设为首页收藏本站

爱吱声

 找回密码
 注册
搜索

tag 标签: 学费

相关日志

分享 Interesting Article on NYU Tuition
热度 6 Dracula 2013-8-22 22:34
The Expensive Romance of NYU Tuition rose $18,000 during outgoing president John Sexton's tenure. But who's really to blame for the school's high cost? JAKE FLANAGINAUG 21 2013, 2:37 PM ET http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/08/the-expensive-romance-of-nyu/278904/ John Sexton, president of New York University, announced last Wednesday he would step down at the end of his term in 2016. Although the Board of Trustees “unanimously and strongly supports President John Sexton,” as written in a March memo from Chairman Martin Lipton, many students and members of faculty have been calling for his resignation for months. In March, 82 percent of faculty at the College of Arts and Science, NYU’s largest undergraduate school, passed a motion of no confidence against Sexton. In the following months, four out of five undergraduate schools would pass similar motions, in addition to a number of graduate programs. Sexton’s critics have a range of grievances against him, but they all boil down to one thing: money. Sexton oversaw the Campaign for NYU, which ended in 2008 and raised $3 billion--the most lucrative fundraising campaign in the history of higher education. One would think such a flush of cash might encourage administrators to lower, if not at least stagnate tuition. Instead, though, the money is going to expensive expansion programs, both in New York’s Greenwich Village and overseas. And over the course of Sexton’s presidency (2002 to the present) tuition has increased by more than $18,000. For the upcoming school year, the cost of tuition plus room and board is more than $64,000. According to a Village Voice cover story, NYU created more student debt than any other American university in 2011, excluding for-profit institutions. As tuition has been increased in the two consecutive years since, the NYU degree has become one of the most expensive in the world--an immense cost only compounded by the school’s location in America’s most expensive city. And while 90 percent of the class of 2010 reported being either employed full-time or enrolled in a professional certification or graduate study program within a year of graduating, they were also saddled with a collective debt of $659 million --the largest sum owed by a single class in the history of non-profit academia. Some things have improved during Sexton’s tenure, of course. Between 2002 and 2012, NYU rose in the U.S. News and World Report ranking of national universities from 35 to 32. Average SAT scores of admitted students have risen by 40 points. Undergraduate applications have almost doubled, and intake has grown as well. The high cost of attending NYU is hardly breaking news. The school has been known for charging exorbitant tuition for years, and its track record for providing financial aid isn't great: As CBS reported earlier this summer, only three percent of NYU students get their full financial needs met by the school. (Compare that to Columbia University, also in Manhattan, which meets the full financial needs of all its students.) Comparatively speaking, New York has always been an expensive city. The high composite cost of an education at NYU is almost common knowledge. And the decision to finance such a costly education, whether personally or with loans, is a choice. A choice I certainly made. So it raises the question: Who’s responsible for the debt? Though I graduated from the school this past spring with a BA in literature, I am not an apologist for NYU. I think the funneling of tuition dollars into loans for vacation homes is a gross betrayal of student trust. The list of objections goes on: I think plans for expansion in Greenwich Village are invasive, the satellite campuses in Abu Dhabi and Shanghai are unnecessary extravagances, and institutional bureaucracy borders on comical cliché. But as Zac Bissonnette, author of Debt-Free U, wrote in 2011: “NYU students have a legitimate concern--the amount of money that they’re borrowing is insane--and the way that they should handle it is to vote with their feet. Transfer to another school. Deprive NYU of its source of revenue and save yourself in the process.” So am I, as an alum of NYU, in some way culpable for the corporatization of the university? By staying through graduation, am I complicit in the out-of-control rise in tuition, the school’s ascendancy as the number-one producer of student debt? “I don’t think the school holds all the accountability,” says a recent graduate of NYU’s music business program. “My mom took out all of my loans in both of our names, but we never discussed how much I was going to owe until now. So it’s parents who are at fault, too. And high schools need to offer some sort of tuition counseling before the fact.” I asked her if, looking back, she thinks her 18-year-old self was mature enough to be making such definitive financial decisions. “Absolutely not,” she said with a laugh. “But at the same time, if someone had told me I would owe as much as I do, I don’t think it would have changed my mind. I was a senior in high school. Everything at that age is so dramatic and romanticized. You’re thinking, ‘I can’t put a price tag on my future.’” That feeling, she says, bleeds into the first few years of college. “When you’re in that culture, freshman and sophomore year, everyone’s just excited to be there. You don’t think it’s ever going to end, but then it’s senior year. You hit that quarter-life crisis, and you realize you actually have to pay for it all.” This is the insidious romance of NYU. The university offers to take a romantic idea (being young in New York), and makes it a reality. The product is the degree; the glamour of Greenwich Village is the marketing scheme. And like all good marketing schemes, it works very well. Images of Greenwich Village and Manhattan are splashed across recruitment literature. Prospective students are taken on tours that focus on the picturesque Washington Square Park, which is actually property of the City of New York. It’s a tactic that greatly influenced my own decision to attend. Sitting on a park bench in the summer of 2008, with a jazz quartet serenading passersby under the Fifth Avenue Arch, I thought I had stumbled into a Woody Allen movie. The tour guides brag about internship opportunities “you won’t find anywhere else”; the Broadway shows, the book signings and gallery openings; falafel stands, banh mi trucks, and coffee shops--it’s all understandably attractive. But of course they don’t tell you how much it all costs, and to be fair, no one really asks. Hollywood plays its part in accentuating the allure. NYU is a constant pop culture fixture. The glamorous kids on Gossip Girl went there. Paparazzi snapped photos of Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen pouting at the Starbucks on Washington Square East, Dakota Fanning skulking around the Gallatin School. The school is so mythologized it even inspires its own breed of quasi-fan fiction. NYU consistently ranks among Princeton Review’s “Top 10 Dream Schools,” punching well above its academic weight in the category of romance. That dream draws students from far and wide. Although New Yorkers and New Jerseyites form the two largest geographic contingencies, faraway states like California, Florida, Texas, and Illinois are all well represented in each incoming undergraduate class. This is a drastic change from NYU’s early days as quiet, Tri-State commuter school. But as much as NYU’s behemoth marketing campaign seduces prospective students, it also creates casualties: promising young men and women forced to withdraw when financial aid packages revealed to be lackluster, or banks declined to extend credit. They’re $64,000 or $128,000 in the hole with no diploma to show for it. Those who are able to secure loans must scrape by, balancing studies with part-time jobs to afford even the simplest of pleasures, all while padding their résumés with (usually unpaid) internships. What results is class after class of outgoing graduates, world-weary before their time. I spent my last college spring break in Bloomington, Indiana, home of Indiana University. To most, it’s not the most exotic locale. But to a second-semester senior at NYU, it was adventure tourism. There are obvious differences between the two schools, despite the fact that they boast student bodies of nearly the same size (roughly 43,000 including graduate programs). Location is the most evident. The 43,000 students at NYU exist in the context of New York City’s 8.3 million residents, and on a campus that quietly weaves in and out of a vast stretch of lower Manhattan. IU’s 43,000 students compose more than half of Bloomington’s total population. Another significant fraction consists of university staff and faculty. And on game days, no matter where you work, or if and where you went to college, everyone in Bloomington is a die-hard Hoosier. Bloomington is IU, IU is Bloomington. Most “game days” at NYU go by totally unnoticed. The Hoosiers I know in the class of 2013 were not necessarily looking forward to graduation. The same goes for Wolverines, Badgers, Fighting Illini, Hawkeyes, and Nittany Lions. The sentiment had nothing to do with job prospects--many secured employment long before my friends at NYU. Instead, they were sad to leave. It was a bittersweet realization that college life was coming to a close. Graduation day would be one-part celebration, one-part funeral. “We only have seven weekends left before graduation!” A friend and Indiana alumna recalls her roommates chanting this whenever she felt like spending a quiet Friday night at home. IU grads are not prematurely world-weary. They’re satiated by a well-rounded college experience; no frills, but no delusions. I returned to New York with a heavy souvenir: regret. NYU doesn’t a foster a community of spirit like IU. For the most part, people don't stop to chat between classes. We kept our eyes averted as we buffeted between buildings on Washington Square. We maintained small pockets of friends that met mostly off-campus, usually too cash-strapped or busy to cultivate any real memories. And now I wonder if Indiana, which accepted me in 2009 and offered a scholarship, would have been a better choice. An Indiana education would have been substantially cheaper. Rent, transportation, even a morning coffee in Bloomington are a fraction of Manhattan prices. Sure, I might have forfeited the fantastic internship opportunities NYU’s urban location affords, but IU has a great journalism program, an on-campus NPR affiliate, and an award-winning student paper that actually pays its contributors. I would have been well equipped to take on adulthood and media job market, but with the added bonus of a few choice college memories. I can’t say I feel cheated out of a more affordable, more memorable college experience, though. “Cheated” suggests I was forced or tricked into doing something against my will. I was persuaded, but not tricked. Nor can I say with any empiricism that I would have been happier at a school like IU. For all I know, my experience there could have been horrible. I bought into the romance of NYU. I bought into the romance of the self-sufficient urbanite. It was expertly marketed to me in no different a fashion than a car or a vacation. But this raises a second question: If a college education can be marketed like a vehicle, why don’t more young people approach it with the same financial pragmatism? Why do so many of us allow ourselves to be clouded by emotion at the expense of personal happiness, or future credit scores? Answer: “You can’t put a price tag on your future.” Or, as UCLA Chancellor Gene D. Block wrote, “You can’t put a price tag on a good education.” It may be the most effective copy ever written. But ultimately, it’s just that: copy. The decision to buy the product still lies with the consumer, no matter how seductive the advertising is. Perhaps some form of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should exist for incoming college freshmen. Perhaps parents should be more involved in helping their offspring make financially prudent school selections. Perhaps higher education should be completely free for everyone. I’m not sure what the precise solution is, but I know the problem is systemic. And blaming one party, or one man (John Sexton) isn’t the answer. For now, instead of shaking a fist at high tuitions while signing a loan agreement with the other hand, do what any smart consumer does: Take your business elsewhere.
1138 次阅读|2 个评论
分享 搞不懂的中国家长之2:要死要活搞艺术
热度 18 樱木花道 2012-6-25 12:01
上面说了个 出国读书。    这次说读艺体。  1999年扩招后,艺术类院校的学费涨得比GDP快多了。   我就想不明白,中国这些家长不知道怎么想得,花大把的银子让孩子搞艺术。 问题是             1 艺术市场的就业非常狭窄,北京上海到处都是三线二线的小明星 甚至求潜规则都没有机会             2 艺术这个东西 不是搬砖 没有天分和悟性 再怎么努力也没有用的             3 读起来艺术的人 尤其是女孩  应该是家里面有老钱的                就是纯粹来培养情操。                   否则最后的结局就是没有搞成艺术 ,被艺术搞了。   家长不是花钱害孩子吗?         花了钱,难道去街道卖艺还要挂个牌子 古筝10级(兄弟亲眼看见的!)     前几天和 川音的几个好基友了一下,为了不给大家带来麻烦,一个例子都不举了。    反正 为什么 中国人事事精明,一涉及到孩子 就傻得逆天?
1107 次阅读|22 个评论
分享 纠结的学费(三)
热度 29 老马丁 2012-5-27 09:46
从二月到五月,除了上面有记录的,期间发生了无数大大小小的游行示威和冲突,实在难以一一记录。 从二月到五月,除了上面有记录的,期间发生了无数大大小小的游行示威和冲突,实在难以一一记录。 从二月到五月,除了上面有记录的,期间发生了无数大大小小的游行示威和冲突,实在难以一一记录。 从二月到五月,除了上面有记录的,期间发生了无数大大小小的游行示威和冲突,实在难以一一记录。 下面讲讲我的亲身经历。 下面讲讲我的亲身经历。 下面讲讲我的亲身经历。 下面讲讲我的亲身经历。 --------------------------------------------------------- 从二月到五月,除了上面有记录的,期间发生了无数大大小小的游行示威和冲突,实在难以一一记录。除了公园的花花草草,最受荼毒的两个地方,一个是省长办公室,一个就是本校了。这两个地方在一条大街上,相隔5-6个街区,很近的。省长乃是本次涨学费的元凶债头,学生们是三天两头去砸。为啥本校也被惠顾呢,有两种说法。说法一是学生一赌省办,警察一赶一逼,就跑到了本校,顺便把本校再骚扰一下。 到后来,警察干脆把省办封起来。告诉人们,危险! 另有一种说法,本校是本省高校的叛徒。绝大部分高校都通过罢课的决议,本校没有通过,完全照常上课,丝毫不受影响。罢课的学生掀翻自己课桌,也容不下别人平静的课桌啊。于是三天两头来本校启蒙,点火,传经,送道,可惜从者寥寥。于是恼羞之余,就要给本校点颜色看看。所以呢,不管哪种理由,小到三五十人,大到成千上万,只要有学生们在市中心游行,基本上要来本校串串门,记性很好的。本校一有情况就用短信和电邮通知大家,让大家心中有数。 这个期间我上课,每周去三次学校,但是我运气比较好,赌大桥那天我不上班,炸地铁那天我没坐地铁,其他时间,我基本上望着山听着街上喊。当然这么多游行,总会有些邂逅。比如说,3月13日那次两千五百人的。 那天下班走早了点,发现大门被封,保安和警察如临大敌。我于是掏出了手机。 前面走不了,走后门。一出来,眼前顿时一黑:有马! 再细看,后面还有自行化支援部队,形成一个双层防守的阵型。 往上看,直升机在呜呜叫。立体作战不可少 再看看那头,一群乌合之众啊。不知是那个college的。 深入接触一下,要饭的也在凑热闹啊。游行的人多,可是这些人的demographic不一定是好施主啊。 ----------------------------- 3月22日那天,那次巨大游行,我也在办公室。 上午就听到山动海响,当天游行必不寻常,手机早早的充好了电,下午出去照几张。待我两点出门去,一场大雨太荒唐,学生顿做鸟兽散,各人各自找自己的娘。 据说这些路面都已经被清理过了。我看见一个人沿路捡标语的木杆,至少建了二十个,都是好木头。失望之下,随便掐了几张。 ------------- 四月上旬,我正从五楼坐电梯去地下一层上课,突然听得教学楼里山喊水喊。电梯下行间邮件已经发到手机上,一伙不明身份者冲进一楼教室。我这个下行电梯直接到底,中间就听得人喊马哭的。到了地下一层,发现所有的教室门都锁了,凭卡出入。那天的课不少人迟到,估计是看热闹去了。结果呢,离门口最近的那个胖子起码起身20次给人开门,为此下课前我让全班给他鼓掌,表扬他坚守岗位不换座的精神。 我就碰这么几次。五.二二大游行我又不班,在家也不怎么收邮件,晚上看电视才知道。哈哈。 下篇日志(最后一个)谈谈对这个事件的看法。
个人分类: 闲谈|104 次阅读|18 个评论
分享 纠结的学费(一)
热度 25 老马丁 2012-5-27 04:27
当美国人民和中国人民都为飞速上涨的大学高学费揪心时,这世界上还有些地方读大学是相当便宜的,比如说本地。 你觉得像本校这样一个怎么排都能进全世界前50的大学,一年学费该收多少?一万加元如何?现在加元和美元一比一。可能贵了点,毕竟是加拿大的问题。好吧,便宜点,五千块一年,可以吧。多伦多大学一年还要七千块呢,咱校过去五年每年排名都比它高,五千块怎么来说也是个deal吧。 其实呢,五千这个答案也是错误的。正确的答案是,本省学生,每年的学费两千,加上其他杂费,保险,学生会服务等,全部出门价每年三千五,合2万人民币,全省其他大学也是这个水平,这笔钱,不到加拿大年人均收入的十分之一。 历史上看,本省学费一直很低。从1968年到2007年,40年间有35年冻结学费。07年后政府开始涨学费,08年涨到1900,10年超过两千,也就是每年涨不到100块左右。而同期,加拿大全国的平均学费已经涨到五千多了。这样下去肯定是不行的。 省政府从09年开始就放风说要涨学费,去年终于拿出了方案,每年涨$325, 连涨5年。这下子捅了马蜂窝。大麻烦终于来了。 上面部分数字的出处在 这里 。 敬请等待,精彩在后。保证今天写完。
个人分类: 闲谈|87 次阅读|6 个评论
分享 野的司机小g
热度 14 樱木花道 2012-3-24 03:01
野的司机小g 1997年初中毕业 考上重点高中 学费600多 3个月后辍学 早上4点花生下锅 5点把花生翻个 6点加蜂窝煤 7点出门。 骑车从白家到一号桥 游乐园 望江公园卖煮花生。 每日利润20元(饭钱2元左右) 中午可以在公园草坪睡1个小时。 6 个月 开始学铲车 被老板冤枉,出走。 2001年开铲车 工资2000到3000. 2002年自己购买铲车 挣8万 土地被政府征用 每亩3万不到 2003年挣6万 2004年挣4万 .................... 2010年铲车卖掉 2011年开野猪。 2010年和爱人离婚,有一儿一女。 儿子8岁跟妈,小女跟小g。 ~ 每一个普通中国家庭背后 都是不容易的。
687 次阅读|2 个评论
分享 美国高校的学费高涨及其与高校的富有
热度 33 武宜子 2012-3-13 13:34
美国高校的学费高涨及其与高校的富有
说起美国高校昂贵的学费,以及它年复一年的只涨不跌,这些事儿恐怕地球人都知道,不能算是新闻。但有关美国高校学费的一些有趣细节,恐怕还不是人人知晓。 举个例来说,近几十年在美国生活过的人,对油价如何的高涨、医疗费用怎样的昂贵、以及(萧条前)房价飙升多么的迅猛,都有过深切的体会。岂知跟高校学费这个大巫比,这些物价几十年来的上涨都只能算是小巫。 一图胜过千言。我们还是用图表来作说明比较直观些: 图一:用时间序列来比较价格变动,少不了要用消费价格指数(通货指数)做基准。所以我们首先把学费上涨指数和通货指数比,在图一里,1985年是基准年,两个指数都归零。但25年之后的2011年,学费上涨指数是通货指数的四倍还多。美国学费上涨离了谱。 图二:在图二的比较中,我们引入生活成本以及医疗费用来和学费比。尤其是近二十年来,公共医疗和医疗保险成为社会争议热点,政策上更有把享有医疗保险看作是基本人权的倾向,所以人们关注医疗费用似乎胜过关注高校学费高涨。其实医疗费用的高涨远不及学费的高涨,两者甚至不在同一个量级。 图三:我们把学费增长、医疗费用增长、新房价格上升、以及通货指数全部放在一张图里,学费上涨独领风骚是一目了然。这三张图(网上得来)由不同的三家单位制作,时间跨度都是从上世纪八十年代左右到2011年前后。虽基准年稍有不同,但提供的信息十分清晰:美国高校学费上涨离谱,三十多年来只涨不跌。 如今美国的实际情况是,高昂的学费成了千万个普通家庭和大学生们的沉重负担,不堪重负的人们不禁要问: 凭什么学费涨的如此邪性? 作为人生投资的大学教育究竟还值不值得年轻人去追求? 这篇我们不谈学费上涨的具体原因,也不论及大学教育值不值得等等(这些都需要另开新篇)。但至少我们可以看一看,大学的学费涨的这么狠,是因为不这么涨大学就会入不敷出无法维持? 美国的大学穷吗? 答案恰恰相反,美国大学不但不穷而且很富裕。虽然近年因各州政府的财政预算缩水,公立大学们开始感到时局艰难,但各州政府基本上都给公立大学进一步上涨学费开了绿灯。而私立大学们,就是在全美经济处于艰难困苦之际,各私立大学都是稳坐在钱山上巍然不到 (经济萧条当中,大家伙都听到过这家公司倒了,那家企业破产了。但好像很少听说哪家大学倒了)。 衡量大学的富裕,各大学的捐赠基金余额可能是个不错的指标。曾经在网上听耶鲁经济系的Bob Shiller教授提过,如果把耶鲁的捐赠基金平均分给在校的大学生们,每人可分近两百万美元。下面是美国十大明星学校的捐赠基金以及学生人数和学费情况: 第一,哈佛。2011年捐赠基金余额: $31.7 billion,较上年上涨15.1%;在校学生人数:21,000,每人可分$1.5 million;大学生学费: $52,652 (含食宿,下同)。 第二,耶鲁。2011年捐赠基金余额: $19.4 billion,较上年上涨16.3%;在校学生人数:11,875,每人可分$1.6 million;大学生学费: $52,700 (看来Shiller教授所言不虚)。 第三,德克萨斯大学(Univ. of Texas)。2011年捐赠基金余额: $17.2 billion,较上年上涨22.0%;在校学生人数:51,112(本部,分校不计),每人可分$0.3 million;大学生学费: $9,816 (州内),$32,594 (州外)。 第四,普林斯顿。2011年捐赠基金余额: $17.1 billion,较上年上涨18.9%;在校学生人数:7,859,每人可分$2.2 million;大学生学费: $54,780 (别看普林斯顿的学费比哈佛和耶鲁都略高,但学生们可能更喜欢普林斯顿。因为它对大学生实行零贷款政策,即某学生原本可以被批准享有低息贷款,这时普林斯顿会用捐赠基金的钱来抵消贷款部分,使得学生四年后毕业时,无还贷压力)。 第五,斯坦福。2011年捐赠基金余额: $16.5 billion,较上年上涨19.1%;在校学生人数:19,945,每人可分$0.8 million;大学生学费: $52,860。 第六,MIT(注意,这不是Made in Taiwan的头字母缩写)。2011年捐赠基金余额: $9.7 billion,较上年上涨16.8%;在校学生人数:10,894,每人可分$0.9 million;大学生学费: $40,460。 第七,密歇根大学(Univ. of Michigan, 在Ann Arbor的那个)。2011年捐赠基金余额: $7.8 billion,较上年上涨19.4%;在校学生人数:42,716,每人可分$0.2 million;大学生学费: $25,204(对住校学生)。 第八,哥伦比亚。2011年捐赠基金余额: $7.8 billion,较上年上涨19.5%;在校学生人数:28,221,每人可分$0.3 million;大学生学费: $59,208。 第九,西北大学(Northwestern Univ.)。2011年捐赠基金余额: $7.2 billion,较上年上涨20.8%;在校学生人数:20,284,每人可分$0.4 million;大学生学费: $40,223。 第十,德州农工(TEXAS AM)。2011年捐赠基金余额: $7.0 billion,较上年上涨22.0%;在校学生人数:49,861,每人可分$0.1 million;大学生学费: $19,035 (对德州居民)。 2011年美国的经济增长是蜗牛的步履,但这些大学的捐赠基金依然有20%左右的增长率。这些美国明星大学真可以说是富可敌国。 美国的一个机构叫做National Association of College and University Business Owners,它2011年完成了一项调查。在评估了839所大学后发现,美国有75所大学的捐赠基金余额在$1 billion以上。
1352 次阅读|13 个评论

手机版|小黑屋|Archiver|网站错误报告|爱吱声   

GMT+8, 2024-11-22 09:49 , Processed in 0.029624 second(s), 19 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

返回顶部