Philosophical-the future of B&M universities

[homeschoolmom1]

This is just to have a fun discussion about the future of brick and mortar universities. This week's story at homeschoolmom1's house: so I am reading the book "Why A students work for C students" by Koyosaki (or a similar name), the same guy that wrote "Rich Dad Poor Dad". He keeps on writing that the key to financial independence and early retirement is to generate passive income. He is a big propnent of doing so by buying rental property. So my husband mentions this week that we could consider buying an apartment in a university town and rent it to faculty or students. He proposed Ft. Collins, CO. But then I came across an article that suggested that by 2030 on the order of half of all Colleges in the US will be gone. I really do think that the next big bubble to pop will be student loans. Who knows what kind of change in higher education that will lead to? In all honesty, knowing what we do here, it is hard for me to fathom how anybody would NOT want to do it this way and rather spend some insane amount of money for 4 years. Trust me, if partying for a few years is the goal, that can be had far cheaper by working at Disney or on a cruise ship. Over brunch last weekend, a colleague of my husband's was complaining about the checks he writes for his kids every semester: 1 kid at Tufts, 2 at Yale and 1 in Med School at UPenn. Now, those are prestigious places for sure and attending will almost certainly set the kids up for both feet in all sorts of doors, but is it really worth it? He was calculating 35K per child per semester in undergrad and a total of 250K for Med school. Now, they are rather wealthy (unlike us...), so I have limited pity for them., but, seriously? I said to my husband that buying a little studio shack in Ft. Collins simply because of proximity to a university might backfire and make it a really poor investment if in 20 years from now nobody actually"goes" (physically) to a university any more. Why do not more people do what we do? I suppose many don't know about this option? The question is, if they knew about it, would they do it this way?

[dfrecore]

I think the student loan bubble is going to burst as well - but I don't necessarily think it's going to make colleges go away, I just think the prices are going to come down, because people won't go if they can't pay for them. When kids start saying no the high prices, those prices will HAVE to come down, or colleges will go away. They will lower prices out of self-preservation. There won't be as many bells and whistles - dorms with pools and granite countertops will be a thing of the past for sure.

Also, as someone who quit college at 19, let me tell you that I managed to do quite a lot of partying in my 20's without having to pay tuition! I partied WAY more then, when I had a job and some money, then I did my first year in the dorms.

I tell my kids all the time, "we will be paying for an education, NOT for an experience. The experience is on your own dime!"

[DavidHume]

There is already some traction to cut student loans. First, with grad/professional student loans, then to reappropriate those funds to grants for undergraduates. Ultimately, to eliminate or severely limit the qualifications for undergraduate loans. The idea being, that the federal student loan limits is artificially influencing the tuition charged by schools. The tuition rates continue to rise to meet the amount of money the average student is allowed to borrow.

[Merlin]

There is already some traction to cut student loans. First, with grad/professional student loans, then to reappropriate those funds to grants for undergraduates. Ultimately, to eliminate or severely limit the qualifications for undergraduate loans. The idea being, that the federal student loan limits is artificially influencing the tuition charged by schools. The tuition rates continue to rise to meet the amount of money the average student is allowed to borrow.

My personal take is that higher education in the US will go down one of two paths:

1. Some future administration will change the rules and create a government subsidized "free" college education system so anyone who wants to will be able to get a traditional 4-year degree at a public college or university. Schools will probably be forced to accept all applicants as part of that. Of course, the ivy leagues and other top private schools will still remain elite, independent, and expensive (even more so since they won't be getting any government money.)

2. Due to a lack of funding, most public colleges will close their doors, though some will move to online-only. The top private schools will remain open and will cater purely to those who can afford it. This will widen the gap between social strata and link "quality of education" to social status so "normal people" will with a college degree will have online educations and wealthy people will have B&M education from a top university.

[dfrecore]

My personal take is that higher education in the US will go down one of two paths:

1. Some future administration will change the rules and create a government subsidized "free" college education system so anyone who wants to will be able to get a traditional 4-year degree at a public college or university. Schools will probably be forced to accept all applicants as part of that. Of course, the ivy leagues and other top private schools will still remain elite, independent, and expensive (even more so since they won't be getting any government money.)

2. Due to a lack of funding, most public colleges will close their doors, though some will move to online-only. The top private schools will remain open and will cater purely to those who can afford it. This will widen the gap between social strata and link "quality of education" to social status so "normal people" will with a college degree will have online educations and wealthy people will have B&M education from a top university.

What leads you to believe that #2 will happen?  Like has something like this happened before?  When has education become less attainable?  Why would it become so in the future?  Just curious, I can't see how this could happen.  Someone comes in to fill the gap, the market fixes this problem (and would have fixed it long ago if the government hadn't intervened in the first place - schools wouldn't have had all kinds of money to fund crazy if the government hadn't of guaranteed loans).

[Merlin]

My personal take is that higher education in the US will go down one of two paths:

1. Some future administration will change the rules and create a government subsidized "free" college education system so anyone who wants to will be able to get a traditional 4-year degree at a public college or university. Schools will probably be forced to accept all applicants as part of that. Of course, the ivy leagues and other top private schools will still remain elite, independent, and expensive (even more so since they won't be getting any government money.)

2. Due to a lack of funding, most public colleges will close their doors, though some will move to online-only. The top private schools will remain open and will cater purely to those who can afford it. This will widen the gap between social strata and link "quality of education" to social status so "normal people" will with a college degree will have online educations and wealthy people will have B&M education from a top university.

What leads you to believe that #2 will happen?  Like has something like this happened before?  When has education become less attainable?  Why would it become so in the future?  Just curious, I can't see how this could happen.  Someone comes in to fill the gap, the market fixes this problem (and would have fixed it long ago if the government hadn't intervened in the first place - schools wouldn't have had all kinds of money to fund crazy if the government hadn't of guaranteed loans).

My perspective on this is based on the understanding that many public colleges depend very greatly on government funding and federal student grants & loans to survive. So if that funding were to disappear, chances seem high that many colleges would have to rethink how they operate (like selling real estate to downsize and/or moving more of their business online/remote) to remain solvent. Given that there is a lot of political pressure to defund programs like education and the arts, and leave this kind of thing to the states and individuals, it seems entirely reasonable that this could come to pass at some point. If it does, it also seems reasonable that the big name schools would probably be capable of weathering such a storm, but it would result in even higher education costs for their students.

Given the ivy league schools are already considered an elite destination for those in an upper socioeconomic stratum (and those who want to eventually end up there), I don't see that changing. In fact, I would expect them to become even more elite given a loss of federal grants and student loans would also mean fewer students could attend those schools since most wouldn't have the family resources to cover their education outright. Full-ride scholarships are already pretty rare, but if the costs of an ivy league education were to skyrocket even further, they would probably become even rarer.

Has anything like this happened before? I'm sure there are some parallels that can be drawn from history, but that isn't the basis of my perspective. Part of my job is being a bit of a futurist, so I tend to think a lot about how current trends line up against possibilities and draw conclusions from there. So, while I think it would be in our country's best interest that #1 occurs, there is a small voice in the back of my head that tells me #2 is more likely. Particularly given the current administration and how our policymakers are already starting to lean that way a bit. Also, if you look at futurist writings, there are others who have drawn similar parallels.

In any case, that is just my personal take.

[Ideas]

Why do not more people do what we do? I suppose many don't know about this option? The question is, if they knew about it, would they do it this way?

I think changes to the system will be fairly slow. I think we will see more of the online, self-paced, shorter terms and schools allowing testing out of 1/2. 

But there will still be lots who don't look into the PLA and testing out. It will be right there on their school's website, sometimes on the front page, but they won't really care to look into it. I think it's partly because of some students not liking timed tests. So testing out seems harder to them. I think others know that school policies can be difficult to deal with, and they just want to follow the neat plan they made with their advisor.


Even more so, I think some people are interested, but they give up after one or two tries. It's harder for many people to motivate themselves without a deadline. So they'll sign up and they can take the test anytime in the next 90 days. Well after 70 days they haven't done a thing. Now they don't know if they can pass, and they are busy with their traditional classes and other things. Etc. I guess it also comes down to poor time-management and less self-motivation, especially in the first year students. But basically, they lose a bunch of their test-out options after the first year.

I think that right now, a parent can still help assure their child's success by paying for the top ranked schools. It's changing, but I think those top ranked programs will still have a good foothold for a while, and that it's worth it. I think that everyone else has to fight for a job sometimes, by doing things like networking, using LinkedIn strategies, etc. The top ranked ones can kind of just walk right in. (You know they have decent enough interview skills and other things, because they got into the top ranked program.) I think the only way a top ranked one doesn't do well is if they get below a 3.0.

[cookderosa]

This is just to have a fun discussion about the future of brick and mortar universities. This week's story at homeschoolmom1's house: so I am reading the book "Why A students work for C students" by Koyosaki (or a similar name), the same guy that wrote "Rich Dad Poor Dad". He keeps on writing that the key to financial independence and early retirement is to generate passive income. He is a big propnent of doing so by buying rental property. So my husband mentions this week that we could consider buying an apartment in a university town and rent it to faculty or students. He proposed Ft. Collins, CO. But then I came across an article that suggested that by 2030 on the order of half of all Colleges in the US will be gone. I really do think that the next big bubble to pop will be student loans. Who knows what kind of change in higher education that will lead to? In all honesty, knowing what we do here, it is hard for me to fathom how anybody would NOT want to do it this way and rather spend some insane amount of money for 4 years. Trust me, if partying for a few years is the goal, that can be had far cheaper by working at Disney or on a cruise ship. Over brunch last weekend, a colleague of my husband's was complaining about the checks he writes for his kids every semester: 1 kid at Tufts, 2 at Yale and 1 in Med School at UPenn. Now, those are prestigious places for sure and attending will almost certainly set the kids up for both feet in all sorts of doors, but is it really worth it? He was calculating 35K per child per semester in undergrad and a total of 250K for Med school. Now, they are rather wealthy (unlike us...), so I have limited pity for them., but, seriously? I said to my husband that buying a little studio shack in Ft. Collins simply because of proximity to a university might backfire and make it a really poor investment if in 20 years from now nobody actually"goes" (physically) to a university any more. Why do not more people do what we do? I suppose many don't know about this option? The question is, if they knew about it, would they do it this way?

On an aside, my homeschool book club just spent February discussing The Vanishing American Adult by Ben Sasse (he's a homeschooling dad AND a senator.... was really good if you're looking for something to read

IMO, traditional education is changing, but kids go to traditional colleges because they have parents pushing them to do it. Our kid's kids (my grandkids) will potentially be much more non-traditional simply because there is no stopping technology at this point- students ARE customers and being place-bound is just so 1980's. Over-paying for education is just so 2018. But, parents my age (I'm 48) did go to college *in a building* and that's the expectation because even though 50% of them didn't finish their OWN degree, they sill believe that it is the path to wealth. The author you read also does a great job in .... which one was it..... I listened to his audio book 2 years ago tracing the history of the Industrial Revolution and how it's perpetuated the college myth forward.... anyway, I'll think of it. I love progressive change, I can't wait to see what this crazy educational landscape looks like when I'm 90

Found it: Rich Dad's Rich Kid, Smart Kid Give Your Child A Financial Head Start (excellent assessment and overview of the college myths we believe)

[burbuja0512]

My DH is convinced that most teaching professions as we know them will not exist in the near future. He's read quite a bit about AI taking over the classroom. I have not, so I can't quote it, but I think the argument is interesting. I mean, I worked for surgeons for almost 4 years and definitely see how they are being trained to work with robots, who are much more precise than a human with their cutting. Only one more step and you could have a robot teaching the class on how to work with the surgical robot....

And this could apply to any area of study, I believe.

[Ideas]

Hm. What does "near future" mean to him? I'm sure they could teach, but would students sign up for that? It seems like there would be a lot of reluctance by the school administrators, government, etc... like the government, for a while, refusing to give financial aid for any of the new robot-taught classes. What about the profs who have tenure already?