Search News


Browse Archives

News

What Does a Degree Cost?

May 19, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

College tuition prices keep rising. State budgets are stagnant or shrinking. And policy makers, from President Obama on down, are increasingly calling for increases in the number of Americans who get some higher education or training.

Those factors have led more state legislators, trustees and others to argue that, to accomplish the latter goal given the former circumstances, colleges are going to have to lower what they spend to produce the average credential they award. But any discussion of lowering the "cost per degree" must start with a more fundamental question: What does a degree cost to produce now?

That question may be basic, but it is not simple, as a new report from the Delta Project on Postsecondary Education Costs, Productivity, and Accountability makes clear. The paper, prepared by Nate Johnson, associate director of institutional planning and research at the University of Florida, lays out a range of possible approaches to calculating the cost of a college degree and then calculates them using a rich set of data from the State University System of Florida, where Johnson formerly worked.

The paper shows that it is distinctly possible to come up with such a figure, but the wide variation in the numbers -- based on institution type, program, degree level, and other factors -- suggests that the answer will depend in large part on how the question is framed. And that decision is a surprisingly value-laden one, says Johnson. "You frame the question one way if you are only interested in students who graduate, and another way if you want to know the cost for people who go to college and don't complete," he says. "The point is, this is not just a data question. It's a question of what it is that we want from our colleges and universities."

The broad work of the Delta Project and its founder, Jane Wellman, is to analyze the "spending side" of the higher education cost and price picture; the group has released a series of reports that try to document the interplay of colleges' revenues and expenditures, and how those trends affect what they charge to students. The new study, which grew out of Johnson's work in Florida, he says, aims to develop a "common language," if not a common format, for focusing the discussion about how one might measure the cost of a degree in a particular institution, system or state. Toward that end, Johnson proposes several possible ways of calculating the average cost of a degree.

The analyses are based on data showing that the Florida university system incurred an average of $288 in direct and indirect instructional expenditures per credit hour, with wide variation by level ($188 for lower division undergraduate, $537 for master's, etc.), institution ($240 for an upper level undergraduate credit at the massive University of Central Florida, $677 for the same credit at the 700-student New College), and field of study ($159 in family/consumer sciences, $509 for natural resources/conservation). The analysis counts only those expenditures derived from state appropriations and student tuition, excluding endowment and other funds.

The first estimate, which Johnson calls the "catalog cost," calculates what a college would spend to educate a student who fulfills the "catalog requirements" of the average degree to the letter -- no more, no less. (The equation: cost per credit hour x instructional expenditures/credit hours.) The average cost is $26,485, with institutions within the Florida system ranging from $22,440 to nearly double that. Johnson also found significant variation by field because of vastly different requirements and program length, with mechanical engineering averaging $37,870 vs. $27,159 for elementary education.

The catalog method is easily understood, but it "does not reflect actual student behavior," Johnson notes. More accurate in gauging how students actually maneuver through institutions, he writes, is the "transcript method" of cost analysis, in which the total number of credit hours students take are multiplied by the cost per credit hour, and then divided by the number of degrees awarded. The average freshman who entered a Florida system university and graduated in 2003-4 "attempted" 131 credits, including failed or withdrawn courses and subtracting for any AP or dual enrollment courses that reduced their course requirements.

The average "transcript cost," then, was $31,763; converting to 2006 dollars, to make parallel to the figures from the "catalog cost" analysis, Johnson writes, the average figure is $33,672. (The 2003-4 figure for mechanical engineering was $47,257.)

Both the catalog and transcript cost methods factor into the calculation only those costs incurred by students who actually graduate. The third major analysis, "full cost attribution," examines the entire amount that an institution or system spent on instructional purposes to achieve an "aggregate level of degree completion." The equation looks like this: all credits taken at an institution over three years x the three-year average cost per credit hour/three years of degrees.

Not surprisingly, because all courses taken by all students would be allocated to the smaller proportion who actually earned degrees, this produces the highest cost per degree number; $37,757 in 2002-3 dollars, equivalent to $40,645 in 2005-6, Johnson writes. This analysis grows less predictable and valid the more narrowly it is drawn, he adds, because programs with high attrition, or into which many students transfer late in the game, can have their figures drastically altered. The overall high and low for the Florida university system, for example, were $170,831 for "multidisciplinary studies" and $21,473 for parks and recreation, and the variation by degree level was enormous: $33,425 for a law degree, $259,781 for an M.D., and $121,725 for a doctorate.

So which is the most accurate assessment of what a university spends to educate a graduate? The catalog cost of $26,485, the transcript cost of $33,672, or the "full cost" $40,645? The last is "probably closer to an answer" to the question that policy makers are increasingly asking now, about "what would we have to spend to get more graduates," though that assumes that colleges maintained their current enrollment and expenditure levels, he notes.

But the other key point, Johnson says, is that the choice of how you measure cost depends, to an extent, on how you perceive the role of colleges. Using the "full cost" measure, he asserts, more or less says that most of what a university does is designed to educate students, and that "all of those costs could be attributed to the cost of producing college graduates," as overhead, he says.

"If you highly value research or public service," though, "you could almost say that the graduates are free -- a byproduct" of what you spend on those other purposes.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on What Does a Degree Cost?

  • The true cost of a college degree
  • Posted by feudi , FAO on May 19, 2009 at 8:30am EDT
  • The cost study at the University of Florida provides several ways to account for cost. The most accurate measure of true cost is the last one discussed in the article which includes the cost of all students who entered the University, regardless of whether or not they graduated. This is the figure that is closest to the real world and it's the figure that school administrators should concentrate most on lowering. As so many studies have shown, there is an enormous cost of academic failure in our system of higher education. The study shows that the true cost of a degree is about 21% higher when you add in those who do not graduate. You can liken that cost to the accounting notion of "shrinkage" in a retail setting. Usually shrinkage runs about 10 to 12%. A good question would be why is the cost of shrinkage nearly double in higher ed vs. the economy in general.

  • Only degrees matter?
  • Posted by Jim on May 19, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • Policy makers tend to be interested in the economic aspect of higher education; so the 'full cost' should not be their primary concern, though I agree it tends to be. Both it and the first comment totally overlook the point that there are, and certainly should be, benefits to higher education whether or not the student gets a degree. If what we actually teach is so worthless that only the actual credential of the degree matters, we are wasting our, the students', and the State's time; and there is plenty of evidence that even from a narrow economic point of view, although there is a small 'bump' from the credential effect of the degree, most of the economic benefits of education (at all levels) can be attributed to completed years of education.

  • Description Sans Solution
  • Posted by William Patrick Leonard , Director, Academic and Student Services at SolBridge International School of Business, Daejeon, KR on May 19, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • How ever calculated the cost to the consumer and the state would be much less, if institutions would utilize their resources—faculty and physical plant more This report and the bulk of the literature on higher education costs may be characterized as defensive and self-serving. It tends to focus on external cost pressures, the difference between total cost and sticker price or the cost of doing business as usual. The traditional mix of faculty, curriculum and capital, the academic production function, has been and remains ignored as a primary contributor to ever-increasing tuition charges. As long as the inviolate production function remains unchallenged, we will continue to describe costs rather than containing them.

  • Opportunity Costs
  • Posted by Ollie on May 19, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • One needs to add opportunity costs, foregone alternatives, to the accounting based costs to get the real total costs of today's higher education.

  • The Value of the Non-completer
  • Posted by Bob on May 19, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • The article and the previous comment seem to give no value to the non-completer. If a student transfers of takes a year off then, their education still has value. Many will continue in another program or apply their skills in the workforce. Life can be complex, so non-traditional education paths are likely to continue with us.

  • Posted by JH on May 19, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • Note that both the magnitude and the proportions differ from what the same institutions report through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), which includes expenditures from all sources, including contracts, grants, endowment income and gifts, among others. Neither IPEDS nor the expenditure analysis include auxiliary enterprises, athletics,
    or hospitals, but IPEDS shows nearly a half billion dollars more in direct instructional expenditures, and $400 million more in total educational expenditures than the system’s own cost analysis. Some of the difference may be due to definitional issues, but for purposes of discussion
    or national comparisons, the true cost of a credit hour in the system, when all revenue sources are taken into account, may be 15-25% higher than the cost analysis suggests.(page 7 of the full report).

    Note should also be made that while maintenance of the plant is included as a cost, capital costs are excluded. These could be included by using depreciation
    and debt service (as is required in the audits of private institutions). Ignoring these additional real costs leads to an underestimate of the actual cost of providing the education.

  • More valuble than a BMW
  • Posted by David Cooper , Professor/English at Jefferson Community and Technical College on May 19, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • A college education costs approximately the price of an automobile; however, education appreciates with time. It is an investment in yourself and tuition is probably the best money you will ever spend if you get a solid education and if you graduate with a degree. It's yours for a lifetime and no one can ever take it away from you. A college education is money well spent.

  • RE: Feudi's Comment
  • Posted by Mr. Matekoni on May 19, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • Interesting. I'd say that retail shrinkage is not a great analogy for a process like education, particularly one that is so highly dependent on human input/commitment/life circumstances etc. We don't suceed as colleges simply by keeping students "in inventory" for four years and then giving them a diploma. Much harder to optimize. I'd expect that higher education will always have a significant failure rate. We're talking about people's motivations and their lives here. Things change; things happen. PEOPLE quit things all the time. Not that effort shouldn't go into reducing attrition and cost. I really appreciate the poster who reminded us that a partial education still has value. Student agency is often overlooked in these discussions, however. They get to make the choices, too. They are not hapless victims of a machine.

  • What does the market tell us?
  • Posted by tom abeles , editor, On the Horizon on May 19, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • The real question, when just looking at costs per credit or degree is what does it cost to obtain this in the marketplace. Most for-profit universities, whether in brick or click space float their costs against the traditional market and still have a net positive cash flow. Recent announcements by the University of the People claim to be able to offer courses for only the fees for testing. And, Straighterline, in an article in IHE offers courses for USD 99 plus cost of registration. Similarly secondary schools offer dual credit.

    Thus, just for the credit/degree it seems that post secondary institutions are being chased, hard, by some Clayton Christensen type disruptive innovations. Justifying the costs by playing with the books, seems like arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic when equivalent credentials are offered in the marketplace at substantively lower costs.

    The "value" of the degree is what is in question and that is why some people will pay the premium for a certificate from a medallion institution or a major research institution or a selective admissions college/university. It is also the reason why many students cram credits from a community college into their transcripts and then transfer to their big State U which is mandated to accept these on an equal footing.

    The universities seem unwilling to validate their costs based on values other than the degree. Yet, those externalities are what makes some institutions worth a differential over another to the student.

    The "question" seems to be whether the tax payer will accept the differential costs in public institutions when the focus has been reduced to the cost for a degree or credit and the externalities have been stripped from the discussion.

    The world is rapidly trying to level the playing field for credits. The Bologna Process is one example. Inter-institutional agreements in brick and click space are another both at the local and international levels. So, if credits/degrees are the game, the internal evaluations are only tools for the institution to determine if it can continue to compete in a world market on just the credit/degree basis or if, like any commodity, the label makes a difference.

  • True Cost
  • Posted by Joe on May 19, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • Can we please remember at all times that the published price in the catalog is rarely what the student actually pays. The delta between the "catalog cost" and the "actual cost" can be quite large. Colleges have this perverse incentive to keep their "sticker price" high and then provide the discounts on the back end. That high sticker price acts as a signaling mechanism to students that the school is of high quality. Few students want their degree to go "on sale for the low low price of $X dollars if you register in the next 24 minutes!!"

    But students WILL work every angle possible to get a discount on the back-end (challenge exams, liberal transfer policies, grants, scholarships, etc). This can even be the case at state schools where you can run into trouble just assuming that the catalog cost multiplied by credits gives an accurate figure.

  • Price of a degree
  • Posted by RBG on May 19, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • To any student looking for a real bargain: Each week I get an e-mail offering me the opportunity to earn an "accredited" bachelor, master or doctorate from a "recognized" university,with the inestimable advantage of "NO studies, NO attendance, NO waiting, NO examinations, NO hefty fee" -- all this within TEN DAYS. The total price appears to be a "couple hundred." How can any private or state-supported college or university compete with this, especially when we are assured that "Many companies where you apply for a job dont' give you a call as you lack the basic education they require?" I suspect that the cost of a degree may not be the only criterion.

  • Inputs / Outcomes?
  • Posted by Dr. F. Gump on May 21, 2009 at 7:00pm EDT
  • As RBG suggests, the degree shouldn't probably be the focus of our assessments / evaluations.

    What can a college graduate do for a company, state, or nation after four or five or six of the best years of his or her life?

    RE: auxilliary college functions - students choose to live in a variety of places: home, dorms, apartments, greek letter houses, and they have more fun in some abodes, are more studious in others. The cost of accomodations and entertainment (cable t.v., football games, keg parties) shouldn't be factored in with academic expenses, but those expenses certainly affect the student's educational outcomes).

    Obama just needs to mandate that henceforth, all students will study in secular cloisters, meager room & board, no entertainment, no summer breaks, and no sparing the rod of punishment for those who won't study. That may improve the completion rates for colleges, but it will almost certainly lower the number of students applying to matriculate.

  • What a degree costs
  • Posted by Ed Lyell , Professor, Business and Economics at Adams State College on May 23, 2009 at 7:15pm EDT
  • I directed one of the first program costing projects when at the Colorado Commission on Higher Education around 1973-6. We discovered similar massive variations in cost per degree, within and between institutions.
    It was so obvious that many programs should be closed that the legislative budget committee liked my study, but higher education and its lobbyists all but shut down the state commission to avoid the reality of the numbers.
    Since then HE has become even more poorly run in terms of costs and their unwillingness to manage to them.
    At most research universities the faculty now teach half as many courses for twice as much inflation adjusted money.
    All of these costs have been primarily passed onto the students through tuition and fee increases. Thus students are the prime funders of un-sponsored faculty research.
    Legislators should wake up and return to the teaching productivity of the 1970's, or even better with today's technology alternatives.