Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Hope those fees last in the State University of New York.
Current estimated tuition fees and expenses at UCLA:
resident, living with parents:  $19,417
non-resident,                        $42,134

University of Arizona:
resident, living with parents:  $15,640
non-resident                         $42134

UofA grad student:
resident:           $35,930
non-resident:     $42,806

Google "UCLA tuition and fees"  "Univ. of Arizona tuition & fees"                        

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Thu Feb 11th, 2010 at 11:37:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How sad... It was nowhere near that 5 years ago when I graduated.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 02:05:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But it's nowhere near that now.
by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 10:12:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As for fees, you need a house, you need to eat, whether or not you go to college. $10,000 in living expenses for a year.

I don't know what or where you are Googling, but if a student is living with parents, he is not paying $15,640 in tuition and fees.

At U. Arizona, tuition and fees are $6,800 according to this:

http://www.bursar.arizona.edu/students/fees/showrates.asp?term=101&feetype=undergrad&feerate =res

Where are you coming up with $15,640?

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 10:11:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"At U. Arizona, tuition and fees are $6,800"

Which is huge

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 11:07:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It is huge? Really?

I wouldn't really want it to be lower.

For a variety of reasons.

But as I said, I accounted for Pell grants from the federal gov't and a variety of subsidies and scholarships.

Let me put it this way. The amount of subsidy for public higher education in many US states far far exceeds anything elsehwere in the world. Asking students to take on 1/4 of the cost of their education (when that quarter itself is totally met by Pell grants and grants-in-aid for a big percentage of students) is not asking too much. Many of my students work 15 hours a week at part-time jobs. The alternative to this tuition structure is to dismantle the current system of higher education because we can't ask taxpayers to do more than fund $15,000 per student in a state like New York. The teacher to student ratio at my school, and the level of support, is 3x better than it is one hour away at a marvelous school like the U. of Toronto in Canada. The tax rate in New York is 7% of income, 9% sales tax, and $9,500 a year property tax on a $250,000 house (if you can find one that cheap). These are state and local taxes, not federal. The alternative to $5-7,000 in tuition is a dismantling of the higher education system.

The problem is, if students do not want to pay $5-7k for research universities, they have the option of attending satellite universities and community colleges at less than half the cost. But I don't want all schools to be turned into that.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 12:01:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, my 7 years of studying in France probably totalled less than €2000 of fees. And it was not because I went to second-grade schools.

So yes, I think it is huge to pay $6800 for one year. It's one third of the median income!

I guess there is a major cultural difference there. It doesn't cost that much to train as a medical practitioner here. But then, they do not demand as crazy fees once they are trained. This may regrettably change as neo-liberalism and individualism are catching here. But I am quite attached to that system where you don't start life burdened with debt.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 01:40:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I really am not saying that anything that doesn't do it the USA way is second-rate. This is why I said U. Toronto is a marvelous school.

But, the level of research and development at US universities still far exceeds those elsewhere, and the classroom structures are different (at Toronto, there are 3x as many students in a class as at my school), as are the number of lectures. I know the British system requires more of a time commitment from students and instructors as far as face-to-face interaction goes, but in some European countries such as Italy and Spain, it's the reverse. Lectures are not offered three times a week.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 01:53:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But, the level of research and development at US universities still far exceeds those elsewhere

Not in surface or solid state physics. Certainly not in high-energy physics.

Indeed for all of the natural sciences, it greatly depends on how much you stretch "far." In many cases even on your definition of "exceeds," if you get my drift.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 02:55:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm definitely referring to money and support.

Although I would point out the US system is pretty efficient, unlike our health care. We spend the most there too.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 04:55:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Normalised to population, GDP or nothing?

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:04:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
(n/t) signifie "non texte."

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:05:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I recently went over the different figures because our job search season is in December/January and we had two noted European scholars with whom we were discussing different systems. I was quite surprised to see the difference in expenditures, but I do not want to equate resources with quality of education, because there is not a tight correlation. For a faculty member, however, resources are always a significant factor.
by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:10:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But, the level of research and development at US universities still far exceeds those elsewhere,

That has not been my experience, it would be fair to say that US universities get more media coverage.  In terms of quality*quantity of research I've found the US about what you'd expect for its population.

by njh on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 03:09:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
EU2020 says that US investment in research at the level of higher education exceeds EU investment by multiples.

In terms of expenditure for higher education alone (i.e. including but not limited to research) the EU has an expenditure of 1.1% GDP, while the US is 2.3% GDP.

From the EU2020 site:

"American universities have far more substantial means than European universities on average, two to five times higher spending per student. The resources brought by students themselves, including by the many foreign students, partly explain this gap. But American universities benefit both from a high level of public funding, including through research and defence credits, and from substantial private funding, particularly for fundamental research, provided by the business sector and philanthropic foundations. The big private research universities also often have considerable wealth, built up over time through private donations, particularly from graduate associations.

The growing under-funding of European universities jeopardises their capacity to attract and keep the best talent, and to strengthen the excellence of their research and teaching activities(1). Given that it is highly unlikely that additional public funding can alone make up the widening shortfall, new ways have to be found of increasing and diversifying universities' income. The Commission plans to conduct a study on the funding of European universities in order to examine the main trends in this area and identify examples of best practice."

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:02:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
EU2020 is a political programme, not an attempt to examine reality.

That doesn't mean that the numbers are wrong, but it does mean that we need to know what they count. Particularly since they're being used as an excuse for backdoor privatisations - a use of numbers than normally means that they fall just short of being make-believe.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:09:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I see. Well then, I've got nothing.

I know in relation to Canada that the funding doesn't compare. It's more than double in the US.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:11:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that they've made up the numbers on purpose.

It's just that this kind of international comparison is not trivial. To take an obvious example, South Korea boasts of a 20 % of GDP "education budget" - but they include primary and secondary schools in that figure!

Similarly, if less blatant, at anything below postgraduate level, there are structural and organisational differences between Europe and the US that make comparisons a non-trivial exercise.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:14:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Another thing to keep in mind is where the applied science is done. When Vestas develops a new alloy, they do it in-house. I don't know what the American system is in that respect, but given the reputation of places like Lawrence Livermore for pay-for-play research for the armaments industry, I suspect that the mix is different.

Whether it is desirable to have the applied science lodged with universities is a subject of ongoing debate, of course, but it's one of the things that needs to be kept in mind if we want to make apples-to-apples comparisons.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:21:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think that same article I linked to put European R&D at 2% GDP and American R&D at 2.5% so not that much of a difference at all.
by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 06:18:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This article is not about the topic we're discussing (only about technology transfers) but it does cite differences in total funding for higher education.

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/3825

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:14:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I was going on the highly biased and mostly anecdotal evidence from papers I've reviewed and read for various conferences.  No doubt the areas I have been active in are unusual.  I do question whether more money produces more quality research or merely more big toys.  The best papers in computational complexity theory for many years came from russians without even computers to work on.
by njh on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 06:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As for fees, you need a house, you need to eat, whether or not you go to college.

True, but if you are a student you need time to attend classes and to study for those classes. Too much time spent working defeats the purpose of attending college by resulting in poor grades and employment prospects for many.

For UCLA the numbers come from their web site.

For the University of Arizona the numbers are from here.

All of these things could be fixed by taxing those who have the money: the wealthy and the big financial institutions. But we have just been through forty years of public instruction in Neo-Classical Economics that has succeeded in teaching a majority that it is not really possible to tax the wealthy. Over 90% of all US graduates with one or more degrees in economics believe this. NCE is the language in which they express their thoughts, the air they breathe.

Of course it is all self serving bull shit, but try and explain that to a majority of the population. That is our task. You are one of those for whom the spell has been broken.

As for the cost of public education, the University of California and the California State University systems were enormous bargains when our son was attending. He lived at home while obtaining both his bachelor's and master's degrees and left school without debt. In order to do that today I would first have to find work in California, and school construction has virtually collapsed in the last two years.

Having hamstrung themselves by allowing the creation of requirements for super-majorities in the state legislature for budgets, the only way the State of California has been able to respond to the dramatic drop in state revenues is to transfer more and more of the cost of education at state universities to the students.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 05:43:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That link took me to estimated expenses and not charges.

In other words, that's no UCLA that is charging the amount beyond University fees. That is simply a notice of what they imagine will be required to feed and clothe a student living with parents. The parents nor the child pay that money to UCLA for the privilege of living and eating at home.

As for work, I don't think 15 hours of work outside university is unreasonable. I did it. And in the summers, I earned up to $5,000.

We are in partial agreement. I do agree that one might take on onerous debt and really put their future in hock, as is evident in Jeffersonian's post. I myself am in hock, but that was because I could not abide by the $12,000 salary I was asked to live on as a grad student (I could have lived on it, but I chose not to). My undergrad was paid for by the redistribution of funds from the rich to myself (i.e. I received grants in aid 90% from my university and the rest was work-study--I even pocketed my summer employment).

I still think $15-20k is not too much debt, and that in my experience, students who pay seem to appreciate their education more. With Pell Grants and Work Study, a student from the lower middle class starts off the year with $12,000. Tuition is $5,000 to $7,000. Summer work could bring in $4,000. A student loan brings in another $5,000. That means a student has resources of $21,000 a year without tapping into their parents at all. That money minus tuition must meet their housing, food and book needs.

I'm actually much more concerned with the massive recent cuts in higher education. I think now is the time when the system might be dismantled.

by Upstate NY on Fri Feb 12th, 2010 at 06:31:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series