3 ms·
>> we have much higher expectations of colleges today than we did 30+ years ago Who is 'we'? I see this argument sometimes, but I've never heard of anyone choo
by bradleyjg 11y ago
>> we have much higher expectations of colleges today than we did 30+ years ago
Who is 'we'? I see this argument sometimes, but I've never heard of anyone choosing to go to school A versus school B because school B didn't have a gym. It seems like the people who want rec centers, dining halls, new dorms, etc. are school presidents -- both so they'll have something to fund raise for and so they'll have additional staff to boss around.
- cgearhart 11y ago"We" is "students", and they vote with their feet, bringing their dollars with them. The enrollment numbers are below, but the total funding (including public funding) for "party" schools is about 1.22x the total funding of the overall best schools. We can argue about rankings, public/private funding, personal debt, etc., but the overall point seems to be that people like party schools, and they love taxpayer-funded "party" schools. Top10 Party Schools: Tulane - 13531; U. of Georgia - 35197; WVU - 29175; Miami - 18456; U. of Iowa - 31387; UofT - Austin - 51313; U. of Wisconsin - 43193; UCSB - 23051; Howard - 10265; Ohio University - 29217 Total: 284785 Top10 Schools (overall): Princeton - 8125; Harvard - 21000; Yale - 12336; Columbia - 29870; Stanford - 16136; U. of Chicago - 14467; MIT - 11319; Duke - 14850; U. of PA - 24806; Caltech - 2209 Total: 155118
- me2i81 11y agoThis makes no sense as a comparison. All of the top 10 schools get many more applications than they have spaces, and that's true of many of the "party" schools as well.