For college students and their parents, the steady spike in tuition prices in recent decades has been not only troubling but mysterious: why on earth is tuition inflation double the general inflation rate? What’s behind these huge tuition bills: Massive legacy costs? Less public funding? The cost of acquiring real estate?
While none of those reasons are necessarily off the table, consider this article by Tamar Lewin in today’s Times:
Over the last two decades, colleges and universities doubled their full-time support staff while enrollment increased only 40 percent, according to a new analysis of government data by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a nonprofit research center.
During the same period, the staff of full-time instructors, or equivalent personnel, rose about 50 percent, while the number of managers increased slightly more than 50 percent.
Support staff! And what kind of work are they doing?
The growth in support staff included some jobs that did not exist 20 years ago, like environmental sustainability officers and a broad array of information technology workers. The support staff category includes many different jobs, like residential-life staff, admissions and recruitment officers, fund-raisers, loan counselors, and all the back-office staff positions responsible for complying with the new regulations and reporting requirements colleges face.
This explanation seems satisfying (intellectually, at least, if not emotionally). But it’s probably also important to consider how much money colleges have been putting into student amenities as well. When I visited my undergrad alma mater a few years ago, the chancellor pointed out that three buildings had gone up in the past decade or so that were each larger than any existing building on campus. There was a library, a convocation center (a multipurpose arena), and a huge student gym. The gym, he said, was a top priority because parents and prospective students increasingly think of themselves as customers, shopping for the most amenities for the best price, and the colleges that didn’t come to grips with this would soon see their customers going elsewhere.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
I would agree, when I worked in accounting @ the local univ, I would say about 35% of the support jobs could be cut if they raised productivity. Crazy incompetence in state government jobs. It’s impossible to get fired from a job at a university — my hubby’s boss had an alcoholic assistant who he tried to get rid of for 3 years, it wasn’t until she showed up intoxicated he was able to swing the axe. Even then she appealed to the employee board.
“…all the back-office staff positions responsible for complying with the new regulations and reporting requirements colleges face.”
And this is precisely why I’m against all government regulation. It just increases costs above and beyond any perceived benefit that they provide. I bet there’s also an equivalent increase in government employees required to check that these regulations and reporting requirements are met. So there’s an additional cost to the taxpayer too!
College tuition increased because the massive increase in subsidized student loans means that students are able to pay more money to the colleges. It’s a simple case of supply and (government-subsidized) demand.
Thirty years ago, non-elite colleges couldn’t charge tuition equal to the median household income because few students would have been able to afford it. Nobody would go to those colleges, so they would have been forced to lower tuition. Nowadays, colleges can raise their tuition willy-nilly because students will simply get the extra money by signing on the private loan agreement dotted line, without thinking about the repayment repercussions. And the lenders don’t care because the repayment is government guaranteed.
The thing is, is that while all us college students (go UW!) hate the tuition spikes, none of us want to give up the libraries, or the computer systems that need manning, or the nice gyms. So, unfortunately, if we like them so much we gotta pay for them.
Though I could do without the “environmental sustainability officers,” but I’m Republican.
Every time I read an article about increased tuition cost, it just reaffirms my decision to go to Berea College. My 4 years there were cheaper than 1 year of instate tuition at a North Carolina University (Appalachian State was my 2nd choice). It’s a great example of keeping the costs of education down. And all that support staff? At Berea the majority of low level employees and managers are the students.
Two other things to consider, which were not mentioned – but are related.
1) 20 years ago you didn’t HAVE to go to college. Now it is pushed by every HS counselor, TV, etc. So you have more students, which as mentioned are looking from a customer point of view as the article mentioned. If schools build gyms, rec halls, etc, and not classrooms – then demand is going to out strip supply, and prices will rise.
2) 20 years ago – there were not as many scholarships, grants, etc. You generally paid out of pocket, and/or got a loan, which wasn’t as easy to get as it was 5 years ago. Now that cash is easier to get (for some) it allows people to not shop by price, but by other things (such as the amenities). Even if students get a loan, they don’t think of them having to pay it back, because it is so far in the future (4+ years is almost an eternity to an 18 year old), so they don’t think of the cost involved.
20 years ago, you did have to go to college. Anyone who didn’t was a fool. They had already started work on NAFTA. People already knew offshoring would be a problem. (Back then you’d be more worried about the Koreans and Mexico.) This was a well understood problem. We also had the savings and loans scandal, a mini prelude to the wall street melt down and boom bust cycles on things like Texas oil.
The difference was there were many more mature workers who themselves went to school in a time when college was less necessary (60′s and 70′s) and didn’t think they needed to plan for a future without the factory town factory. These people were still in the workforce. They are now well out of it, and have had to readjust or retire.
Increasing subsidies to students and their parents drive increased prices. Loan guarantees, grants and tax deductions and credits.
Students and their parents are going to pay what they’re going to pay for college. Federal student aid adds what the government is willing to pay to what the student and family are willing to pay. The result is the university feels much more free to increase the price.
This is true in other things the government subsidizes that private entities sell, including health insurance, health care, and, until recently, residential real estate.
Same reason as the housing bubble – easy monetary policy and federal subsidies. Just like the technocrats in DC thought everyone should own a home, they thought everyone should go to college. Cheap loans plus the perpetuation of the myth that everyone should go to college caused the demand for a college education to increase unnaturally. Make no mistake, there is a bubble in college tuition rates. It is simply not sustainable for people to emerge from school with six figure debt and a degree in 18th century literature or the like.