Search News


Browse Archives

News

State Funds and Student Success

August 17, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

A new research paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research argues that declining state funds for colleges can impair student success and, in turn, economic growth. The paper, “ Cohort Crowding: How Resources Affect Collegiate Attainment,” indicates that “[w]hile it is plain that the well-known cyclical variation in state funding for higher education may have deleterious effects on public colleges and universities, it is the more sustained depletion in resources per student accompanying relatively large cohorts that has the significant impact on collegiate attainment and the supply of college-educated workers to the economy.”

The problem may be exacerbated, the report warns, because in the coming decade, many states will face large increases in the college-age population -- “with serious questions about the capacity of state colleges to meet enrollment demand for these cohorts.”

“The impending collision of large cohorts and limited public resources in higher education is not just a predicament for colleges and universities, but a potential crisis in economic growth for decades to come if the flow of college-educated workers to the labor force is further curtailed,” according to the report. “While states have, historically, been central to the development of infrastructure and the provision of subsidy in higher education, the current fiscal constraints and restrictions against deficit funding may limit the capacity of states to make investments in human capital through public colleges and universities.”

John Bound, the lead author of the report and a professor of economics at the University of Michigan, says that policy makers would be wise to pay attention to dramatic increases in enrollment at colleges and universities and their relationship to graduation rates. His findings suggest that a 10 percent increase in the size of the college age population in a state leads to a 4 percent decline in the fraction of students attaining a bachelor of arts degree. (Sarah Turner, an associate professor of economics and education at the University of Virginia, co-authored the report.)

Bound also says that it would take “enormous increases in tuition to provide the necessary resources for colleges and universities to expand and maintain quality.”

“Because consumers pay only a fraction of the cost of production, changes in demand are unlikely to be accommodated fully by colleges and universities without commensurate increases in non-tuition revenue,” he said in the report. “For this reason, public investment in higher education plays a crucial role in determining the degrees produced and the supply of college-educated workers to the labor market.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on State Funds and Student Success

  • Different views
  • Posted by L.L. on August 17, 2006 at 9:00am EDT
  • An interesting view on the economics of higher education. The great thing about economics: poll 50 economists of widely-varying persuasions, and you'll get 50 widely-varying views.

    As to the paper at hand --

    http://www.nber.org/papers/w12424

    * did it look at the potential diseconomies of scale in huge, centralized universities? With bureaucratic gridlock, as well as monopoly control over on-campus real estate and overhead costs, etc.?

    * Greene (U-Ark.) has argued that the U.S. has a large number of colleges and just about anyone who wants to go to college, can go. Were his arguments addressed?

    http://www.uark.edu/ua/der/EWPA/editors/greene.htm

    * There appears to be no differentiation between the wide variety of baccalaurate degrees granted (e.g., BBA, BSEE, BSCE, BA-Philosophy). An obvious potential scenario is, if a group of employers wanted more BSCEs, they would increase the number of co-op positions and donate funds to a college, eliminating any "crisis."

    * Growth states are a special focus. What about non-growth states? Including those whose overall tax rates are already higher than "growth" states?