"All of those trends add to the cost of college, but not by that much. At most, about a quarter of the increase in college tuition since 2000 can be attributed to rising faculty salaries, improved amenities and administrative bloat. By comparison, the decline in state support accounts for about three-quarters of the rising cost of college."
a) they've increased their spending on amenities and salaries by about 25%
b) they're taking in less money than before (apparently they're receiving 3x less money than they are increasing the budget? So budget increase is 25% of extra costs while funding decrease is 75%?)
I suppose it depends what metric we should be judging by. If university generates measurable value for the public (it probably does; having lots of smart people walking around isn't necessarily a bad thing), the next question is "how much money must be spent per unit of said public good?" Of course, no one can really agree on the goal of university or any metrics by which to judge (other than you have to go if you care about your future!), so it's kind of fubar.
I'd be willing to bet that they could get away with spending less money. I've been saying this for a while, but sooner or later student debt will lead to a major re-balancing of balance sheets. I'm a big believer in learning for free via the internet; if you have internet access, you've got everything you need to learn anything and contact anybody. Let the university system die a natural death and let's massively lower the cost and expand the reach of education.
At my university, 'working effectively in groups' usually meant one smart kid at the computer in the computer lab doing all the work while 7 other kids swarmed around them and copying what they did as close as possible without triggering the 'plagiarizing' senses of the teacher.
I worked alone (in the same computer lab) so I could actually learn and internalize what I was taught, but I'd look around and that was a common sight.
A university is not required (and in fact, I'd argue that classwork and grades isn't a good structure for it) in order to figure out how to be effective in a group. Working a single job in fast food taught me more about working in a group than any group project at school or the 'Small Group Communications' class I was required to take for my major.
Have lab space then, have the government pay for it and schedule times for people who want to use it. Should not be limited to a university's chosen student body; it should be open to anyone that wants to learn.
You get much more than that and it gets superfluous. US universities are superfluous to the point of wastefulness.
I still say defund them and let them figure it out or shut down. But yes, I understand why this sounds extreme, particularly if you don't share my views of college being a super shit deal for most people (and universities--peddling such shit deals and responding to criticism with moral indignation--are no better than timeshare salesmen).
In many university courses the tuition you pay is to access the network of alumni, faculty. These are(still) vital for Phd to collaborate and MBAs to find work. I am not sure the internet is actually even a partially workable substitute for this important aspect.
anything, that is, which doesn't need a lab. So much for physics, chemistry, biology, everything that depends on them...
Doable? Maybe. Effective for the general population? Unlikely.
Am self taught at computing too.
How much does music school cost btw? Probably way more than most violinists make right? Going into debt for education is a crap deal, that's what I'm saying. You can get the same result cheaper.