid close to nothing. Not every campus has a bus -- let alone a free one. Mine certainly doesn't.
I've already discussed bona fide professors ad nauseum. They rarely do much teaching, if any. They "oversee" grad students and lecturers who actually do the teaching, and get paid far less. If a department has a lot of professors I guarantee its because they have a lot of research grants, and the head of the department is far less worried about classes than he is about the research departments and bickering "border wars", as I call them, anytime a research project encompasses more than 1 field (quite often).

Maybe I just got lucky and picked the right school, or maybe you've just had a bad experience, but my experience is that in four years, I can only think of three classes total that were not taught by the actual professor. Two calculus classes and a physics class. That's it. I had classes in history, political science, computer science, economics, Japanese, astronomy, architecture, urban planning, statistics, even other physics classes, and all were professor-taught. One physics class was a really low-level rudimentary physics-for-architects class for those of us dummies that don't actually get physics. The professor teaching that class taught one other class as well: 700-level physics - stuff so advanced that they were researching the curriculum as they went along. UVA has three professors that are considered "famous" - Ken Elzinga, Larry Sabato, and Julian Bond - and all three of them actually teach. I was lucky enough to have Elzinga, and I promise that he is a terrific teacher and lecturer as well as a well-published economist.

I know I might sound like the most holier-than-thou academic elitist here, but I'm only trying to make the point about professors. I don't know how it is at other schools, but I can't imagine that UVA is the only school in the country where professors get themselves into the lecture hall and visit the discussion sections and hold office hours and such.

 

[sandgk]

I am not claiming the full brunt. I am claiming a proportional cost. The Professor may or may not make it to class - however, he is responsible for setting the curriculum. You simply cannot set aside his salary as a theoretical consideration, merely because it inflates your per hour cost. By contrast, however, you were claiming, early on, that you could compute the rational cost of tuition based pretty much on the cost of a TA and (as far as I could determine) duct tape. You also failed to compute the annualized cost of the staff, instead you preferred to present a number that used an inflated cost, based solely on number of hours in a classroom setting.

You are right on one score, Ohio State, like other major institutions of higher learning, is a business. I have this distinct impression: if you were to run Ohio State, or even a center located in the school, for just one year, you would learn quickly that reducing tuition costs would drive it into the red.

 

[strohs]

Total income $3.76 billion
Total expenditures $3.72 billion

Quite impressively balanced.

The University doesn't require the non athlete students to practice for several hours on top of school. They have more available time to get a job.

The last I checked these kids WANT to play football for tOSU university, they are not required to play.
It is an honor and a privilege, it is not a right, and most definitely not a requirement.
Plus, just as athletes scholarships are dependent upon their athletic performance, just as many regular students scholarships are dependent upon their academic performance.
Meaning, they are by your definition required to study extra thus preventing them from getting a job; so just how are you going to compensate them?

 

[23Skidoo]

I am not claiming the full brunt. I am claiming a proportional cost. The Professor may or may not make it to class - however, he is responsible for setting the curriculum. You simply cannot set aside his salary as a theoretical consideration, merely because it inflates your per hour cost. By contrast, however, you were claiming, early on, that you could compute the rational cost of tuition based pretty much on the cost of a TA and (as far as I could determine) duct tape. You also failed to compute the annualized cost of the staff, instead you preferred to present a number that used an inflated cost, based solely on number of hours in a classroom setting.

The University budgets I've seen are claiming the full brunt.
I never claimed their salary is a "theoretical consideration" -- I claimed it's being primarily funded by the research side of the house. And it's my belief that you could clump most of the corporate-level officers, VPs, Presidents, etc. into that as well. The real money is in research. That's no secret.
I calculated $711/hr taught as an example. Being that, where I am, Professors supervise 5 or more courses -- they don't take anywhere near the brunt of that. The grad students are the ones putting in the time and effort, and the benefits they get take the brunt. It was a simple point, but obviously went over everyone's head. If you want to get piddly, feel free to take a couple dollars off the top for the lone system admin, the couple hours a week put in by Professors, the building manager, and the janitors -- all people I've mentioned already, oddly enough.

You are right on one score, Ohio State, like other major institutions of higher learning, is a business. I have this distinct impression: if you were to run Ohio State, or even a center located in the school, for just one year, you would learn quickly that reducing tuition costs would drive it into the red.

Of course it would be in the red, I'm an EE major not a business major. The only positive is that there would probably me a couple extra million laying around since my administrative skills are worth -- at most -- $30k/yr.
You dont see me claiming anywhere that I could run a University better, only criticizing the idea that $35,000 is the "true cost" of a year of education.

 

[VprHis]

Wow. Where to start. If you want to be taught by someone who has nothing else occupying his/her time, go to a small college. If you're offended by high tuition and feel that your money is being wasted, I suggest you stop paying.

The fact remains that in most fields, the value of a faculty member is measured by their research--and that is exactly as it should be. Someone who cannot demonstrate command of the material through application has no business teaching it to others. That and the fact that the indirect fees the university extracts from research grants is only a small part of the money being brought in. That research is the ONLY way students learn how to function in their field. You'd be amazed at how much slave labor is going on in the average university. If the school actually paid everyone for their work, that research expenditures number would increase about 8-fold (based on the situation where I am, anyway). We can't all major in things that can be learned in the classroom--and even in those majors anyone with a grain of honesty will tell you that your education is only beginning once you reach the real world and have to apply the information you hopefully gained in college.


The bottom line, I guess, is that those 'superfluous' researchers earn perhaps $100,000/year (much of which likely is skimmed off the top of their research funding). Their research, on the other hand, is quite likely bringing in 3 or 4 times their salary--and that money does not become profit for the university--it goes directly into the education of their students. In case you were unaware of it, graduate education is extremely expensive, and largely self-funded. It costs about $300,000 to $400,000 to educate a PhD student in my field--and it's all funded by those research grants.


...Oh, and in case you think I'm ignoring the BS/MS person actually teaching the class? Open the book and learn some self-sufficiency.