While I can't say I'm concerned about the University of Chicago (not a direct impact on my life), I am concerned about the overall trend that it represents. Th

While I can't say I'm concerned about the University of Chicago (not a direct impact on my life), I am concerned about the overall trend that it represents. The fact that students are willing to pay for it doesn't mean too much (IMO) as the economics and incentives of higher education (2008 downturn, skimpy state budgets, tuition grants, non-dischargeable loan debt, graduate research funding) have driven most schools to a challenging place where students are mostly choosing between institutions that are kind of mercenary, and ones that are blatantly mercenary. This story comments on the University of Chicago mostly because its one of the extremes. However, the issue is really the trend - The move to run schools like big business. To gauge success by non-student oriented metrics like year-over-year recruitment growth or annual profit. To compete for, and try to hire big shot administrators / executives (cause that $1M (Example) Harvard guy is worth 10x more than some $100k random dude). To vote large administrative / executive pay raises or parachutes (not general faculty) while the main public story is the rapidly rising cost of tuition. To tailor the school towards showing good metrics, rather than educating students and letting metrics flow from that. To focus primarily on research output because its more profitable / efficient than educating a bunch of undergrads. IMO, its all the problems that we're vaguely aware exist in higher education, but the University of Chicago is just particularly egregious about it and could make Obama look bad if he puts his library in it while talking about how important educating all our students (not just the wealthy ones) is.