Since higher education is my industry, I thought I would take issue with the sentiments expressed by Molly Corbett Broad in today's article in the New York Times, "Tough Times Strain Colleges Rich and Poor."
With endowment values shrinking, variable-rate debt costs rising and states cutting their financing, colleges face challenges on multiple fronts, said Molly Corbett Broad, president of the American Council on Education.
“There’s no evidence of a complete meltdown,” Ms. Broad said, “but the problems are serious enough that higher education is going to need help from the government.”
In a word, no. Institutions of higher education already get a number of direct and indirect subsidies from the federal government, whether from grants for research, their status as non-profits, or subsidized loans to their customers. To the extent that they did not operate their businesses in a way that safeguarded against downturns is their problem, not the taxpayers'. Organizations will find tougher going in a slower economy. They should look inward for solutions. Higher education has no more claim to panhandle the federal government than anyone else; which is to say, none at all.
My home institution is no different. Here is the latest statement based on this week's meeting of the Board of Trustees.

A concerted PR effort
Stan should comment on the blizzard of "poor poor us" articles the PR departments of colleges have gotten placed lately. Two letters from the President of Vassar (where The Daughter attends) spend 5 paragraphs saying nothing, except, "Tuition is going WAY up next year...it's not like you can do anything about it." I'm sure the Dartmouth letter is on its way (child #1).
The justification, such as it is: we charge whatever we want, because all you're buying is a brand name and a selection process (people selected by Ivies but don't attend do as well as those who do)...and you perceive that the brand name will be worth whatever we charge. Hmmm. Kind of sounds like a "bubble", doesn't it?
Post new comment