<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, but nearly all of NYU’s peers experienced a higher number of applicants and a lower acceptance rate, which is strange.</p>
<p>interesteddad is right on in his assessment of the role that endowments play in keeping top schools “top” Financial strength begets operating and financial benefits to students and faculty and augments the brand power to recruiters and redounds to a psychological benefit for alumni. </p>
<p>Here is an unofficial list of endowments as of 6/30/06
1 Harvard $28,915,706,000
2 Yale $18,030,600,000
3 Stanford $14,084,676,000
4 Univ of Texas System $13,234,828,000
5 Princeton $13,044,900,000
6 MIT $ 8,368,066,000
7 Columbia $ 5,937,814,000
8 Univ of California $ 5,733,621,000
9 Univ of Michigan $ 5,652,262,000
10 Texas A&M System $ 5,642,978,000
11 Univ of Pennsylvania $ 5,313,268,000
12 Northwestern $ 5,140,688,000
13 Emory $ 4,870,019,000
14 Univ of Chicago $ 4,867,003,000
15 Washington Univ St Louis $ 4,684,737,000
16 Duke $ 4,497,718,000
17 Notre Dame $ 4,436,624,000
18 Cornell $ 4,321,199,000
19 Rice $ 3,986,644,000
20 Univ of Virginia $ 3,618,172,000
21 Dartmouth $ 3,092,100,000
22 Univ of Southern California $ 3,065,935,000
23 Vanderbilt $ 2,946,392,000
24 Johns Hopkins $ 2,350,749,000
25 Univ of Minnesota & Fdn $ 2,224,308,000
26 Brown $ 2,166,633,000
27 Ohio State Univ & Fdn $ 1,996,839,000
28 Univ of Pittsburgh $ 1,802,859,000
29 Univ of Washington $ 1,794,370,000
30 NYU $ 1,774,700,000
31 Rockefeller Univ $ 1,771,954,000
32 Case Western $ 1,598,566,000
33 California Inst. Of Technology $ 1,580,922,000
34 Purdue $ 1,493,554,000
35 Univ of Rochester $ 1,491,275,000
36 Grinnell $ 1,471,804,000
37 Williams $ 1,462,131,000
38 Pomona $ 1,457,213,000
39 Boston College $ 1,447,887,000
40 Univ of Wisconsin $ 1,425,750,000
41 Univ of Toronto $ 1,414,513,000
42 Wellesley $ 1,412,410,000
43 Univ of Richmond $ 1,387,834,000
44 Amherst $ 1,337,158,000
45 Pennsylvania State University $ 1,326,390,000
46 Indiana U $ 1,276,160,000
47 Yeshiva $ 1,273,237,000
48 Univ of Illinois & Fdn $ 1,252,290,000
49 Swarthmore $ 1,425,281,000
50 Univ of Delaware $ 1,223,203,000
51 Tufts $ 1,215,413,000
52 Smith $ 1,156,350,000
53 Univ of Nebraska $ 1,153,539,000
54 Univ of North Carolina $ 1,149,222,000
55 Southern Methodist $ 1,122,447,000
56 Univ of Cincinnatti $ 1,101,100,000
57 Baylor College of Medicine $ 1,059,393,000
58 Univ of Kansas $ 1,049,367,000
59 Michigan State $ 1,047,792,000
60 Georgia Tech $ 1,047,724,000
61 Wake Forest $ 1,042,558,000
62 Texas Christian $ 1,016,353,000
63 Univ of Florida $ 996,245,000
64 George Washington $ 963,697,000
65 Univ of Oklahoma $ 960,315,000
66 Berea $ 948,738,000
67 Princeton Theological $ 945,355,000
68 Univ of Missouri $ 944,054,000
69 Carnegie Mellon $ 939,581,000
70 Lehigh $ 939,473,000
71 Boston University $ 916,017,000
72 Syracuse $ 908,371,000<br>
73 Baylor $ 870,364,000
74 Tulane $ 858,323,000
75 Univ of Alabama $ 848,848,000
76 Georgetown $ 834,497,000
77 Univ of Iowa $ 832,869,000
78 St. Louis Univ $ 824,851,000
79 Univ of Tulsa $ 816,980,000
80 Trinity Univ (TX) $ 814,672,000</p>
<p>Actually, per student endowment provides a clearer picture because it factors in the size of the school. The reason endowment matters is that it determines how much per student, above and beyond tuition, a school can spend each year. Some of the top LACs are spending $70,000+ per student, funded in large part by investment returns from the endowment. </p>
<p>Here’s a partial list from the Questbridge folk:</p>
<p>Colleges/Universities: Endowment per Student for 2004</p>
<ol>
<li>Princeton University $1,678,406 </li>
<li>Yale University $1,328,552 </li>
<li>Harvard University $1,278,283 </li>
<li>Grinnell College $893,666 </li>
<li>Pomona College $837,825 </li>
<li>Swarthmore College $789,735 </li>
<li>Williams College $748,146 </li>
<li>Rice University $723,909 </li>
<li>Stanford University $714,622 </li>
<li>Caltech $701,004 </li>
<li>Amherst College $698,469 </li>
<li>MIT $650,426 </li>
<li>Wellesley College $557,347 </li>
<li>Berea College $553,778 </li>
<li>Dartmouth College $486,734 </li>
<li>Wabash College $415,412 </li>
<li>Smith College $361,572<br></li>
<li>Emory University $358,322 </li>
<li>Bowdoin College $344,786 </li>
<li>Haverford College $336,788 </li>
<li>Washington University $327,601 </li>
<li>University of Notre Dame $317,991 </li>
<li>Claremont McKenna College $315,208 </li>
<li>Earlham College $309,135 </li>
<li>Middlebury College $306,253 </li>
<li>University of Chicago $293,211 </li>
<li>Hamilton College $287,572 </li>
<li>Macalester College $284,891 </li>
<li>Bryn Mawr College $280,279 </li>
<li>Harvey Mudd College $277,207 </li>
<li>Carleton College $274,779 </li>
<li>Vassar College $271,254 </li>
<li>Trinity University $269,780 </li>
<li>University of Richmond $268,827 </li>
<li>Univ of California, San Francisco $262,341 </li>
<li>Lafayette College $255,066 </li>
<li>Northwestern University $250,785 </li>
<li>Washington and Lee University $245,384 </li>
<li>Scripps College $242,171 </li>
<li>Brown University $239,584 </li>
<li>Colby College $232,952 </li>
<li>Duke University $232,650 </li>
<li>Vanderbilt University $230,054 </li>
<li>Columbia University $223,404 </li>
<li>Davidson College $222,963 </li>
<li>Southwestern University $218,710 </li>
<li>Oberlin College $218,498 </li>
<li>Mount Holyoke College $214,832 </li>
<li>Denison University $214,666 </li>
<li>Whitman College $206,231
Source: Council for Aid to Education</li>
</ol>
<p>I like your list better. The absence of public universities is striking and goes to my earlier comment. However, they do receive some level state funding which would raise their level of dollars available per student. Do you have any kind of amended list that reflects this?</p>
<p>The decrease in applications is a non-issue in my opinion if NYU and Yale, which had a fall of nine percent in its applications in 2007 from 2006, attracts strong academic students to form their student bodies. In fact, Yale’s acceptance rate also increased in 2007 (8.7%-9.6%, though not as much as NYU’s 27.2%-32%). </p>
<p>Hawkette wrote:</p>
<p>“But the Education Establishment and the media that supports them is loathe to upset the status quo and embrace these schools, so it will be tough for the public to understand and appreciate just how many great schools and great students are spread out across the country. My personal belief is that a collegiate “glass ceiling” has been erected over these schools and, without significant changes in rankings methodology (like getting rid of the Peer Assessment), it is unlikely that they will make substantial further moves up the rankings ladder.”</p>
<p>I believe it’s starts here on a forum such as this. People on this forum know the number of reputable schools are growing, and it’s up to the posters here to enlighten the wider publc that they are other quality schools to which parents can send their children. Further, those who are members of the attentive public (those who keep abreast of with what’s taking place around them) are aware of the trends that you eloquently stated. </p>
<p>I am a big supporter of emerging trends. It signals something fresh is on the horizon that hopefully is positive and can be better than the norm.</p>
<p>“Chicago has always had a superb reputation. Popularity is a whole different kettle of fish. Some people get ‘where fun goes to die’… others will never understand. It’s a bit like trying to understand why scaling Mt. Everest is someone else’s idea of fun. If you don’t get it, you’re never going to get it.”</p>
<p>Agreed. </p>
<p>UoC has historically been considered one of the top schools in the nation (it’s recent rise in the USNWR rankings has more to do with USNWR adjusting its methodology and UoC adjusting how it reports its nos. than anything else).</p>
<p>Is UoC a “better” school than it was 5 years ago or 50 years ago? I highly doubt it.</p>
<p>8. Rice University $723,909
18. Emory University $358,322
21. Washington University $327,601</p>
<p>(Not surprisingly) relatively large endowments have enabled these schools (among others) to give large amounts of merit aid.</p>
<p>I would say Carnegie Mellon because the post-grad employment surveys have only been getting better and a few years ago it was already noted as the #1 school for getting a job. The schools are doing very well now, along with the original CS/ECE/Engineering/Drama schools, the Tepper Business school has gotten a 20+% application increase on top of the increase from last year. Last year’s acceptance rate for the school was 19% so it will probably be even lower this year. There are new buildings being built such as the huge Gates building and donations are coming in much greater numbers. </p>
<p>I’d also vote for Northeastern as it is a very great up and coming school that has also increased its appeal on campus and raised the standards of its students as well as lowered its acceptance rate and selectivity.</p>
<p>Many of the costs of providing the support to college education are not fully variable. Things like libraries, computer centers, rec centers, placement centers do not require a 1% increase for every additional 1% in students. Same for Presidents, etc.</p>
<p>I do not put that much faith in judging school quality changes by changes in applicants. Many applicants are not that well informed and are doing a follow the crowd exercise. Others are luerd by marketing and fin aid campaigns. There are measurables for school quality that are easily found including NAS members, national faculty awards won, and research spending for research schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Public universities really have to be evaluated separately because their funding sources (legislative appropriations) are so different.</p>
<p>What you really want to know is how much is spent per undergrad each year. That’s an easy calculation or a liberal arts college. Simply take the annual operating budget and divide by the enrollment.</p>
<p>It is much more complex for universities because undergrad education is often such a small part of what they do. Their expenses and revenues include contracted research. Grad students. Professional school students. It is much, much more expensive to educate a grad student or a med student than an undergrad (because the students per faculty is so much smaller at the grad school level). So simply dividing the endowment proportionally between undergrad and grad students would overestimate the undergrad spending. I’ve seen estimates that it costs 1.5 to 2 times as much to educate grad students than to educate undergrads.</p>
<p>I think it is highly unlikely that universities will be voluteering to help unpack their cost distributions anytime soon. For example, Harvard’s per undergrad endowment would look a lot smaller than the number above if you pulled out the massive endowments for Harvard Medical School, Harvard Law School, Harvard Business School, and the spending on Faculty of Arts and Sciences faculty that teach very light undergrad loads.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are some efficiencies of scale. However, the biggest piece of any school’s operating expense is faculty and staff costs and that is fully variable, if you keep the same ratio of faculty and staff per student as you grow.</p>
<p>No question that operating a very small college is very expensive. There is a cost associated with the small class sizes, the interactive nature of the education, etc. Some people shop at the mall (more variety). Some people shop at boutique stores (where the staff knows your name). Both are legitimate options.</p>
<p>The University of Florida</p>
<p>I do not think staff costs are that variable. You only need one President, one director of marketing etc. Also much endowment money goes to buildings and not at all to expenses. Publics get building money from the state in a typically separate appropriation while privates have to spend endowment money. For example the average building appropriation for the UW is $100 million/year. That’s equal to $2 Billion or so endowment income.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. But, that’s chump change compared to the overall cost of faculty and variable staff – more security, more secretaries, more librarians. A President’s salary is only equal to three or four or six or whatever faculty salaries. With an 8:1 student/faculty ratio, you have to hire 125 faculty for every additional 1000 students.</p>
<p>Plus, it’s not just one President. It’s the Deans of each School, which often have their own administrative organizations, etc. I guarantee that the head of the Harvard Medical School makes a pretty penny. Probably more than the President of the University. And, we aren’t even talking head football coaches’ salaries!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not the way buildings are paid for at the top privates. Generally, a building is funded by large naming rights alumni gifts above and beyond the endowment. A portion of that one-time gift is put into endowment to generate revenue for ongoing maintenance of the new building. There are exceptions. For example, right now a college can earn more return from investments than the interest rate on tax-free bonds. So you are seeing schools plop the naming rights gifts into the endowment and paying construction costs with 30 year bonds.</p>
<p>I know that Grinnell used millions of its endowment money to fund new buildings–whether through paying back bonds or otherwise the money is taken away from other potential uses. Naming rights typically only pay a fraction of the total cost.</p>
<p>The new buildings are usually the prime focus of a major alumni campaign. I’m quite sure that was the case at Grinnell, which has an absolutely enormous per student endowment.</p>
<p>A few schools that seem to be emerging, or distinguishing themselves:</p>
<ul>
<li>Brandeis U.</li>
<li>Northeastern U.</li>
<li>USC</li>
<li>U. Florida</li>
<li>Suffolk U.</li>
<li>NYU</li>
<li>Bard C.</li>
<li>Claremont Cs.</li>
<li>Emerson C.</li>
<li>Tufts U.</li>
<li>Whitman C.</li>
<li>Macalester C.</li>
</ul>
<p>(A lot of Boston-area schools there! Wow.)</p>
<p>Now matter how you slice it funding buildings from donations or endowment will cut into fundraising/endowment for other purposes. There is no Santy Claus.</p>
<p>Correct. But, that’s the same for all schools. You could say that funding buildings from legislative appropriations is money that isn’t appropriated for other purposes. There aren’t too many Santy Clauses hiding in state budgets these days.</p>
<p>No but they are really different and considered quite distinctly. Many more people like shiny new buildings than hiring more liberal profs and paying them big $$$. Union support new construction as in many college towns these are the biggest projects every year. I always find the capital budget gets a far more sympathetic hearing. There are no overpaid deans to rail about.</p>
<p>For example over the last two 2 year budgets UW got a small increase in operating money but building money went from $115 million over two years to $172 million–a MUCH larger % increase. The total building budget over the last 4 years (2003-2007)was $1.4 Billion so the private side is doing much more than they used to also.</p>