Saying ‘No’ to College

As I finish the second calendar year of blogging regularly for Forbes, I realize I never have really seriously confronted an issue of fundamental importance regarding American higher education. Does the current generation or two of Americans, mostly born between, say, 1940 and 1980, the individuals who today run our nation’s business, professional and governmental enterprises and provide resources for America’s colleges and universities, realize that they are seriously botching arguably their most sacred responsibility, of caring for their progeny, the next generation? Don’t parents and grandparents consider it a prime goal in life to provide for their children by preparing them to be tomorrow’s leaders and to do good works, making for a prosperous and just world decades into the future?

Everywhere I turn I see politically and economically powerful adults disadvantaging future generations. At the federal level, politicians see short term political gains in spending literally trillions of dollars of borrowed money, adding to the fiscal burden of their children and grandchildren. For many Americans, our primary and secondary educational preparation is woefully inadequate—inner city schools, for example, are mostly a disaster, yet we do little to radically change them.

While we expend a good amount of resources—three percent of total output—on colleges and universities, less and less of it actually goes towards instructing the next generation, and more and more goes to subsidize high price administrative bloat, entertainments (especially expensive intercollegiate athletic competitions) and research of little social utility. Resources are seized by university leaders—seasoned adults—in the form of economic rents—payments beyond what is necessary to procure their services—rather than utilized for the benefit of the next generation. Adults are ripping off the young.

Some, for example New York University anthropologist Caitlin Zaloom (author of Indebted: How Families Make College Work at Any Cost) argue the current generation of middle class adults are facing a depressing dilemma: how can they provide a good collegiate education to the children they love without sacrificing their own financial future? Zaloom thinks they are in a horrible bind.

An alternative interpretation is less charitable: the current generation of Americans running this country have pushed up the cost of higher education and lowered its quality, in part with borrowed money (from federal budget deficits that indirectly have helped finance our current $1.5 trillion student loan debt). In order to maintain their own high life style, today’s parents have effectively forced their kids to borrow to pay for their education, something they and their parents did not have to do—at a time when society was much poorer.

Returning to education, we have lost sight of the basics: are our young learning a lot about things that prepare them to be responsible and productive citizens in the future? Are we downplaying the dissemination of truth and beauty in favor of spending resources on other things? For example, do universities really need umpteen bureaucrats who neither teach nor do research that might help future generations?

The public love affair with universities is declining. According to the National Student Clearinghouse, at the beginning of this decade, there were over 20 million Americans attending college; this fall, there were fewer than 18 million, a decline of over 10%. This fall’s decline was 1.3%. All segments showed falling enrollment—for-profit, not-for-profit, two year and four year schools, private and public ones. The proportion of Americans in college has fallen even more than enrollments since 2010—around 17%—because of population growth. The retreat from higher education is substantial.

The excesses of the colleges were fueled largely by federal student assistance funds supplied by a national government that in turn borrowed much of the money from investors buying government bonds. This led to the tuition, staffing and perhaps even the athletic excesses that defining modern American higher education.

For years, the American public unflinchingly accepted the siren calls of the “college for all” crowd: you will not succeed in life unless you go to college. They increasingly are rejecting that. To be sure, demographic factors (falling birth rates) and tight labor markets (making the opportunity cost of attending school high) have contributed to the enrollment decline. But the trust in colleges being the path to opportunity in America has severely eroded.

SOURCE 





Universities Welcome New Revenue Source: Retirees

Mary Warren received her sociology Ph.D. at Arizona State University in 1997—and enjoyed her time at the Tempe campus so much she has decided to go back and live there.

The 72-year-old recently paid around $500,000 for a two-bedroom apartment at Mirabella, a 252-unit high-rise project on ASU’s downtown campus aimed at seniors and developed by the university with a private real-estate firm.

Ms. Warren said she’s looking forward to moving in and auditing courses at the university when the development opens at the start of the 2020 fall semester.

“There’s so much out there to learn, you might as well take advantage of it,” said Ms. Warren, an early-childhood education professor.

With state government subsidies for higher education lagging behind prerecession levels after cuts, and with many traditional students struggling with college debt, some universities think they have found a promising new source of income in retired seniors.

More schools are building or planning senior-living facilities on or near campus to cater to baby boomers who view college as a stimulating alternative to bingo at an archetypal retirement home. Some savor the pursuit of academic and cultural interests. Others are lured by the promise of interaction with younger students, for whom many hope to act as mentors.

“There were a lot of things that I didn’t think I was good at in college that I know I am now,” said Elizabeth Ewing, 78, a retired fashion designer who recently put a deposit on a home with her husband at Broadview, a community planned for the State University of New York’s Purchase College. “Math, statistics, engineering.

I’d kind of like to see what all that’s about.” It is the latest way for universities to profit from one of their greatest assets, land. Colleges have already taken advantage of this privilege by developing hotels and high end student housing. Now, some see sales of upscale senior housing as the next step.

Some universities think they have found a new source of income in seniors.

Lasell University, just west of Boston, built one of the first on-campus senior communities two decades ago. It requires members to take 450 hours of coursework or activities each year. Other programs have since sprouted up in places like the University of Michigan and Oberlin College in Ohio. Some communities are on campus; others are situated nearby and may have only a loose affiliation with the school.

Many offer assisted living and nursing options. Anne Doyle, president of Lasell Village, isn’t surprised that schools are catching on to the concept. While the number of baby boomers settling into retirement is expected to keep rising for several years, the number of high-school graduates heading to college is projected to start decreasing during the same period, because of birthrates.

“Thinking about how you combine these two decidedly separate industries…provides enormous opportunity,” Ms. Doyle said. “One is in a growth industry and the other is serving a demographic that’s declining.”

Legacy Pointe, a community in the planning stages with the University of Central Florida, will have 296 retirement homes. Although located off campus, it will stay connected to the university by offering transportation to campus for courses and by bringing in medical students for research and rotations.

SUNY Purchase hopes to begin construction next year on a 40-acre on-campus senior- living development with 220 homes priced at up to $1.9 million for a two-bedroom villa, plus monthly charges that run between $3,300 and $10,000. As with many other senior-living arrangements, most of the original sale price is refunded when residents leave. The university plans to set aside 20% of the apartment homes for affordable housing. After launching sales in May, 25% of the units are in contract; the university has to reach 70% before construction can begin.

The project, less than 20 miles north of New York City in Westchester County, will include walking trails, a pub and a swimming pool. Seniors can also audit classes and attend campus concerts.

The centerpiece is the learning commons, where Purchase plans to offer a variety of programming meant to bring traditional students into the senior-living residence for cross-generational interaction.

That includes offering the community as a captive audience for students in the performing arts, and in the sciences, where working with an aging population can benefit research.

SOURCE