First two years of college for free?

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:59 am

Re: First two years of college for free?

Postby Stebben84 » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:33 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:Time to ask the donors to be more flexible in their giving....

And you think those at the foundation don't try? That is their job and they're actually pretty damn good at it, which I've witnessed first hand. The problem is that they are at the mercy of the donor/money. In the end, it's either get the money for a specified cause or don't get any money at all. Any person who does fundraising will tell you you're a fucking moron for doing the latter.

Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: First two years of college for free?

Postby Detritus » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:35 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:That's great background about how the beast works. But don't you think some "out of the box" thinking could help deal with the issue? Instead of the old "we need more money" plea? Clearly there's plenty of cash there. Time to ask the donors to be more flexible in their giving....

No, you're not listening. There isn't "cash" there. It's locked into specific kinds of investments and bequests.

You think they haven't been trying to be creative in asking for donations? The UW B-School--well, really, a core group of their alumni--have been very creative. I'm thinking here of how they banded together and gave money to prevent the school from being named after someone, and then set a 20-year sunset (I think it was 20 years) to that stipulation so the whole game could be run again. But that doesn't help with the existing endowments, some of which go back to the discovery of Vitamin D and can't be fucked with. And there are a certain number of potential donors who want their name on a building in perpetuity and to hell with what the university needs.

This isn't to say that there aren't areas that couldn't be cut down or eliminated. Certain kinds of administrative units have grown well beyond their original mission over time, and have doubtful grounds for existence in the eyes of many many faculty & staff. The Graduate School in Madison, for example, which started out as a simplified way of handling applications & research funding for grad school, and now constitutes an entirely separate set of hoops applicants must jump through--you can be accepted into a department's grad program and yet rejected by the Grad School, which makes no sense. Another unit that needs to be seriously shrunk is the UW System administration, which does little other than fund executive-level salaries for people who spend their time talking to each other, often over dinner. And of course there are smaller administrative units that seem to accrue one new vice-this or vice-that after another even while the funding for additional instructional salaries has been zeroed out.

We have to be careful, though, in blaming "administrative bloat," aside from specific examples, because many positions and services are labeled "administrative" simply because they aren't directly instructional. Academic advising, for example, is "administrative" even though a good adviser is just as useful to a student's career as a good instructor. Also, the more that university functions have been funded with outside grants and awards, the more the reporting requirements on those grants and awards has gone up. Semi-annual or even quarterly reports are not unusual, and may ridiculous amounts of information that no one will ever read, using very specific formats and data requirements that are very time-consuming to comply with. And thanks to certain little games going on in the Med school some years ago, we all now have to provide regular reports on outside activities, on the percentage of our time spent on each funded project, whether or not we lobby the local, state, or federal governments, etc. etc. even if we don't have anything to report. All of those activities are "administrative," but have to be done to keep the external money flowing in.

Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 9601
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: First two years of college for free?

Postby rabble » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:55 pm

Let us all think back to the time, not so long ago, when we spent all that time and money deciding if students could refuse to pay their student fees if the money was going to something they didn't want to pay for.

Let us all further consider that Ned is saying we should force benefactors to pay for things they don't want to pay for, so Ned doesn't have to pay for something he doesn't want to pay for.

Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 14522
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:42 pm

Re: First two years of college for free?

Postby snoqueen » Tue Apr 15, 2014 3:52 pm

Let's oversimplify for a moment.

Herb Kohl wanted to fund a basketball facility. He gave the University something like $25 mil (or whatever it was).

He did not give UW a pile of cash. The funding was in the form of various securities. Some of those continue to earn returns over time, because nobody pays for a whole building like that in cash. You pay off the debt over time and earn dividends and interest on the part of the money you are still holding, thus increasing the value of the donor's original gift over time. You would be a complete idiot if you did not follow this established principle.

But that's why it looks like the UW is sitting on such a pile of cash. It's all spoken for and tied up a million different ways by the donors' lawyers and the University's lawyers. Incidentally, the folks at the legislature know this -- they weren't born yesterday. For political reasons, they're trying to create a commotion among those who do not understand the funding system. That would be Ned.

The University can't turn around and use Kohl's money to, say, fund the French department. It has to be strictly accounted for (see above) so the donor gets what he paid for.

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3247
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 4:32 pm

Re: First two years of college for free?

Postby wack wack » Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:20 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:These institutions sit on billions of dollars in some cases and plead poverty.

Run government like a business: CHECK

Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests