3 ms·

There are universities for which that would be a valid argument. They are expensive places to store mediocre children of the wealthy and are deigned for purpose

by Zigurd 2y ago

There are universities for which that would be a valid argument. They are expensive places to store mediocre children of the wealthy and are deigned for purpose. More prestigious private universities use a lot of government funding to fund widely cited research which is what makes them prestigious.

seneca 2y ago
Government funded research is not, at all, what makes them prestigious. Harvard was prestigious long before the American government even existed.
627467 2y ago
In that case why not just tie government funding to admission rule changes, instead of blanket regulate private institutions? Are businesses not allowed to pick their customers in the US?
- axus 2y ago
  Not since the Civil Rights Act of 1964
  - gameman144 2y ago
    Businesses can still pick their customers, they can't just accept/reject customers based on protected categories (e.g. race, sex).
    - int_19h 2y ago
      That kind of like saying that Russia has free speech, you just can't say things that are prohibited by law. One can reasonably argue that such protected categories are necessary for a just and fair society, but let's be clear about what it is we're advocating.
Maxion 2y ago
> More prestigious private universities use a lot of government funding to fund widely cited research which is what makes them prestigious. Just a correction, the unversities are NOT the ones that apply for, and receive funding from e.g. the NIH. It is individual researchers that apply, and receive, funding. And this money goes towards their salary and research. No funding, no salary, no reseacher. Universities don't themselves receive government funding.
- mukara 2y ago
  This might be shocking to some, but when a researcher receiver a federal grant (for example), the university takes a significant cut which they refer to as Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs [1]. The F&A covers the so-called "indirect" costs of conducting research on university facilities: buildings, utilities, admin and accounting, support staff for compliance with federal regulations, etc. Each university has its own F&A rate, which can be as much as 60% of received federal funds [2]. This rate has historically trended upward. An example of funds allocation for a typical small NSF grant: https://austinhenley.com/blog/grantbudget.html https://austinhenley.com/blog/grantbudget.html [1] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517263.pdf https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517263.pdf [2] https://financeandbusiness.ucdavis.edu/finance/costing-policy-analysis/facilities-administrative-rates https://financeandbusiness.ucdavis.edu/finance/costing-polic...
- Metacelsus 2y ago
  Well, the university will take a big slice (sometimes ~40%) of what researchers get from the NIH as "overhead", and then spend it on admins. And if professors hire grad students, the university will take another big slice as "tuition" even if the grad students aren't taking any courses. This is one reason I'm leaving academia – if I raise money outside of academia, I actually get to keep it.

by Zigurd 2y ago

seneca 2y ago

Government funded research is not, at all, what makes them prestigious. Harvard was prestigious long before the American government even existed.

627467 2y ago

In that case why not just tie government funding to admission rule changes, instead of blanket regulate private institutions? Are businesses not allowed to pick their customers in the US?

axus 2y ago
Not since the Civil Rights Act of 1964
- gameman144 2y ago
  Businesses can still pick their customers, they can't just accept/reject customers based on protected categories (e.g. race, sex).
  - int_19h 2y ago
    That kind of like saying that Russia has free speech, you just can't say things that are prohibited by law. One can reasonably argue that such protected categories are necessary for a just and fair society, but let's be clear about what it is we're advocating.

Maxion 2y ago

> More prestigious private universities use a lot of government funding to fund widely cited research which is what makes them prestigious. Just a correction, the unversities are NOT the ones that apply for, and receive funding from e.g. the NIH. It is individual researchers that apply, and receive, funding. And this money goes towards their salary and research. No funding, no salary, no reseacher. Universities don't themselves receive government funding.

mukara 2y ago
This might be shocking to some, but when a researcher receiver a federal grant (for example), the university takes a significant cut which they refer to as Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs [1]. The F&A covers the so-called "indirect" costs of conducting research on university facilities: buildings, utilities, admin and accounting, support staff for compliance with federal regulations, etc. Each university has its own F&A rate, which can be as much as 60% of received federal funds [2]. This rate has historically trended upward. An example of funds allocation for a typical small NSF grant: https://austinhenley.com/blog/grantbudget.html https://austinhenley.com/blog/grantbudget.html [1] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517263.pdf https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517263.pdf [2] https://financeandbusiness.ucdavis.edu/finance/costing-policy-analysis/facilities-administrative-rates https://financeandbusiness.ucdavis.edu/finance/costing-polic...
Metacelsus 2y ago
Well, the university will take a big slice (sometimes ~40%) of what researchers get from the NIH as "overhead", and then spend it on admins. And if professors hire grad students, the university will take another big slice as "tuition" even if the grad students aren't taking any courses. This is one reason I'm leaving academia – if I raise money outside of academia, I actually get to keep it.