|
1 members (signalcurling),
226
guests, and
28
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
The problem is, for the free public university system to work, the whole high school system would have to be redesigned too. ... more trade / vocational schools, more selective college prep schools (public, not private costing you arm and leg). Bingo. Loving Jon's observations, however. LOL. I think that in some cases (see Irena's recent thread for details) this is a real winner of a plan, actually.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 282
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 282 |
Who defines the best of the best? The SAT? Grades? Recommendation letters? All you get in a system like this is an arms race weighted toward stressed-out tiger cubs. No thank you. What do you suggest as an alternative, Val? The tiger mom/cub arms race already exists today, but fortunately the percentage is relatively small. My kids attend a quite competitive school district and even here most kids just have fun during the summer. If college were free, the percentage would increase, but I don't see the US becoming like Korea or Japan. For better or worse, most parents don't emphasize education that highly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,299 Likes: 2 |
What do you suggest as an alternative, Val? worse, most parents don't emphasize education that highly. If you read the earlier messages in this thread, you'll see. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2 |
The tiger mom/cub arms race already exists today, but fortunately the percentage is relatively small. My kids attend a quite competitive school district and even here most kids just have fun during the summer. An arms race is a negative sum game, but Tiger Parents are creating opportunities for others. In my town there is a weekend school of Chinese culture with classes in Mandarin, English, math, and gymnastics. For every Tiger Mom there is a Tiger Dad, and I can say from experience that many Chinese fathers (with advanced degrees in math, the natural sciences, or engineering) are good math instructors. If you can't beat them, join them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,261 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,261 Likes: 8 |
What message does that give? College is for athletes? Yes, in terms of sport event ticket sales college athletics may be seen as a profit center whereas academics may be seen as a cost center for that institution. Economics.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856 |
What message does that give? College is for athletes? Yes, in terms of sport event ticket sales college athletics may be seen as a profit center whereas academics may be seen as a cost center for that institution. Economics. Basically, state and school support are listed in the Revenues column, and also in the Subsidy column, so if the subsidy is greater than profits, sports are a loss generator, not an income generator. By this rubric, only 23 of the 228 reporting Division I schools generate income from their sports programs. The overall economic impact is a $2B loss.
Last edited by Dude; 01/07/14 09:06 AM. Reason: ETA "reporting, because some schools (like privates) do not have to report their finances to the NCAA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,261 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,261 Likes: 8 |
Thank you, Dude, for illuminating how the US public Universities might significantly lower their costs, possibly affording free tuition: by eliminating collegiate sports and their associated economic losses.  [If collegiate sports were truly a loss, would they continue? No. institutions embark on an upward spiral of optional investment, leveraging ticket sales to drive fundraising and expenditures on infrastructure such as field improvements, addition of practice fields, better lighting, new fencing, enhanced scoreboards, additional stadium seating, luxury box seating, press box upgrades, etc.]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856 |
If collegiate sports were truly a loss, would they continue? No. If you say so, but the evidence says otherwise. institutions embark on an upward spiral of optional investment, leveraging ticket sales to drive fundraising and expenditures on infrastructure such as field improvements, addition of practice fields, better lighting, new fencing, enhanced scoreboards, additional stadium seating, luxury box seating, press box upgrades, etc. Yes, because these things are required to recruit the most sought-after athletes, in order to present the best program, and thus draw the most fan dollars. Such a collegiate sports arms race could be expected to drive escalating tuitions, fees, and state contributions, with no tangible benefits to education. Such an arms race could be expected to see very few winners, and a great many losers. Kinda like we're seeing now. However, colleges remain committed to their sports programs because they make the school look good, helping them in their recruiting for academic students. But recruiting costs don't end there, because prospective students are also drawn towards newer or upgraded facilities, and top ranks in US News rankings. So there's an arms race in those areas as well... leading to MORE escalating costs. The result is, once again, an arms race that yields escalating costs and an increasing number of losers. The only way to win the game is not to play.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 2 |
According to a recent paper ************************************************ http://www.nber.org/digest/nov12/w18196.htmlThe Benefits of College Athletic Success Unexpected regular season football victories by NCAA Division I-A schools increase alumni athletic donations … and applications. In The Benefits of College Athletic Success: an Application of the Propensity Score Design with Instrumental Variables (NBER Working Paper No. 18196), Michael Anderson finds that unexpected regular season football victories by NCAA Division I-A schools increase alumni athletic donations by $134,000. These victories also increase applications by 1 percent, and they improve a college's 25th percentile SAT score by 1.8 points. Anderson uses data on bookmaker spreads to estimate the probability of winning each football game, and thus to identify unexpected success. He then estimates the effect of unexpected success on donations and applications. He suggests that his observed effects likely operate through one of two channels. First, a team that plays well may be more enjoyable to watch, and if alumni and prospective students spend more time watching a college's team, they may feel more connected to the school. Second, fans and alumni may enjoy winning itself. Anderson notes that a simultaneous investment of $1 million in every one of these teams probably would generate smaller effects on donations and applications than the surprise victories he studies, because team won/loss records are a zero sum game and improving the level of overall play would not create any more wins for a given team. About 8 percent of the teams in Anderson's sample improve their season wins by five games over a one-year period. Improvements of that magnitude increase alumni athletic donations by $682,000 (28 percent), applications by 677 (5 percent), and 25th percentile SAT scores by 9 points (1 percent). --Linda Gorman ************************************************ successful sports teams attract students and donations, so revenue from ticket sales and TV rights do not capture the full economic benefits to a school of sports teams.
|
|
|
|
|
