03-25-2021, 12:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-25-2021, 12:05 PM by BostonCard.)
(03-25-2021, 11:39 AM)lex24 Wrote:(03-25-2021, 11:12 AM)Goose Wrote:(03-25-2021, 09:37 AM)BostonCard Wrote: One other thing looking at the staff directory at Cal, it looks like bloated AD headcount is not something exclusive to Stanford.Totally true. The "costs" of the departments nationwide have gone up even faster than the revenue stream has expanded. You can remove the AD constraint here as well. ALL University non-academic headcount has exploded. That is why Stanford will house lots of those functions in new buildings being built in Menlo Park. Do "we" really need these people? IMHO, no, but it is clear others either feel differently or don't care. This, not the won-loss record of men's BB is the reason I do not and will not donate to Stanford in any way. They waste resources prodigiously IMO.
BC
Administrative positions have exploded at Universities nation wide. One of the reasons that tuition has reached stratospheric levels, putting kids (and there parents) in debt. It is a national disgrace. Tuition at Cal in 1980 was about $300 a quarter. 2021 tuition for residents is $14,312.
Your point is well taken, and I agree with it, but I wouldn't focus on public institutions which have suffered the double whammies of increased costs and decreased support from the state. There is also the separate fact that increase in tuition are partly offset by increases in aid. Especially at a place like Stanford, where tuition has now been waived for families making less than $100,000, the net effect is increasing price discrimination, where tuition is going up much faster for the wealthy than for families with less means. The problem, unfortunately, is that the upper middle class is getting the squeeze here; families making, say $180,000, which is wealthy enough not to qualify for tuition waivers, but for whom a $80,000 price tag is still almost half of their income.
BC
