3 ms·

Useless administrators. There has somehow been an increase in administrators over a time period when the introduction of computers should have cut the number d

Useless administrators. There has somehow been an increase in administrators over a time period when the introduction of computers should have cut the number drastically. > At public research institutions specifically, there has been a particularly marked rise in the number administrators. In 1990, there were approximately twice as many full-time faculty at public research institutions as administrators. In 2012, the two groups were nearly equal. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinesimon/2017/09/05/bureaucrats-and-buildings-the-case-for-why-college-is-so-expensive/#4050fcfc456a https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinesimon/2017/09/05/bureau...

Retric 7y ago
The data given does not support their premise. “Three decades later... administrative spending made up 24% of schools’ total expenditures” Even if admin costs where zero in the 1980’s they went up far more than 24% over the next 30 years. What happened is fewer classes are taught by full time professors which was a minor cost savings. One of these costs was a massive influx of new students required a huge increase in facilities. Another was the need for websites, computers, and networking infrastructure to keep up with the competition. Collages did not benefit from the computer revolution because few things could be automated and they suddenly needed websites, and networking in the student dorms etc.
- azinman2 7y ago
  There's no way that computers (which have only gotten cheaper over time) and networking is why it costs nearly 50k/year to go to a private university. Facilities also get paid off and aren't being rebuilt every single year. They also often are funded through alumni contributions (which is why buildings are named).
  - Retric 7y ago
    Individual computers got cheaper but the numbers increased dramatically. Few collages had high speed networking to every dorm in 1980. WiFi is a similar new expense that they suddenly ‘needed’ to pay for and staff people to maintain. My point was not that computers where the only issue just that they where a specific example that grew much faster than inflation. IT was really expensive. Many schools lack donors and actually needed to pay for new facilities. 12.1m students in 1980 vs 21.2m in 2010 means quite a few new buildings across the full range of collages.
    - okcando 7y ago
      This particular example is an added expense but doesn't strike me as an extraordinary one, and brings with it many administrative savings to do with applications, enrollments, grading, payments, educational resources, and so on. These are things that would have required more physical space and more personnel in the past. Schools have transitioned a lot to a more self-service model but it has not translated into savings for students or their families as far as I can tell.
      - Retric 7y ago
        I think your overestimating the effort those tasks required. Grading for example seems like a significant administrative burden ideal for automation. However, collage administrators don’t calculate grades per student, at most their doing a quick GPA calculation based on final letter grades. Teachers actually calculate grades, but that’s again vastly less effort than grading assignments. to the point where many just use pen and paper to record results. Many attempts at automation have increased teacher workload and require support staff. Schools are seeing benefits from these computer systems, but they rarely reduce costs. PS: Another consideration is collages are seasonal. Reducing the effort for some task may aid the workers. However, 100 administrators twiddling their thumbs costs just as much and schools need to staff for various crunch times not average workloads.
- travisoneill1 7y ago
  This article contains more data to support: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-reason-college-tuition-costs-so-much.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-r... > an analysis by a professor at California Polytechnic University, Pomona, found that, while the total number of full-time faculty members in the C.S.U. system grew from 11,614 to 12,019 between 1975 and 2008, the total number of administrators grew from 3,800 to 12,183 — a 221 percent increase. > According to the Department of Education data, administrative positions at colleges and universities grew by 60 percent between 1993 and 2009, which Bloomberg reported was 10 times the rate of growth of tenured faculty positions.
  - Retric 7y ago
    full-time faculty is a talking point, part time instructors make up a larger share of total instruction. Anyway, faculty want to defend their salaries which is why it’s coached in those terms. Reusing numbers from another post. 12.1 million US students in 1980 vs 21.2 million in 2010 and their instructors increased “11,614 to 12,019 between 1975 and 2008” sure that’s the full story. PS: I can’t find C.S.U numbers but I expect your going to find similar or larger growth in student populations due to California’s higher than average population growth.
stuff4ben 7y ago
Instead of free public tuition which would be untenable given our governments inability to manage the money they do have (or don't have depending on your perspective), I'd rather see them introduce a law to cap administrative expenses for public universities to some small number...maybe 10% of the total budget.

Retric 7y ago

The data given does not support their premise. “Three decades later... administrative spending made up 24% of schools’ total expenditures” Even if admin costs where zero in the 1980’s they went up far more than 24% over the next 30 years. What happened is fewer classes are taught by full time professors which was a minor cost savings. One of these costs was a massive influx of new students required a huge increase in facilities. Another was the need for websites, computers, and networking infrastructure to keep up with the competition. Collages did not benefit from the computer revolution because few things could be automated and they suddenly needed websites, and networking in the student dorms etc.

azinman2 7y ago
There's no way that computers (which have only gotten cheaper over time) and networking is why it costs nearly 50k/year to go to a private university. Facilities also get paid off and aren't being rebuilt every single year. They also often are funded through alumni contributions (which is why buildings are named).
- Retric 7y ago
  Individual computers got cheaper but the numbers increased dramatically. Few collages had high speed networking to every dorm in 1980. WiFi is a similar new expense that they suddenly ‘needed’ to pay for and staff people to maintain. My point was not that computers where the only issue just that they where a specific example that grew much faster than inflation. IT was really expensive. Many schools lack donors and actually needed to pay for new facilities. 12.1m students in 1980 vs 21.2m in 2010 means quite a few new buildings across the full range of collages.
  - okcando 7y ago
    This particular example is an added expense but doesn't strike me as an extraordinary one, and brings with it many administrative savings to do with applications, enrollments, grading, payments, educational resources, and so on. These are things that would have required more physical space and more personnel in the past. Schools have transitioned a lot to a more self-service model but it has not translated into savings for students or their families as far as I can tell.
    - Retric 7y ago
      I think your overestimating the effort those tasks required. Grading for example seems like a significant administrative burden ideal for automation. However, collage administrators don’t calculate grades per student, at most their doing a quick GPA calculation based on final letter grades. Teachers actually calculate grades, but that’s again vastly less effort than grading assignments. to the point where many just use pen and paper to record results. Many attempts at automation have increased teacher workload and require support staff. Schools are seeing benefits from these computer systems, but they rarely reduce costs. PS: Another consideration is collages are seasonal. Reducing the effort for some task may aid the workers. However, 100 administrators twiddling their thumbs costs just as much and schools need to staff for various crunch times not average workloads.
travisoneill1 7y ago
This article contains more data to support: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-reason-college-tuition-costs-so-much.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-r... > an analysis by a professor at California Polytechnic University, Pomona, found that, while the total number of full-time faculty members in the C.S.U. system grew from 11,614 to 12,019 between 1975 and 2008, the total number of administrators grew from 3,800 to 12,183 — a 221 percent increase. > According to the Department of Education data, administrative positions at colleges and universities grew by 60 percent between 1993 and 2009, which Bloomberg reported was 10 times the rate of growth of tenured faculty positions.
- Retric 7y ago
  full-time faculty is a talking point, part time instructors make up a larger share of total instruction. Anyway, faculty want to defend their salaries which is why it’s coached in those terms. Reusing numbers from another post. 12.1 million US students in 1980 vs 21.2 million in 2010 and their instructors increased “11,614 to 12,019 between 1975 and 2008” sure that’s the full story. PS: I can’t find C.S.U numbers but I expect your going to find similar or larger growth in student populations due to California’s higher than average population growth.

stuff4ben 7y ago

Instead of free public tuition which would be untenable given our governments inability to manage the money they do have (or don't have depending on your perspective), I'd rather see them introduce a law to cap administrative expenses for public universities to some small number...maybe 10% of the total budget.