WaPo feature on bad economic outlook for colleges

[Anonymous]

Let's calm down a bit. The population of the US when I entered college was 276 million. Today it is 330 million. That's an increase of 54 million people in the past 21 years. The number of "known" colleges has remained the same.

The real challenge for private colleges outside the top 25 or so LACs and universities is simply cost, not the lack of students. These colleges don't have the names or prestige to justify their high tuition rates over going to your state university. And it looks like we're starting to see reductions in tuition at some some LACs. Because they have to, in order to attract students to stay alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I took away from the article, was that this isn't just about population decline, it's another income disparity issue. Colleges don't just need high school graduates, they need high school grads in the 1%. As income disparity has increased, there are fewer and fewer full pay students to fight over. The top schools will always receive plenty of qualified full pay applicants, and they are expert at ensuring their balance of need/full freight covers costs.

Or rather while in the past maybe the top 20% could comfortably afford college, now it's only the top 1%, and this has more to do with the hollowing out of the middle class, than the rise in tuition.

This. And first generation college students can no longer work their way through college, or even partially through college.

Three decades ago my parents could pay for part of my education, scholarships paid for the other portion, and my part time job paid for all my other expenses so my blue collar middle class parents (lower middle class by dcum standards) didn't have to. Now? Doubtful this could work financially.

Agreed. And even in the 1990s it was already getting harder compared to earlier decades. My mother grew up in a lower middle/working class family, daughter of a carpenter and bookkeeper. She was able to go to a private LAC in the 1960s with her parents paying about 2/3ds and a scholarship covered the rest. Today that would just not happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had not realized that oberlin was reducing the number of students in the conservatory, and adding a business concentration.

Oberlin is an awesome place to study the (bad) business of outrage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Told through the lens of one liberal arts college that's the canary in a coal mine. https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2019/10/21/downfall-hampshire-college-broken-business-model-american-higher-education/?arc404=true

..."Because of low birthrates following the Great Recession, Carleton College economist Nathan Grawe predicts that the four-year-college applicant pool is likely to shrink by almost 280,000 per class, over four years, starting in 2026, a year known in higher ed as “the Apocalypse.” As youth populations decline everywhere but the southern and western United States, colleges in New England and the Midwest will find it increasingly hard to lure students, particularly those able to pay.

The problem is the business model. Colleges have long counted on wealthy students to subsidize the cost of education for those who can’t afford it. But for many institutions, that is becoming untenable. With only a $52 million endowment, Hampshire is especially vulnerable to this reality, but enrollment experts say it will affect many schools outside the most elite. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale and MIT will be fine, says Jon Boeckenstedt, Oregon State University’s vice provost of enrollment management. “It’s those colleges in the middle of the curve, with good, solid, well-known reputations but not spectacular financial resources or academic reputation, that are feeling the pinch,” he explains." ...

Simple solution: Lower f#cking tuition fees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Told through the lens of one liberal arts college that's the canary in a coal mine. https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2019/10/21/downfall-hampshire-college-broken-business-model-american-higher-education/?arc404=true

..."Because of low birthrates following the Great Recession, Carleton College economist Nathan Grawe predicts that the four-year-college applicant pool is likely to shrink by almost 280,000 per class, over four years, starting in 2026, a year known in higher ed as “the Apocalypse.” As youth populations decline everywhere but the southern and western United States, colleges in New England and the Midwest will find it increasingly hard to lure students, particularly those able to pay.

The problem is the business model. Colleges have long counted on wealthy students to subsidize the cost of education for those who can’t afford it. But for many institutions, that is becoming untenable. With only a $52 million endowment, Hampshire is especially vulnerable to this reality, but enrollment experts say it will affect many schools outside the most elite. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale and MIT will be fine, says Jon Boeckenstedt, Oregon State University’s vice provost of enrollment management. “It’s those colleges in the middle of the curve, with good, solid, well-known reputations but not spectacular financial resources or academic reputation, that are feeling the pinch,” he explains." ...

Simple solution: Lower f#cking tuition fees.

How does that work? They meet need and are accepting too many students with need so their tuition receipts are too low. Average tuition is already too low, giving those who can pay a break won’t improve things. There’s no reason to believe this will bring in more full pay students, those are in scarce supply.

[Anonymous]

Alas, people aren't willing to pay OOS or private prices for small schools near nothing with no national reputation.

Times change. Preferences change.

Some of these schools will recraft and survive. Some not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I took away from the article, was that this isn't just about population decline, it's another income disparity issue. Colleges don't just need high school graduates, they need high school grads in the 1%. As income disparity has increased, there are fewer and fewer full pay students to fight over. The top schools will always receive plenty of qualified full pay applicants, and they are expert at ensuring their balance of need/full freight covers costs.

This isn’t the cause. Income disparity has increased by some measures (concentration of wealth at the top vs. bottom), but the middle class is shrinking because there are more people moving into the upper income levels. There are going to be fewer rich students because there are going to be fewer students, period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Told through the lens of one liberal arts college that's the canary in a coal mine. https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2019/10/21/downfall-hampshire-college-broken-business-model-american-higher-education/?arc404=true

..."Because of low birthrates following the Great Recession, Carleton College economist Nathan Grawe predicts that the four-year-college applicant pool is likely to shrink by almost 280,000 per class, over four years, starting in 2026, a year known in higher ed as “the Apocalypse.” As youth populations decline everywhere but the southern and western United States, colleges in New England and the Midwest will find it increasingly hard to lure students, particularly those able to pay.

The problem is the business model. Colleges have long counted on wealthy students to subsidize the cost of education for those who can’t afford it. But for many institutions, that is becoming untenable. With only a $52 million endowment, Hampshire is especially vulnerable to this reality, but enrollment experts say it will affect many schools outside the most elite. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale and MIT will be fine, says Jon Boeckenstedt, Oregon State University’s vice provost of enrollment management. “It’s those colleges in the middle of the curve, with good, solid, well-known reputations but not spectacular financial resources or academic reputation, that are feeling the pinch,” he explains." ...

Simple solution: Lower f#cking tuition fees.

How does that work? They meet need and are accepting too many students with need so their tuition receipts are too low. Average tuition is already too low, giving those who can pay a break won’t improve things. There’s no reason to believe this will bring in more full pay students, those are in scarce supply.

“Too low” for what? When the federal government turned on the spigot for student loans, colleges went into an arms race to see who could attract students by spending the most money on flashy things that had nothing to do with education and expanding their Administrative costs. Now that generation of students are paying the piper and have successfully made the case to the next generation that borrowing six figures to pay for college is a bad idea. The gravy train is ending, and colleges without multi-billion dollar endowments will rein in their costs back to where they should have been in the first place or go out of business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Told through the lens of one liberal arts college that's the canary in a coal mine. https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2019/10/21/downfall-hampshire-college-broken-business-model-american-higher-education/?arc404=true

..."Because of low birthrates following the Great Recession, Carleton College economist Nathan Grawe predicts that the four-year-college applicant pool is likely to shrink by almost 280,000 per class, over four years, starting in 2026, a year known in higher ed as “the Apocalypse.” As youth populations decline everywhere but the southern and western United States, colleges in New England and the Midwest will find it increasingly hard to lure students, particularly those able to pay.

The problem is the business model. Colleges have long counted on wealthy students to subsidize the cost of education for those who can’t afford it. But for many institutions, that is becoming untenable. With only a $52 million endowment, Hampshire is especially vulnerable to this reality, but enrollment experts say it will affect many schools outside the most elite. Schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale and MIT will be fine, says Jon Boeckenstedt, Oregon State University’s vice provost of enrollment management. “It’s those colleges in the middle of the curve, with good, solid, well-known reputations but not spectacular financial resources or academic reputation, that are feeling the pinch,” he explains." ...

Simple solution: Lower f#cking tuition fees.

How does that work? They meet need and are accepting too many students with need so their tuition receipts are too low. Average tuition is already too low, giving those who can pay a break won’t improve things. There’s no reason to believe this will bring in more full pay students, those are in scarce supply.

“Too low” for what? When the federal government turned on the spigot for student loans, colleges went into an arms race to see who could attract students by spending the most money on flashy things that had nothing to do with education and expanding their Administrative costs. Now that generation of students are paying the piper and have successfully made the case to the next generation that borrowing six figures to pay for college is a bad idea. The gravy train is ending, and colleges without multi-billion dollar endowments will rein in their costs back to where they should have been in the first place or go out of business.

Too low to keep the lights on. Did you read the article? It's about Hampshire college and they haven't been pumping money into facilities, the school is falling apart. The plan was to support the school from tuition. When the school ended up accepting more than 30% low income students, the money collected doesn't cover operating costs. They need to find more wealthy students or they won't survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I took away from the article, was that this isn't just about population decline, it's another income disparity issue. Colleges don't just need high school graduates, they need high school grads in the 1%. As income disparity has increased, there are fewer and fewer full pay students to fight over. The top schools will always receive plenty of qualified full pay applicants, and they are expert at ensuring their balance of need/full freight covers costs.

This isn’t the cause. Income disparity has increased by some measures (concentration of wealth at the top vs. bottom), but the middle class is shrinking because there are more people moving into the upper income levels. There are going to be fewer rich students because there are going to be fewer students, period.

No, the middle class didn't all become upper class. There has been growing wealth at the top distributed among fewer and fewer people. Regardless, the sheer number of people able to pay full tuition, is dwarfed by the number who can't. If it was just about finding qualified applicants the school would be fine, but they need paying applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no reason to physically attend college

Yeah, those on-line chemistry and physics labs are awesome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had not realized that oberlin was reducing the number of students in the conservatory, and adding a business concentration.

It’s not really the best of times for that academic institution.

[Anonymous]

Warning bell for any slac outside the top 25.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Warning bell for any slac outside the top 25.

So, basically over 3000 colleges are in trouble?

I think you people need to get out of your "Top 25 or bust" bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warning bell for any slac outside the top 25.

So, basically over 3000 colleges are in trouble?

I think you people need to get out of your "Top 25 or bust" bubble.

Any slac outside the top 25 is in trouble.