The Middle Class Gamble

12/15/2011

On another note, I just read this article in the SF Chronicle about the University of California system and a new pricing policy at UC Berkeley, also known as Cal, the flagship of the 10 campuses.

The phrase "the house always wins" came to my mind, but I'm not sure why. On the face of it, this sounds like a step in the right direction for the struggling middle class. But then again, bringing in more out of state students and limiting in state students really rankles me. I say that as the mother of a high school junior who is at this very moment sitting for an AP Bio exam.

The comments raise the 1% - 99% divide issue, which I am sure is a sensitive topic for all public and private colleges and universities. I am only now beginning to wrap my mind around what is right and wrong with higher education financing and costs. I'm wide open to other opinions. What is your collective experience with higher education, if any?

WakeUpAmerica

12/15/2011 03:08:42 am

The California public higher education system was put in place primarily for CA residents and allowed out-of-state students to apply if there was room. That is how it should remain. Period. It is CA tax dollars that help support the system.

MicMac

12/21/2011 09:37:22 am

I agree on the whole, WakeUp, but all state universities have long recognized the value of attracting out of state students, not just for the money, but for the American experience mix. The hidden costs are just now being addressed as every one is running for cover, naturally, righteously, under current economic conditions.

Laura, I suspect this phenomenon you describe has been at least partly in place for a couple of decades, perhaps more, although the current economic crisis has sharpened the boundaries/policies/end result. When I lived in Piedmont in the 90s, I knew tons of PKids with grade point averages of 4.0 or BETTER, (community service, all bells and whistles, legacy non carborundum) who applied to Berkeley and did not get in. It was almost a given that if your kid was local, they would not gain acceptance. Better chances with Harvard, from California, as compared to Massachusetts students, eveb.

There was an in state quota even then, whether it was academic/demographic/financial. Berkeley (and all other campuses) wanted a demographic that included other states (and countries). That does contribute to the making of a better academic experience for all students involved, wherever your are. Who really wants to attend any UC campus if the majority of students are from in state? Too homogeneous. Just sayin. Were this to become true of any UC campus, no longer could it hold national status, it would be like a great big community college, although with far higher standards, I give you that. (Or not?)

When I got into Berkeley (from NY State, although I worked and lived for a year to gain residency status) in the 70s, I only had a 2.87 grade point average. (Underachiever!) Yeah, OK, I had very high SAT scores and I had been an exchange student, twice. But I do remember that the in state standard was well over 3.0 at the time. 3.2 rings a hollow bell.

It's very difficult to parse out the historical precedent from the current standards. Just sayin. I am the parent of four children, aged 16 to 30. I have lived in Maine and California, supported different children at different times in college in both states (also recently in AZ, my son had to drop out and spend a year working to gain residency for financial reasons after being a full pay out of state student with loans and scholarships). Just saying that I am torn on this subject, even as I recognize the current events are unprecedented. I think on the whole that most folks on this blog (including Laura) are correct, but a different peripheral/historical view also contributes.

Not a wholistic solution, but an idea. If you want your children to directly take advantage of tax payer supported, cheaper college education, close to home, why not enroll them for one or two years in your local community college? That way, they get to know all kinds of previously unknown social elements/demographics in the community in which they have lived all their life to that point. Very "life" educational. It makes them appreciate the local world in which they have grown up. Plus their (assumed) higher academic achievements serve to elevate the academic experience of all in the community college. My son did this in Maine for a year before he went off to UATucson, and the biggest educational experience he took away was from the POV and experience of the many OLDER students enrolled. He got to know his community in a different way that he didn't when he was just a kid at the high school. And he lived at home with me in that year in a different capacity than when he was a high school student. More independent, more open to talking to me, exploring ideas and thoughts about life. It was a good time, for him and for me. That year continues to resonate.

I tend to have high academic standards, that is why I strove to attend UCBerkeley. But high academic standards will only get you so far in life, now more than ever. There is a whole shitload of stuff out there that is free for the taking, the picking, the plucking. If you are flexible and think outside the box.

Otherwise, why would a parent who could at least partially afford private or out of state college want their kid to stay so close to home? I think sending a kid off to college in another state or country is well worth the dollars spent. You may think your kid is "urban" "well educated" "sophisticated" relatively, but sorry, they really do need to brush up against other kids from a different US state or country, elsewise, they are just drinking the same old pap that was served around the parental dinner table. We so depend upon our young Americans to expand their point of view before they become workers, parents, voters. Get outta town. . .or, before you get out of town, get to know your own community, really, really well, so that you have a point of credible comparison. Community college.

eclecticsandra

12/15/2011 03:34:09 am

This all seems like a pyramid scheme. How long can the costs be shifted without making the University of California available to California students?

The support should be coming from the people of California, and those pockets just aren't as deep any more. It is time for an examination of the practices of higher education to see why the cost of education is so high.

We have focused on government spending, and now it is time to look at education spending. There are many reasons to think that some changes have occurred because of the need to have a business plan for running a university.

V-A

12/15/2011 03:45:21 am

imo, what's happened to universities/colleges is the same thing that's happened to churches, art,government, and many other formerly good things in life. They are now businesses. Their function is to raise billions, not educate.

When did business become the model for EVERYTHING? When did the bottom line become the only measurement of success?

Mhurka

12/15/2011 03:53:55 am

I recently read that because of the current financial crunch many admissions offices are taking into account an applicant's need for financial aid when deciding who to admit. When I went to college decades ago I don't recall the situation being this grim.

eclecticsandra

12/15/2011 06:26:59 am

It would be nice to have a discussion on higher education without having it highjacked by taking a comment out of context.

WakeUpAmerica

12/15/2011 08:12:45 am

Tom,
Excuse me, but WTF? Perhaps you should start your own blog.

12/15/2011 09:00:28 am

I earned my BA 25 years ago. When I was a student it was a modest school with dated buildings and cinderblock dorms. We had an antiquated gymnasium with no equipment for our gym requirement, and a dank basement room with an exercise bike as the "workout room.". Faculty and commuter students parked on the asphalt patch at the center of the campus.

I took a class there this summer and barely recognized it. The asphalt patch has been replaced by several gorgeous steel and glass buildings over a huge underground garage. Classrooms are fitted with state of the art media equipment, the old gym is now a lovely conference center, and the "workout room" has been replaced by a shining new gym. I shudder to think how much this all cost. I'm sure the building spree, which has been replicated on many other campuses I've visited, is a big part of the reason tuition at my alma mater has increased by 500%.

Laura Novak

12/15/2011 09:35:27 am

I am back from teaching and can now delete Tom's comments. Tom: you are not welcome here. And we are not discussing Paterno. Take it elsewhere.

I hear the argument about state universities providing for its own students. Someone told me they recently visited Michigan (they live in Ca) and heard on the tour that 50% of U of M's students are from out of state. I'm not sure what percentage of that is undergraduate.

The argument is long and loud about the UC allowing students who can and will pay more to take coveted spots, especially at Cal and UCLA. As parents of rising students, we worry about that a lot. It's hard enough to place into the system.

And Up, fascinating percentage. 500%. Imagine that. It's amazing. And let's not even get into the money spent on sports. If I hear one more person tell the tale of the athlete they tutored who was barely passing and was there on scholarship, I'll scream.

Ottoline

12/15/2011 10:19:01 am

I've been intrigued by the need-blind tuition-free stance that some top colleges adopted in 2008. Yale, Harvard, Brown -- I can't remember the rest. If you got accepted and your parents' income was below ~$60?k/yr each, there was no tuition, with a graduated scheme for those whose parents earn more. I was just amazed at the wonderfulness of that. Then I found out that it was because some schools like the aforementioned had such huge endowments (esp during the bubble years before the crash) that the IRS was eyeing those tax-free globs of money, saying they were getting too big to be tax-free or free from more govt auditing/control. So the free-tuition plan was meant to reduce that endowment to keep the IRS out of the schools' business. For whatever reason, it still seems like a good offer, both individually and societally. Of course, Harvard has a 7% acceptance rate, and the UC system is not in that financial position. Plus I have heard v little about this scheme lately: first it was controversial, for the pressure it put on less wealthy colleges. Then the crash hit. I think they lowered the limit for parents' incomes. So I wonder what the plans/assesments around that are now.

And I see free online courses from v prestigious schools. And look at our dropout role models who did pretty well in a do-it-yourself way: Gates, the Facebook guy, Jobs.

Still, isn't it obvious that education is becoming more and more the province of those who can afford it? Not entirely, but the scale is tipping, as it is with the other things we 99%ers are upset about -- like income distribution. And for the same reasons.

I have often wondered how much the total tuition bill is in the U.S. per year. And what that would cost each taxpayer, to fund it entirely. Sort of like the Veterans' Bill after WWII. I bet such a tuition bill is less than our war bill. And the money would go to
a sector I like much better than the war profiteer sector. And it would be spent in the U.S. of A.rather than being blood and treasure poured in the desert sand.

What could be more important than an education. Eating, I guess, but there was a time when I thought both were possible for almost everyone. In the U.S.

Laura Novak

12/15/2011 10:32:31 am

Great comment, Ottoline. I think a number of larger private universities were/are doing that, in terms of tuition versus parents' income. However, I didn't know the rationale behind it. I guess like tax deductible charity donations: it's a great concept and/but it has to benefit everyone.

I heard a politician say today that the $800 BILLION spent in Iraq was "worth it." I think I would ask the families of those killed and injured if they feel the same way.

Me? I'd rather have seen that money go toward our schools. But that's an old argument. Something about bakes sales right?

Ottoline

12/15/2011 11:14:12 am

Well SURE the $800B spent in the war was worth it if one is sucking on that particular teat. A politician? I can hear the slurping sounds right now. It sure was worth it to the war profiteers and the pals who enabled that unprecedented terriffic transfer of wealth.

The ones who were killed or maimed? The profiteers don't now them or care about them. They're just expendable 99%ers.

Janine

12/15/2011 12:20:21 pm

I am an alumna of a state university in Oregon. When I went there in the late 70s tuition was affordable, amenities were bare-bones to nonexistent, most of the students were poor to middle-class Oregonians, and administration was limited. When I went back in the late 90s tuition was not affordable, amenities were so prominent that it was difficult to find a cheap lunch on campus, a much larger proportion of students were from more prosperous families in other states, and there were layers of bureaucracy that astounded me. State universities are losing their souls and abandoning their mission.

12/15/2011 01:15:57 pm

I've heard international students are very appealing financially to top US schools. Different rules are used in calculating financial aid. For the most part they will pay their own way, so they do well in "need-blind" admissions. Last year I knew several excellent applicants to MIT. Only the Chinese citizens got in. $$$$?

MicMac

12/21/2011 08:08:29 am

Heck, our local high school here in Maine is accepting tuition paying "boarder" students from foreign countries (mostly China, Vietnam a close second, other countries to be added) to balance the budget. It's not just higher education. I am not against this, just reporting a trend as to the national crisis in funding education period.

Sherryn

12/15/2011 02:45:31 pm

I had the same experience as Up. I graduated a small Jesuit run college, five modest buildings and one huge stone and ivy covered main building facing the street. Tuition was 18 grand for all four years for commuters, 21 grand for those who stayed on campus. And that was a good chunk of change for back then.
Our dream was for our kids to attend the same school we did.
Well, since then, the only regcognizable vestage of the school was the old stone building. It's now attained University Status, all new buildings and a HUGE sports complex.
Here's their fee schedule page now:

http://www.lasalle.edu/financialaid/content/tuition.php

My oldest is a public high school junior in the NHS and we're filling out scholarship applications, looking into student aid, crossing our fingers and losing sleep.
Our Son is a HS freshman with decent grades, but he's seriously considering going to a trade school, which is fine by me if that's what he truly wants, but I feel guilty thinking he's doing it to save money. Who knows what he'll choose, but I still feel a college education is an important asset.

It just seems so unfair that it's out of reach for too many people in our country.

Ottoline

12/15/2011 05:06:30 pm

In long-ago Europe, a university education among my ancestors was considered very important, but it was so expensive that only one of the three siblings in my grandfather's family could go -- my grandfather. His brother inherited the farm, the sister inherited the furniture (!), and my grandfather got nothing else besides his education. When I heard this story, I didn't know whether to laugh or cry about the sister's portion! My mother shared my view, but also explained that these three things were considered of equal value at that time. No Ikea in those days.

During and after WWII, my grandfather's broader view of the world due to his education made him wild to leave ahead of the Communist front -- because he knew what would (and did) happen. Because he was 50 when he came to the U.S., his degrees did not count and he had to be a janitor, a caretaker, and a gardener and died at 52. But his children did well here. The brother who inherited the farm was tortured and sent to Siberia and of course lost the farm, just like everyone else lost their privately owned land. I think the sister's family still has some of the furniture.

I am so very worried that we are at risk of losing our country, just like my grandfather's generation did. It's like lemmings suiciding into the sea every so many years. Every 70 yrs there's a market crash, and every xx yrs there's a collapse of society and we all have to start over. Maybe that's how we will solve all these seemingly unsolvable problems of today, like education, wars we are stuck in, climate change -- all of it.

mistah charley, ph.d.

12/16/2011 01:13:12 am

"Follow the money, honey" - and it's clear the higher tuition is paying for buildings (construction companies, banks) and bureaucrats - "facilities" and "services".

On the other hand, more and more of the actual teaching is done by "adjuncts" - part timers receiving really, really shitty pay, which they accept hoping that they will somehow get a foot on the faculty career ladder - most don't, of course.

I have no children. If I did, I would wonder very seriously if taking on a mountain of debt, in exchange for the credential of a bachelor's degree, is a good deal for them. Over at a different blog, someone is often criticized because her children haven't gone to college - but it's not so clear to me that they would be better off if they'd done so.

Mark Twain may have said something like, "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." I favor people being educated; schooling is sometimes one of the ways this happens.

12/16/2011 01:59:55 am

@mistah charley, ph.d.
The criticism of Palin for her children skipping college is intended as criticism for their not being educated by any means, which those bloggers join you in favoring.

12/16/2011 02:03:31 am

I am a big fan of Community Colleges for the first two years and then a good state school for the last two. That Community Colleges are getting expensive too, but they are still a pretty good deal compared to the other schools.

FrostyAK

12/16/2011 03:14:44 am

Back in my day the state U I attended was covered by the scholarships I earned. That amount covered tuition AND room and board. Today just tuition is 1000% of my total payments, with room and board costs tacked on after.

I have not gone back, but I expect they have upgraded all facilities, as they were antiquated when I was there.

As with everything else good, in future ALL levels of education will be only for the 1%. Having an illiterate 99% is the plan. Illiterate masses aren't as apt to revolt, they are too busy scrabbling for their next meal.

Ottoline

12/16/2011 03:28:30 am

FrostyAK -- I see an illiterate 99% heading our way too. That's why there's so much nonsense presented in the media -- we (collectively) devoted SO MUCH time to DWTS, as just a tiny example, rather than keeping our eyes on the economy and ethics. I wouldn't be surprised if the anti-abortion issues and celebrity gossip aren't kept hot just to divert attn from the real issues. As an actual plan. Remember the beautiful Julie Christy in "Farenheit 451" lounging in front of her giant-screen tv, watching some kind of addictive junk. Even long ago, I knew I was the old lady in the house with the wall-to-wall books who got torched.

mistah C: in "The Millionaire Next Door," the writer says that most of our middle-class wealth is in all those unglamorous small local businesses, which prob don't take a college education to run very very successfully. Of course, I think education is for more than just earning a living.

mistah charley, ph.d.

12/16/2011 09:51:12 am

see http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/25/student-loan-fury-in-the-occupy-movement/

phantomimic link

12/16/2011 09:54:19 am

For many years American families were sold on the concept that parents MUST sacrifice all they can (and cannot) for their children's college education, while the universities jacked up their prices. Family budgets have been dangerously strained to the breaking point as a result of this mentality. The current economic crisis is contributing to end that thinking.

Community colleges throughout the nation have seen a large uptick in enrollment. Families are thinking twice before going into debt, and are telling their loved ones that they cannot go to the expensive college of their dreams. It may be tough and disheartening but the best education is that which teaches you to be realistic, and that begins at home.

Laura Novak

12/17/2011 05:05:52 am

Here here again, Frosty AK. well said and to the point. Is stupidity the new opiate of the masses? Or perhaps it goes hand in hand with some religious beliefs.

That article is SO depressing, Mistah Charley. It sickens me to think of a kid being saddled with that kind of debt.

When I see that a kid is going to a community college, where a mandated number of students must be able to transfer into the UC system every year, I think: "now THAT's a smart kid." Get those undergrad requirements and basics out of the way much cheaper and then move on to a more costly, but hopefully affordable situation in the last two years. It can be a successful strategy.

Conscious at last!

12/18/2011 07:18:25 am

Laura-

Hi there! I have some ideas to offer to you as a parent of a college bound student. I will tell you that my experience is based on: working in academia myself as a tenured professor, the experience of other academics and my years as a parent of college graduates.

1-- Find the best places for your child
-- don't get dazzled by BRAND NAMES.

I think that #1 is so important that I will pretend I've typed it twice!!

Each student has different needs which must be honored - academic and social needs.

2- Find out about faculty, not just programs.

3- Visit schools and explore beyond the tour. Walk around, get the feel of the place, talk to folks, read the college newspaper, speak to faculty in those departments or programs that interest your child...and others!

4- Residential life whether dorm life or off campus, is critical. Even if life in the classroom if OK, if residential life is seriously flawed, it will ruin the student's experience and be a possible cause for transferring. Explore this issue as much as you look at academics.

Also, too, feel free to contact me if you want more info or ideas. Cheers!

V ictoria link

12/19/2011 09:10:07 pm

I have friends and family in the educational system and they tell me that the percentage going to cover administrative costs keeps going up and up, while the money for faculty is going down.

Comments are closed.

The Middle Class Gamble

Laura Novak

Blogs I Read

Categories

Archives