"The Fiscal Cliff" Really???

[kandrathe]

I don't understand this argument. Sure there are tricky details to education reform, but some high level facts stand out. College educated people are more employable and earn more than those without a college education. The cost of attending public colleges has dramatically increased. Students are now graduating with considerably more student debt than the previous generation. We spend a lower fraction of government money on public education than previously.

I was thinking of K-12, but we can go to colleges too if you like. Estimated government spending 2010 shows public funding (all tax levels) Education costs us $908.3 billion. In 2000, that number was $552.6 billion. In 1990, it was 342.5 billion. From 1990, to 2000 it increased by 61% (6.1% per year). From 2000, to 2010 it went up just over 64%. In 1990 there were about 45 million K-12 students, in 2000 about 55 million, and about 56 million in 2010.

If we look at the ~56 million K-12 students consuming $538.8 billion nationwide (of the $908.3 billion from above) it equates to $9621 per student per year. If we choose a comfortable average number for class size of 20, that means we pay our schools $192,420 per class. This is not reflected in teacher salary (which with benefits may be 1/3 to 1/2 that amount).

According to this article;

"Twenty-five percent of Americans that start high school do not graduate. Entering the workforce without a high school diploma means an unemployment rate three-and-a-half times the rate of those with a college degree. And for those who do find full-time work, they on average earn less than half of what a college graduate makes each year.

Thirty percent of high school graduates do not go on to college right after graduation. In the workforce, a high school graduate earns on average more than someone without a diploma, but still only 60 percent of what a college graduate makes each year.

Forty-three percent of students who start college will not graduate in 6 years. Women graduate at a six-percent-higher rate than men within six years, and outnumber men in higher education by a ratio of 3-to-2. "

Minnesota completion rates.

This is close to what I've found in my research. Almost twice the number of Americans per capita compared to Europe attempt college. In Minnesota, which leads the nation in education, only about 1/3 of them complete in four years, and only 1/2 complete within 6 years. We don't encourage education in trade schools anymore, and they have by and large evolved into 2 and 4yr degree granting institutions. Why? Simple. The amount of financial aid you qualify for is directly related to the length of the program you attempt (not complete). If you tell the government you are going for a trades program, or even a 2 year degree, they give you less money.

Is the funding given to those that drop out (50 to 75 percent) money well spent? Hard to tell, but probably not. Is it the case that too many students who are unprepared for the rigor of college attempt college? Yes, I think this is part of it. This drives up demand, and eventually that is reflected in costs. Since the government foots a large chunk, and defers a large chunk in low interest loans, the student doesn't feel the pain of their financial decision until they quit or graduate from college.

Of course there are a lot of details as to why tuition has increased and why the shifts in spending have occurred, but I think we do know how to spend to make education more accessible and have a better educated population. I benefited from a quality public school education, and now I make a comfortable living. I have considerably lower tax brackets than my parents did. I'm oversimplifying a complex budget process, but I'm paying less and the current generation is graduating with a lot more debt.

I speak as someone involved directly in higher education administration. The private non-profit college I work for is pretty efficient, but we could still trim much redundancy and waste. It is pretty rare for schools to end programs, even with flagging enrollments. Public universities are much less efficient, and have little reason to ever control growth or costs. They just pass on the costs to the State legislature. It is political death to attempt to cut back funding for education.

Tuition rate changes are complicated as you say. The average discount rate is running about 35% now (meaning hardly anyone pays the sticker price). Then you have additional stuff they didn't have 50 years ago, like comfortable dorm rooms. Technology. Security. More co-curricular and extra-curricular activities. And, the fastest rising cost for the past 30 years has been... health care costs for employees. We've managed to hold the line to between 3-6%, which over time has made us more affordable compared to our peers.

The bottom line is that I disagree that we are getting our monies worth from education, and it is likely that blind government intervention and the politics is making affordability worse, not better. In K-12 we need to focus on a few things, first parents need to be more fully engaged in their child's education and preparedness, second, we need more money for excellent teachers and less for the administration, third, we need to be clear on what we are expecting the public monies to produce (is it standardized worker widgets?), and finally, we need to empower schools to make the right decisions for their specific situations. Mandates from State, or Federal levels become a glass slipper that no school fits or is comfortable in. As the article describes, we've moved backwards in education from 60 years ago, we still have the same sized achievement gap from 1966, and about the same number of adult Americans are functionally illiterate (~ 14%).

These are 2003 numbers, so we are due for an update, but at that time 93 million adults were at basic or below basic literacy. 123 million were intermediate to proficiently literate. The numbers remained flat from 1992 to 2003. If we use national SAT/ACT scores as a guide, they have remained flat over the past two decades. From what I see in the data, we are spending more on education, and getting the same or worse results.