3 ms·

Shouldn't the overproduction of Phds drive down university costs? I hear you on the bogosity factor. I wonder why this persists. Perhaps because by the time

Shouldn't the overproduction of Phds drive down university costs? I hear you on the bogosity factor. I wonder why this persists. Perhaps because by the time someone realizes it's all BS, their career it too invested in exposing it?

panzagl 11y ago
It's driven down teaching costs, but other costs have increased at a much greater rate.
jseliger 11y ago
Shouldn't the overproduction of Phds drive down university costs? Most cost increases appear to come from technology, ancillary services (gyms are popular punching bags in this regard) and administrative staff (everything from diversity deans to grant writers). I hear you on the bogosity factor. I wonder why this persists. Perhaps because by the time someone realizes it's all BS, their career it too invested in exposing it? I think this is precisely the issue: the system selects for people who become very, very invested in the system. Another important change involves the elimination of mandatory retirement: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/silver_lining/2011/04/please_take_the_gold_watch_please.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/silver_lining/2011/04/ple.... Until the early 1990s, tenure care with an expiration date around age 65. Someone who got tenure would be on the books for 25 – 35 years. Today tenure doesn't have an expiration date—someone can be on the books for 50 years or longer. That makes tenure much more onerous. I'd like to see universities shift from a tenure-based system to a long-term-contract-based system. This has downsides but its downsides seem better than the current tenure-based downsides.
- mathattack 11y ago
  In theory technology costs should drive others down, no? But that's more true in the corporate world than non-profit or government which the universities resemble. I agree on tenure costs. It seems like they're really bloating the system in the name of academic freedom. I get it at the large research universities where the professors bring in lots of research money, but is it really worth it elsewhere? People say it's a bulwark against poor administrators making short term decisions, but that's what the rest of the world has to deal with too. Perhaps just timeboxing the tenure part would work. "The department has X tenured slots. After 65, you can stay on as an untenured professor emeritus at a lower salary."

panzagl 11y ago

It's driven down teaching costs, but other costs have increased at a much greater rate.

jseliger 11y ago

Shouldn't the overproduction of Phds drive down university costs? Most cost increases appear to come from technology, ancillary services (gyms are popular punching bags in this regard) and administrative staff (everything from diversity deans to grant writers). I hear you on the bogosity factor. I wonder why this persists. Perhaps because by the time someone realizes it's all BS, their career it too invested in exposing it? I think this is precisely the issue: the system selects for people who become very, very invested in the system. Another important change involves the elimination of mandatory retirement: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/silver_lining/2011/04/please_take_the_gold_watch_please.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/silver_lining/2011/04/ple.... Until the early 1990s, tenure care with an expiration date around age 65. Someone who got tenure would be on the books for 25 – 35 years. Today tenure doesn't have an expiration date—someone can be on the books for 50 years or longer. That makes tenure much more onerous. I'd like to see universities shift from a tenure-based system to a long-term-contract-based system. This has downsides but its downsides seem better than the current tenure-based downsides.

mathattack 11y ago
In theory technology costs should drive others down, no? But that's more true in the corporate world than non-profit or government which the universities resemble. I agree on tenure costs. It seems like they're really bloating the system in the name of academic freedom. I get it at the large research universities where the professors bring in lots of research money, but is it really worth it elsewhere? People say it's a bulwark against poor administrators making short term decisions, but that's what the rest of the world has to deal with too. Perhaps just timeboxing the tenure part would work. "The department has X tenured slots. After 65, you can stay on as an untenured professor emeritus at a lower salary."