3 ms·

college markets are kept uncompetitive by high barriers to entry. One is the chicken and egg problem of attracting decent professors. The other is huge subsid

college markets are kept uncompetitive by high barriers to entry. One is the chicken and egg problem of attracting decent professors. The other is huge subsidies to existing institutions that make the tuition costs of a start-up college uncompetitive.

tokenadult 17y ago
college markets are kept uncompetitive by high barriers to entry. Indeed. The United States looks bizarre to other countries because accreditation of colleges is done by associations of previously accredited colleges. You get to be in the club if the club admits you. http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html But the clubs make one of the requirements of membership a substantial capital expense for certain kinds of facilities, so a new market entrant has to start out with a substantial supply of cash at the beginning. For colleges tha initially have no endowment income, starting out while relying mainly on student tuition payments for revenue is quite risky. http://www.maguireassoc.com/services/forecasting.html http://www.maguireassoc.com/services/forecasting.html
yummyfajitas 17y ago
What do you mean by "decent professors"? If you mean "quality teachers", then you'll have a very easy time of it. There is a huge oversupply of PhD's, and many are excellent teachers. You can get good teachers quite cheaply. Accredition and reputation are the main barriers.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  There is a huge oversupply of PhD's, and many are excellent teachers. Agreeing with your first point that there are lots of Ph.D.s to go around to staff many colleges, how does one check your second point that a particular person is a good teacher? What is the best evidence for determining who is an effective teacher at the college level, and how is that evidence gathered at each college where Ph.D.s teach, and used at each college that has occasion to hire new faculty?
  - yummyfajitas 17y ago
    Disclaimer: most of what I'm about to say is second hand info. I'm a research postdoc, so teaching matters very little to me (all I need to do is show up). However, I know several people who did go through this process. Current method: student evaluation. Treat it as a roughly equal mix of easiness, sympathy (1), clarity and charisma. The best method would be to measure outcomes on standardized exams. However, in all cases I've seen, the teacher doesn't affect this very much. Very few places do this. In practice, most teaching colleges hire mainly based on personal connections or random chance (whoever applied at the right time). So I didn't mean to imply that new entrants into the college market could do a good job of hiring teachers. Basically, they can do just as good a job as anyone else. (1) Fun fact: my teaching evaluations went down about 40% after I stopped acting sympathetic and started writing my own tests. "Sorry the test is so hard, I didn't write it. I'll try to help you pass it and see what I can do about a curve." -> good evaluations. "Stop whining, i'll curve it if it's too hard. And yes, I do expect you to understand the concepts rather than just do mindless calculations." -> bad evaluations. I could probably try harder to game the system, but I don't really want an academic job anymore.
    - nazgulnarsil 17y ago
      you could control the standardized tests for IQ, which would cancel out noise. The problem is that you now need to administer two tests, and the errors implicit in assigning raw numbers to such fuzzy concepts as teaching ability multiply.
- jteo 17y ago
  My experience is that not every PhD obtained one to become a teacher. In fact, most of them teach due to the requirements of the university (during their almost-PhD years), as opposed to any burning desire to shape the next generation.
tallanvor 17y ago
There are over 4000 colleges and universities in the U.S, ranging from low cost community colleges to very expensive private schools. That's a lot of options for people looking for an education. New schools are still started, although not as often as before, and they are usually public schools. Still, to claim that the college market is uncompetitive makes no sense.
- tokenadult 17y ago
  to claim that the college market is uncompetitive makes no sense. You've convinced me that to claim that the college market doesn't have a lot of participants makes no sense. But I don't think anyone was making that claim here. What would be good evidence that a college that wants to do something new and different (e.g., offer a three-year accredited degree at lower cost than a four-year degree) is in a strong competitive position in the current market? How do colleges compete one against another?
  - nazgulnarsil 17y ago
    they compete by giving their students access to better jobs or academic positions than they would have had by attending a different school. college is a prestige and credentials game.
  - Retric 17y ago
    How do colleges compete one against another? They compete for new students / the parents of said students. The problem is even with all that competition schools don't grow and quickly grow and take over the market so students end up competing for them. Which is why schools focus on looking good from the outside and not really innovating in education.
  - tallanvor 17y ago
    They compete for students. They compete for professors (both those who will attract students and those who will attract grant money). They compete for peer recognition. If colleges believe they can offer a 3 year degree that will result in students who are able to compete against students with a 4 year degree, they will do so. And, to be honest, a couple will probably try. The format of higher education in America has been evolving for close to 400 years. During that time, many ideas have been tested, and you can still find a few colleges that are very different than the norm. However, the vast majority look similar in terms of how degrees are structured because that is what was found to be the most effective in preparing students for a career after they graduate. You can argue over whether or not whether the traditional methods are best, but at the end of the day they work for the majority of students here. And, of course, the quality of higher education in America is high enough to attract people from all over the world. At the end of the day, you don't have to take my word for it - just look into some of the research that's been done, both in terms of curriculum and general student development, and you'll get an idea as to just how much time is being put into determining the best ways to help students learn and grow.

tokenadult 17y ago

college markets are kept uncompetitive by high barriers to entry. Indeed. The United States looks bizarre to other countries because accreditation of colleges is done by associations of previously accredited colleges. You get to be in the club if the club admits you. http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html But the clubs make one of the requirements of membership a substantial capital expense for certain kinds of facilities, so a new market entrant has to start out with a substantial supply of cash at the beginning. For colleges tha initially have no endowment income, starting out while relying mainly on student tuition payments for revenue is quite risky. http://www.maguireassoc.com/services/forecasting.html http://www.maguireassoc.com/services/forecasting.html

yummyfajitas 17y ago

What do you mean by "decent professors"? If you mean "quality teachers", then you'll have a very easy time of it. There is a huge oversupply of PhD's, and many are excellent teachers. You can get good teachers quite cheaply. Accredition and reputation are the main barriers.

tokenadult 17y ago
There is a huge oversupply of PhD's, and many are excellent teachers. Agreeing with your first point that there are lots of Ph.D.s to go around to staff many colleges, how does one check your second point that a particular person is a good teacher? What is the best evidence for determining who is an effective teacher at the college level, and how is that evidence gathered at each college where Ph.D.s teach, and used at each college that has occasion to hire new faculty?
- yummyfajitas 17y ago
  Disclaimer: most of what I'm about to say is second hand info. I'm a research postdoc, so teaching matters very little to me (all I need to do is show up). However, I know several people who did go through this process. Current method: student evaluation. Treat it as a roughly equal mix of easiness, sympathy (1), clarity and charisma. The best method would be to measure outcomes on standardized exams. However, in all cases I've seen, the teacher doesn't affect this very much. Very few places do this. In practice, most teaching colleges hire mainly based on personal connections or random chance (whoever applied at the right time). So I didn't mean to imply that new entrants into the college market could do a good job of hiring teachers. Basically, they can do just as good a job as anyone else. (1) Fun fact: my teaching evaluations went down about 40% after I stopped acting sympathetic and started writing my own tests. "Sorry the test is so hard, I didn't write it. I'll try to help you pass it and see what I can do about a curve." -> good evaluations. "Stop whining, i'll curve it if it's too hard. And yes, I do expect you to understand the concepts rather than just do mindless calculations." -> bad evaluations. I could probably try harder to game the system, but I don't really want an academic job anymore.
  - nazgulnarsil 17y ago
    you could control the standardized tests for IQ, which would cancel out noise. The problem is that you now need to administer two tests, and the errors implicit in assigning raw numbers to such fuzzy concepts as teaching ability multiply.
jteo 17y ago
My experience is that not every PhD obtained one to become a teacher. In fact, most of them teach due to the requirements of the university (during their almost-PhD years), as opposed to any burning desire to shape the next generation.

tallanvor 17y ago

There are over 4000 colleges and universities in the U.S, ranging from low cost community colleges to very expensive private schools. That's a lot of options for people looking for an education. New schools are still started, although not as often as before, and they are usually public schools. Still, to claim that the college market is uncompetitive makes no sense.

tokenadult 17y ago
to claim that the college market is uncompetitive makes no sense. You've convinced me that to claim that the college market doesn't have a lot of participants makes no sense. But I don't think anyone was making that claim here. What would be good evidence that a college that wants to do something new and different (e.g., offer a three-year accredited degree at lower cost than a four-year degree) is in a strong competitive position in the current market? How do colleges compete one against another?
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  they compete by giving their students access to better jobs or academic positions than they would have had by attending a different school. college is a prestige and credentials game.
- Retric 17y ago
  How do colleges compete one against another? They compete for new students / the parents of said students. The problem is even with all that competition schools don't grow and quickly grow and take over the market so students end up competing for them. Which is why schools focus on looking good from the outside and not really innovating in education.
- tallanvor 17y ago
  They compete for students. They compete for professors (both those who will attract students and those who will attract grant money). They compete for peer recognition. If colleges believe they can offer a 3 year degree that will result in students who are able to compete against students with a 4 year degree, they will do so. And, to be honest, a couple will probably try. The format of higher education in America has been evolving for close to 400 years. During that time, many ideas have been tested, and you can still find a few colleges that are very different than the norm. However, the vast majority look similar in terms of how degrees are structured because that is what was found to be the most effective in preparing students for a career after they graduate. You can argue over whether or not whether the traditional methods are best, but at the end of the day they work for the majority of students here. And, of course, the quality of higher education in America is high enough to attract people from all over the world. At the end of the day, you don't have to take my word for it - just look into some of the research that's been done, both in terms of curriculum and general student development, and you'll get an idea as to just how much time is being put into determining the best ways to help students learn and grow.