Very true. Europe is generally sclerotic economically, a state of affairs for which there are many reasons. But in Europe, as here in the U.S., many people graduate from college and then have jobs that don’t require a college education.
2 Likes
The protections of tenure are not the reason that universities are not hiring tenure-track faculty. There are a number of factors – budgetary constraints (which in and of themselves are multifaceted but don’t generally include bloat in faculty salaries), the ready availability of cheap part-time academic labor, shifts in curricular priorities, etc. – but difficulty in getting rid of tenured faculty is not one of them. For one thing, the probationary pre-tenure period gives the university an opportunity to decline to commit long-term to a faculty member (and for an assistant professor to look for other jobs). For another, it’s not as difficult to fire tenured faculty members as you think it is.
1 Like
Add too many administrative staff to that. It has increased several fold since 2000
2 Likes
Yep. Definitely. A new dean every day.
I hope you follow associate deans, aka “ass deans” on twitter 
https://x.com/ass_deans?s=20
Absolutely. It’s one of the few remaining redeeming accounts on Twitter. 
2 Likes
Obviously, but my point was that Florida, by far, was the most preferential of their in-state kids, among the 5-6 OOS publics that visited/researched, and I’m not talking about tuition tiers, all of them act accordingly in that regard.
2 Likes
How is “youth” defined? Typically it refers to those in the 15-24 age range, the majority of whom would be full-time students, so if that’s the case, these figures don’t actually provide a good reflection of the value of an EU degree, because most of them (those aged 15-22 at least) would not be full-time in the workforce, they’d still be students, either in high school or university.
It may however be a reflection of cultural difference regarding the expectation that full-time students engage in part-time work or work during periods off from school.
I’d be far more interested in the unemployment rate of 20-25 year olds.
Edited to add:
The EU defines youth unemployment as
The youth unemployment rate is the number of people aged 15 to 24 unemployed as a percentage of the labour force of the same age. Therefore, the youth unemployment rate should not be interpreted as the share of jobless people in the overall youth population.
Whereas in the US youth unemployment is defined as
Youth unemployment refers to the share of the labor force ages 15-24 without work but available for and seeking employment
So they aren’t a direct comparison.
1 Like
In this case, the comparability or lack thereof depends on the definitions of “labor[u]r force” and “unemployed”. Note that the latter is usually taken to mean those without a job but seeking a job, though how one defines “seeking a job” can affect who is defined as “unemployed”.
This. Especially “character”.
Have then shown themselves to be hard working? Motivated? Do they lack a criminal or disciplinary record? Have they contributed to a school’s culture by anything (sports teams, musical ensembles, student paper, first aid club, recycling, tutoring - everything can count!) which is tangible? Based on evidence what a student did or didn’t do?
It is hubris to claim that based on spending 6 minutes (or 15 or 20, it doesn’t really matter) reading an application, adcoms may reach under the surface and pass judgment beyond that on what students ARE, as opposed to what they did or didn’t do.
They are not supposed to marry them. Or vote them into office. Or appoint them as their personal confessor. Just let them live on a campus and teach them physics.
4 Likes
Oh god, when I saw the avatar, I knew I would have to follow!
1 Like
Getting back on topic. The college admissions process is no longer about the students but, more about the schools being run similar to corporations. They are treated as data points and “commodities”.
-
The obfuscation around the true costs. Schools quote a number as low as 12 credits and hide the true costs of trying to graduate in 4 years. Tuition increases over a 4 year commitment when merit awards remaining stagnant.
-
Students/parents have lost confidence in the system. Does anyone believe the “college admissions scandal” was isolated? And problems have been fixed? We learn that need blind/was never need blind. College Board selling “students” personal info.
-
The problem is Universities have become bloated.Those who run them make ridiculous salaries compared to the real world. They have no accountability for cost control (which means taking away their perks). Hey! Let’s raise tuition and accept rich kids especially internationals who have money.
Enrollment is on the decline but, tuition costs are rising. This means the system needs “wealthy” kids or those willing to put themselves in debt. Nowhere is there the “plan” to maybe making it affordable and worthwhile for the “less” wealthy. If you were running a business where “Sales” were down, you either lower your price or make your product better. That isn’t happening.
College admissions was never about the student and ALWAYS about the institution.
Yale trained young, white, affluent men for the ministry. Simmons trained women for jobs as teachers and librarians. City College educated first gen immigrants and the children of blue collar workers because no other institution in NYC (a city of immigrants and refugees) had that as their mission.
You didn’t want what the institution was providing? Go elsewhere.
" If you were running a business where “Sales” were down, you either lower your price or make your product better. " OR- rebrand and find a more affluent customer base… which is exactly what many colleges are doing/have done. I grew up near Northeastern University… it was the “safety school when your safety school rejected you”. It was also in trouble financially. Through very shrewd marketing and segmentation and pricing management it has become a reach school for the population which used to see it as the back-up to your safety. Same professors as ten years ago (plus new hires). Same academic programs as ten years ago. Same campus (although with some nice tweaks as the aging physical plant catches up with them). But higher prices and a greatly enhanced reputation. It marketed itself to a much more affluent segment (“back in the day” its core student body commuted via public transportation) and that saved it from oblivion.
10 Likes
This 100% and it will never change.
3 Likes
That is my point. The “selective” schools really only want the affluent and the whole process is smoke and mirrors.
1 Like
The service academies don’t care about your financial status. Berea specifically only admits kids from disadvantaged backgrounds. The vast majority of non-flagship public state U’s and colleges don’t care about financial status. And an even higher percentage of community colleges are affordable with just a Pell grant- spend two years there and take the courses your academic advisor tells you to take, get solid grades, and you have a guaranteed pathway to the flagship. So pay for two years at a top academic institution but end up with a four year degree.
There are plenty of on-ramps for the children of the “non-affluent”. The problem is when you want it all- a so-called prestigious name, the right amenities (whether it’s a specific sport, frat, weather, reputation for great food), at a public institution price. Then you need to make trade-offs.
Just because the children of the non-affluent have different (and fewer) choices than the children of the affluent, doesn’t mean the process is broken.
I’m not sure what you are looking for here- validation that the system is stacked against your kid? Because what you’ve posted suggests the opposite. It is disappointing that some of the options turned out to be unaffordable- but isn’t that EVERYTHING in life? I want to see the fjords in Norway to celebrate my upcoming birthday. I’ve priced it six ways to Sunday- Norway is excruciatingly expensive, and it’s just too far to go to then shave a few days off the trip to make it come in at a more affordable price tag. So I’ll spend a few days North of Montreal (driving distance from me) and enjoy the green and the mountains and the nice people and a “foreign country”. And if the exchange rate doesn’t work and the hotels at Tremblant are too expensive- I’ll make a shorter drive to Vermont and eat breakfast at a croissant place and pretend I’m in Montreal while enjoying the mountains.
Yes, sometimes our choices turn out to be unaffordable- so we pivot.
3 Likes
Colleges With the Best Financial Aid | BestColleges.
Stats seem to contradict that statement.
4 Likes
Well said 
While I mostly agree, I think access and affordability for poor students isn’t very good. What if there isn’t a community college or commutable 4 year school near you? What if getting to the local CC requires a car and you can’t afford one (many places in our country have lousy/non-existent public transportation options)? These problems are particularly acute among solid, but not spectacular, students from low SES backgrounds. They aren’t going to be candidates for the very generous “meets needs” schools and they may or may not have anything close by that is affordable.
2 Likes
I agree with your point-- 100%- and I’ve posted here before about families I know IRL whose circumstances mean they are basically shut out. But again- that doesn’t mean the entire process is broken especially since the 'fixes" are so much more cost effective than “fixing” the entire system.
I served on the board of an organization which provided “last dollar” scholarships to needy kids. Some of the stories of our applicants were beyond heartbreaking. But truth be told-- it didn’t require a lot of money in the grand scheme of things to bridge the gap between what the kid had (Pell plus financial aid, often stacked with other outside money) and what the kid needed. That was both the sad and affirming part of the work this organization did. These weren’t kids that needed $65K for their “dream school”. These were kids who needed $500 in lab fees because their financial aid was adequate to study accounting, but not chemistry. Or kids who needed $800 for an already subsidized laptop because using the computers at the library (which closed at 11 pm during the week and 6 pm on Sundays) wasn’t feasible. And the easiest fix-- kids who needed a few thousand dollars to cover the college provided health insurance-- and all it took was a phone call from a staffer to the college and a follow up email with a PDF showing that the kid ALREADY had an approved health insurance plan; the parents just didn’t understand that their Medicaid IS health insurance. And so the $2500 charge got wiped from the bill without an extra dime needed.
Let’s figure out a way to bridge the gap for the kids who are shut out. That’s easier than revamping an entire system comprised of thousands of institutions, no?
6 Likes