I'm sorry but there's no other way. The cost of education has to come down and that means professors, coaches, and administrators have to pay themselves less.
We're already cutting cost at the lower end of the spectrum with adjuncts. Why not do the same at the top? On second thought $1M is actually too high. It should be lower. Probably a cap of $750k is fairer.
Professors already make less in academia than they would typically make in the industry. I don't think the best of them would stick around if they were handed a 20% pay cut.
Similarly for administrators and coaches, meaningful pay cuts would just push many of them out the door to greener pastures.
The cure for high tuition is unlikely to come just from cutting salaries.
Not just from cutting salaries but cutting salaries shows they are serious about it. I stand by it.
I've hinted at this elsewhere. There is no reason that anyone should be making more than 100x the minimum a full time worker should be making. I'd propose increasing the marginal rate to something obscene like 90% on income above that point. I stand by it as well.
If we are to make college education free of cost, we have to make them cheaper. I draw parallels here between higher education and healthcare. Yes, customer service will become worse in the process. However, I think if we manage expectations, we can do some serious cost-cutting while maintaining a certain minimum standard. This is true in both education and health care. Anyone who aevocates single payer without conceding that the list of options patient/student shrinks is probably not being honest. But this shrinking is OK.
First thing that should shrink is the obnoxious attachment to collegiate athletics. Even if it were true that college athletics is a net positive for a university's balance sheets, I don't think it is a university's place. This is a part of the overall "remove bling" from education. Other efforts could be trying to find ways to make housing less expensive and not as fancy.
Second thing that should shrink is the myriad of regulations from dozens of sources imposed on universities. I didn't know how many things they have to comply to. This is insane.
But coming to point, professors won't quit if wages go down. If they do, that's fine. There are other professors.
I think you're focused on really superficial stuff that isn't going to do much. "Remove bling"? This isn't a fiscal policy. You just don't like athletics, which I guess is fine, but also not very relevant. I personally am not athletic and so those programs did not appeal to me when I was a student, but collegiate athletics have a long history and serve useful purposes.
For the dorms, I don't know where you went to school, but my dorms were pretty basic. When I visited friends at other universities, their dorms were also pretty basic. When I studied abroad in Germany, the student housing was actually nicer than what we have in the US. Could we spend less on dorms? Probably. Would it make a meaningful change in cost? Probably not.
And again, coming back to the idea of cutting salaries, I don't know why you think there is an endless line of potential professors waiting to take jobs for no money. Good professors are valuable and would command high salaries in industry. If the end result of cutting tuition is that education quality declines proportionally, it's probably not worth it.
I also don't know why you're so hung up on the few people who are extremely highly paid. Bloated salaries or not, that group is not large and it's not a major factor in overall cost. Additionally, very few if any professors are in that group.
Not true. This assumption only works when one decides that all professors are equally employable both in colleges and private industry. It also assumes an unlimited number of jobs.
Worse for college professors they have no choice in having their salaries come down because it won't be a decade before college education done online becomes the main alternative. With the pay scales differences across the world being what they are the fact is you will likely have may opportunities for professors in India and elsewhere teach course with the same expertise.
People are quick to bitch and bemoan medical costs from pills to services and pointing overseas "SEE SEE SEE" about how their costs are lower.
Well guess what, education will be even cheaper because the student doesn't have to travel to get the world class education. All that needs to change is regulations which will prevent it.
> Not true. This assumption only works when one decides that all professors are equally employable both in colleges and private industry. It also assumes an unlimited number of jobs.
For highly-paid professors, it's generally true that they are equally employable in private industry. Similarly, for highly-paid professors, there are plenty of available jobs in industry, hence the high pay.
If you disagree, I'd be interested in hearing what professors you believe are simultaneously overpaid in academia and would face difficultly finding industry work with equivalent pay.
> Worse for college professors they have no choice in having their salaries come down because it won't be a decade before college education done online becomes the main alternative. With the pay scales differences across the world being what they are the fact is you will likely have may opportunities for professors in India and elsewhere teach course with the same expertise.
I seriously doubt this is actually going to happen. There are plenty of accredited online universities already and enrollment in traditional universities has not dropped. Online courses mostly provide an option for people who would otherwise be unable to attend. Sure, some people will choose online studies even if they would be able to attend a traditional university, but I expect them to be in the minority.
Also, I don't expect lower professor pay to be a significant cost reduction for online courses. Employing Indian professors instead of American ones will probably not drop the cost to produce an online course significantly, because the costs can be spread across so many students. If anything, I think online courses might strongly favor native speakers because the language barrier is reduced at such a low cost.
We're already cutting cost at the lower end of the spectrum with adjuncts. Why not do the same at the top? On second thought $1M is actually too high. It should be lower. Probably a cap of $750k is fairer.
DJ