These are my notes, copy pasted from the studies themselves for superior transparency.
Some of my personal opinions are sprinkled left and right, but they are rather easy to spot.
(1)Shin, C.S., & Milton,S.(2007) Student response to tuition increase by academic majors: Empirical grounds for a cost-related tuition policy. Springer Science+Business Media , 55. P. 719-734. DOI 10.1007/s10734-007-9085-1 Published online: 22 July 2007
(1)Look at effect of t.i. By student majors. One tuition-increase strategy is to charge different tuition
rates for different academic majors, corresponding to the differences in actual expenditures by the college or university. The situation has worsened over time, because college expenditures have risen more
rapidly than inflation as a result of increased faculty salaries, administrative professionalization,
technology development, and other factors such as utility costs (St. John 1992).
(1)Under a cost-related tuition policy, policymakers pay special attention to actual college
expenditures, which differ according to unit of credit hours, major, level of student, etc. A
simple method for designing a cost-related tuition mechanism is to set student tuition based
on a certain percentage of college expenditures.
(1)a comprehensive,nationwide cost study known as the Delaware Study was launched by the 1998
Higher Education Act (Middaugh et al. 2003).
(1)We define tuition elasticity as the change in student enrollment caused by the change in
tuition
(1)effect of tuition increase is different on enrolment than financial aid
(1)For instance, the tuition levels at competing colleges might affect a college’s enrollment (cross-price effects) as much or more than the absolute tuition level at the college itself. Such cross-price effects have been reported in many studies leading us to hypothesize that students will stay at the college at which they are enrolled (even if the college increases tuition) if the tuition level is lower than that of competing colleges and if students are able to pay. Thus, students might not be sensitive to tuition changes as long as their own college’s tuition is relatively
cheaper than competing colleges.
(1)Some researchers (e.g., St. John and Starkey 1995) have proposed that newly enrolled students respond differently to tuition changes than currently enrolled students
(persistent students
(1)Students in high-earning majors such as Engineering, for example, might be willing to pay higher tuition because they expect high returns in the form of their future earnings (in this paper, we study private rates of returns, not social rates of return).
(1)demonstrating that earning differentials are closely related to enrollment in different majors.
(1)That is, disciplines expected to result in high rates of return might be less sensitive to tuition level or tuition increase since students in such disciplines expect relatively high returns for their investment in their studies
(1)From a purely economic point of view, students in disciplines that cost colleges less, who pay the same amount as other students, are treated unfairly by the state tuition policy. On the contrary, students in high-cost
disciplines who pay the same amount as other students benefit more.4 Based on this argument, we hypothesized that students in low-cost disciplines would be more sensitive to tuition or tuition increase than high-cost majors.
(1)Financial aid expand students’ playability and have been reported to have positive effects on college enrollment (Heller 1999; St. John and Starkey 1995). Instructional expenditures, we believe, are highly related to
instructional quality and students’ satisfaction with their college education. The opportunity to live in a student dormitory, especially during the freshman year, has been identified as having positive effects on student retention as well (e.g., Astin 1997; Sheridan et al.
1994). We believe newly enrolled students are sensitive to tuition level; and persistent students are sensitive to tuition increase.)
(1)The dependent variable, enrollment, is defined as the full-time enrollment of a college or an academic discipline in 2004
(1)Of the nine academic disciplines available in the IPEDS database, we omitted three that only a limited number of institutions offer, that is, Medicine, Law, and Dentistry.
(1)Students were elastic to tuition, but not to tuition increase
(1)The coefficients of the tuition effects on enrollment mean that colleges have one percent higher enrollment in 2004 if their tuition is $100 lower than other colleges, controlling for the other variables. The results imply that students are sensitive to tuition level in general, but not to yearly tuition increase.
(1)Some part of this explanation is supported by the data, which suggest that only half of all the college applicants received admission from a college in 2004 (our calculation based on IPEDS data).
(1)In addition, as long as students believe that the return from a college education is much greater than the cost; then small changes in tuition will not affect demand.
(1)According to recent data from the U.S. Census, the mean earnings difference between college graduates and high school graduates has increased from $17,500 in 1998 to $23,828 in 2001 (Shin and Milton 2006).
(1)Overall, the results suggest that students have different tuition elasticity depending on their academic major.
(1)We hypothesized that students in high rate of return majors are not sensitive to tuition increases because they expect greater benefits from their college education. This hypothesis has been supported in this study
(1)In addition, Ontario, Canada, where public colleges increased tuition without losing students in Law, Dentistry, and Medicine, applied differential tuition rates for academic disciplines (Frenette 2005).
(2)Kepple, T.(2007). Tuition and student debt levels reflect National Priorities. Taken from universitybusiness.com, published in October.
(2)tuition rises at a rate faster than inflation. Th e fi rst is that there are real cost increases associated with organizations that are both personnel and technology intense—
(2)A college, by contrast, buys technology to stay competitive, and it increases cost
(2)Th ird, the federal government has backed away signifi cantly from its commitment to college fi nancial aid. Th is has required all colleges and universities to redirect their own limited resources toward making up much of that loss.
(2)Few baby boomers, even those who attended private colleges, graduated with student loan debt
(2)Th is is a dramatic shift in priorities. In essence, the baby boom generation, which benefi ted from a strong federal higher education subsidy, has been unwilling to provide the same benefi t to its own children.
(2)Th e National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education in 1998 concluded that for public universities the correlation between tuition increases and government aid was actually inverse. “For public four-year institutions, the single most important factor associated with tuition increases has been decreasing revenue from government appropriations,” the report said
(2)higher education is increasingly perceived as a private benefi t for those who take advantage of it and not as a public benefi t to the nation at large
(2)College students who start their working lives with signifi - cant debt are more likely to disregard altruistic but lower-income careers in favor of jobs with a high monetary payoff that may be less beneficial to their own psyches and to society as well.
(3)Kurz, K.(2011). Setting Price in the New Economic Climate: Considerations beyond the Institution's competitive market position. Money Matters, Taken UniversityBusiness.com. Published online January 2011.
(3)For example, if your sticker and net price position are already high relative to primary competitors with
similar “prestige” profiles, increasing tuition more aggressively than they are likely to (based on their recent increase trends) could result in a drop-off in demand for your institution
(3)Have retention rates declined in the last two years among students with high levels of unmet need (after grant)? If so, it may be necessary to buffer your next tuition increase by increasing levels for that population
(3)county unemployment rates are consistently emerging as statistically significant drivers of enrollment behavior
(3)Given the economic climate, some private institutions are wondering if they should actually cut their price. 1- increase capacity(more students) 2. Almost all students should be receiving institutional scholarships or grants in excess of the amount of the proposed tuition reduction. That way, when prices are reduced, the financial aid program can be adjusted as well, so that the vast majority of current students would be paying the same net price as they were before the cut. This makes a price cut much less risky, as net revenues will be minimally impacted, even if enrollments do not grow as much as expected. 3. The institution needs to be prepared to invest some money in marketing the new price in a manner that will reinforce the quality and benefits of the educational experience to ensure the change is not seen as a “fire sale.”
(my question)is concordia at undercapacity? If it is why are we not lowering our tuition?
(4)Easton, S. T., Rockerbie, D.W.(2008). Optimal Government Subsidies to Universities in the face of tuition and enrolment Constraints. Education Economics, Vol 14 no 2; 191-201.
(4)students in British Columbia have seen tuition fees rise by almost 60% during 2002–2004 (although fees were well below the national average before the increases). Increases in enrollments at Canadian public universities are largely determined endogenously by the provincial governments based on the operating grants provided. If the grant is not sufficient to allow the university to cover its costs at the imposed tuition ceiling, the university must ration the entry of new students.
(4)An inability to charge market clearing tuition fees and increasing education demand are putting Canadian universities in a difficult situation.
(4)Contributing to the increase in demand is the falling drop-out rate in both university and high school. More students who manage to enroll in a Canadian university are finishing their degrees. The secondary school drop-out rate fell from 18% in 1991 to only 12% in 1999 across Canada.2 Employers are demanding workers with higher education
(4)Government and universities responded to rapid increases in demand in the 1960s by building new universities and colleges and by expanding existing ones. Since that time, the post-secondary infrastructure in Canada has grown very modestly, despite large increases in demand in the 1990s
(4)Besides hiring new faculty, budget dollars are also needed to replace and expand a crumbling infrastructure.(why should we have to pay for other people's use of the university? Its like buying a used car and being obliged to pay for the damages the previous driver did to it)
(4)If the private rate of return to a university degree exceeds the social rate of return, the student should bear the cost of tuition (Dickson, Milne, and Murrell 1996).
(4)Government subsidies can be used as a form of insurance against uncertainty of future employment that students cannot purchase in financial markets (Wigger and von Weizsacker 2001).
(4)Perhaps the most efficient method is to allow universities to charge the marketclearing tuition price and provide direct government subsidies to students (Levin 1990).
(4)Examples of measuring and determining the most efficient use of scarce university funds are Caballero (2004) and McMillan and Datta (1998).
(4)Operating grants to Canadian universities are typically composed of two parts. The largest share of the total operating grant (90% in the province of Alberta) is based on a weighted student enrolment where different weights are used for various academic programs (graduate programs receive larger weights) and some consideration is given to the size of the university (whether it can achieve economies of scale).
(4)The fact that many universities ration new applications using some sort of standard suggests that government subsidies are not sufficient to allow the universities to meet the market demand in Canada.Data for Ontario universities for the period 1991–2000 suggest that the problem is pervasive (Mueller and Rockerbie 2005a/b).7
Universities must resort to rationing devices, such as grade point average, letters of recommendation, interviews, and so forth, to trim down the applicants into those who are accepted.Governments do provide subsidies (operating grants) to Canadian universities in exchange for imposing tuition fee limits, but if rationing is pervasive then clearly the subsidies are too low to clear the market
(4)Deregulation will raise tuition fees but will also increase access for students...(but if the whole reason why unis are not admitting more students is infrastructure limitations...how will higher tuition increase access....) (i also dont get how more students costs the university more money.....)
(4)university and government policies are often targeted towards other objectives
that are considered valuable to university students, faculty, administrators, governments and
society. Tuckman and Chang (1990) compile an extensive list of such objectives
(5)Dotterweich, D. & Barylajr, E.A.(2005). Non-Resident Tuition and Enrolment in Higher Education: Implications for Tuition Pricing. Education Economics, Vol. 13, no 4; 375-385.
(5)Invariably, there is a significant positive correlationbetween private IHEs and both the non-resident enrollment percentage and tuition.However, some studies have found a positive correlation between non-resident tuition and the enrollment percentage. This leads to an intriguing alternate theory that high non-resident tuition might be perceived as a signal of high quality that results in a higher income stream upon graduation
(5)Hopkins (1974) uses statewide data and finds that geographic accessibility to private IHEs influences enrollment across all IHE types. The evidence also indicates that higher tuition at private and public IHEs reduces enrollment.
(5)Hsing and Chang (1996) use a national data set and find an inverse between tuition and private college enrolment. Higher unemployment rates also tend to increase enrollment, while the opportunity cost of giving up higher wages has an opposite effect.
(5)This evidence generally suggests that the non-resident enrollment behavior of students attending public and private IHEs might best be understood as comprised of separate submarkets based on tuition deciles(does not apply to our situation).
(6)Rich P.(2003). Military dangles big bonuses in bid to attract debt-weary med students. Canadian Medical Association or its Licensors. 169(9). p.947
(6)hopes the bonuses will help it cash in on increasing student concern about their debt load (CMAJ 2003;169[5]:457-8). Students who sign on must wear a uniform for 4 years after completing their residency in family medicine
(6)Kile says he delivers a straightforward message when he meets with medical students. Because many of them are facing “mortgage-sized” debt loads, he says, “we’re saying, ‘why not come and work for us for 4 years, and come out at the other end with no debt?’ ”(Lt. Colonel Jim Kile, med recruiter)
Other argument in the same paper
(6)The Canadian Federation of Medical Students (CFMS) says the impact rising tuition fees are having on accessibility to medical education is the best argument for challenging fee deregulation.
(6)The CFMS has decided to tackle the issue at the federal level, working with federal politicians to develop a national access strategy instead of leaving the decisions up to provincial governments. Delegates endorsed a plan to coordinate a campaign over the coming year. Key steps include the appointment of a CFMS coordinator to deal with the access issue and plans for a national lobby day on Parliament Hill. In addition, the CFMS wants to develop a database for each province and to try and gather data to support its contention that as tuition fees rise, so do the minimum incomes of the families of medical students.
(my notes)This was in 2003....can we look at the campaign they did? How it worked? What they have learned from it etc etc?
(7)Marcucci, P. Johnstone D.B. & Ngolovoi, M.(2008). Higher Educational Cost-Sharing, Dual Track Tuition Fees, and Higher Educational Access: The East African Experience. Peabody Journal of Education, 83: 101-116.
(7)In response, most counties have turned to forms of private revenue supplementation for the support of their expanding higher educational needs—the most important of which is cost sharing, or the shift in higher educational costs from being borne mainly or even entirely by governments, or taxpayers, to being shared by
governments, parents, and students (Johnstone, 1986, 2003, 2004a).
(7)A particular form of tuition fee policy that we have labeled dual track appears to achieve some real revenue supplementation but with problematic impacts on equity (Marcucci & Johnstone, 2007). Dual-track tuition policies are characterized by a highly restricted, “merit-based” entry to free or very low-cost higher education, with other applicants not so admitted permitted entry on a fee-paying basis.
(7)An obvious question raised by dual-track tuition policies is their impact on equity. Because entrance to the limited number of “free” places is by highly competitive examination, conventional academic wisdom would assume that the children of the well-educated and the privileged, with their access to the best secondary schools and all of the other advantages of their family cultural capital, would be disproportionately represented—even though these parents would almost certainly pay some tuition fees if necessary
(7)However, survey data (Carrol, 2004) suggest that the dual-track tuition policies do not increase the access
of traditionally underrepresented groups given the absence of student financial assistance programs such as means tested grants and student loan programs and that, in fact, the private entry scheme may even reinforce existing inequities in participation at the university.There is little socioeconomic difference between the government and the privately sponsored students, with both coming from relatively affluent families. In the absence of a student loan program, enrollments are limited to those students whose families can afford to finance all the related costs of higher education.Some students who do not qualify for government sponsorship apply to private universities or diploma granting institutions or go abroad rather than opting for the fee-paying places. Others who cannot afford the self-paying options try to raise money for admission at a later time or reapply the following year hoping to qualify for government sponsorship. Many opt to start working instead (Carrol, 2004).
(7)In Kenya, there is tension between the Module I(gov sponsored smart kids) and Module II(who can afford it) students. The government-sponsored students often view the self-sponsored students as unqualified and allowed to study only because they can afford to pay. Students argue that facilities are not adequate to accommodate such a large number of fee-paying students (Otieno, 2004).
(7)In Tanzania, although there has been a significant increase in undergraduate enrollments in the past 10 years (see Table 5), with the University of Dar es Salaam alone growing from 3,146 students in 1993–94 to 14,221 students in 2003–04 (Bloom et al., 2005), only a small part of this growth (see Table 6) has been in self-sponsored students10
(7)However, it was observed that in general in Tanzania students from better-off families disproportionately
undertake higher education (Johnstone, 2004b).
(8)Johnston C.(200?). Tuition fees continue upward spiral, hit new high at Western. Jmac, 164; p. 1610 *** This is a scanned newspaper article...or a scanned article – The quality is poor so the fine prints are impossible to discern. My apologies for the limited source information.
(8)“the OMA(ontario medical association) is worried that high fees will not only deter some students but will lead to changes in their choice of residency programs. Instead of following their interests, students may specialize in an area they can complete quicker, or one that has the potential to provide a higher income”
(8)students across canada are protesting high tuition fees
(My notes)(8)jason kur was then a 4th year student of uni of Alberta, served then as the Canadian fed of med students president...he kept track of other increases across canada
(9)Neill, C.(2009). Tuition Fees and the Demand for University Places. Economics of Education Review. 28; 561-570.
(9)Surveys of this work, in Leslie and Brinkman (1987) and Heller (1997), find that an increase of $1000 in tuition fees typically reduces enrolments by between 3 and 6 percentage points, a relatively inelastic response
Kane (1994) uses CPS data on 18–19-year-old male high school graduates to estimate the sensitivity of demand for education in public 2- and 4-year colleges to state average tuition fees. He estimates that total college enrolments fall by around 3.5 percentage pointswhenfees increase by $1000.Cameron and Heckman (2001) obtain similar overall estimates
(9)approach. Christofides et al. (2001) use data from the Survey of Consumer Finances, and find that university
tuition fees have little effect on overall post-secondary enrolments.
(9)Coelli (2005) finds a large effect on enrolments of youth from low income families.
(9)Estimates of the effect of tuition fees on the demand for enrolments derived from Eq. (1) will be biased and inconsistent if shocks to demand also affect tuition fees(basically if demand affects tuition...DUURRR)
(9)Kane, Orszag, and Gunter (2003) point to evidence that budgetary pressures caused by Medicaid spending contribute to declining per capita spending on post-secondary education and higher tuition fees at public colleges in the US. Anecdotally, recent reductions in tuition fees in Newfoundland were justified in part as a response to an anticipated decline in enrolments. Recent fee increases in British Columbia have been described as a response to demand pressures.
(9)But higher post-secondary enrolments can increase the budgetary cost of education subsidies, and encourage governments to allowfees to rise.
(9)fee data for colleges and other types of post-secondary institution are not available for a sufficiently long time
period
(9)part-time attendance is quite low, resulting insample sizes too small for valid inference
(9)Tuition fees are clearly affected by the political party in power. The NDP is associated with fees that are lower by $270 than those when the omitted Conservative Party (PC) is in power – over 10 per cent of the average fee. The Parti Quebecois (PQ) is associated with fees $200 lower than those of the PC, and the Liberal Party $100 lower
(9)The point estimates show that a $1000 increase in tuition fees reduces the enrolment rate by 2–3 percentage
points. Given this estimate, had the C$2000 average tuition fee increase of the 1990s not occurred, the enrolment rate would have been 23–25 per cent in 2002, rather than the actual figure of 19 per cent.
(9)The largest effect on any group is for those whose parents have some post-secondary education but not a university degree, for whom a $1000 increase in fees reduces enrolment rates by just over 4 percentage points.
(9)tuition fees have a greater effect on the net benefit calculation the lower is the educational background of students, but that relatively fewstudents fromthe lowest educational background are close to the cutoff points and so are relatively unaffected.
(9)The result that the effects of fees may be larger for those who have not yet decided to enter university, compared with those who are currently in attendance is consistent with recent evidence from Canada that large increases in tuition fees have little effect on the propensity of students to drop out of university (Johnson, in press), and with evidence from the US that the elasticity of college enrolment is larger for younger students (Card & Lemieux, 2001).
(9)Political parties that are associated with lower tuition fees not seem to introduce other policy changes that increase overall resources going to universities. The PQ is estimated to have lower spending per 18–24-year old than the PC. The Liberals, NDP and Social Credit are all estimated to spend around $30 per capita less on student support than the PC. The only case where a political party is influential for faculty per capita is the NDP, which is associated with fewer faculty per 18–24-year old. The NDP and Social Credit are also associated with slightly worse labour market conditions than the other parties.
(9)Quebec is an outlier among the provinces for several reasons. Completion of a college diploma is required prior to university entry, unlike in other provinces. Tuition fees in Quebec have been frozen for the past 25 years, with the exception of 4 years in the early 1990s. Language constraints may lead to less inter-provincial mobility than is the case with other provinces. Finally, its political spectrum is quite different from that of the rest of the country. Given these features, the tuition responsiveness in Quebec may be systematically different from other provinces.
(9)If anything, then, the results in Tables 4 and 5 likely underestimate the effect of fees on the demand for university education in Canada.(what probably happened is that the data of quebec probably minimized the statistical results of the rest of canada. 1000$ increase on 120 people is smaller than 1000 $ increase on 100 people...with the extra 20 no changing their post secondary demand behaviour,while being added in the same model)
(9)An alternative possibility is that the Canadian higher education market is in constant excess demand, so that although higher fees may discourage some students observed enrolments do not drop. If that were the case, then the strategy described here could not expect to uncover reliable evidence on the price effect on the demand for university places.(This is my view)
(9)The results are the opposite – there is a larger negative response to fee changes when cohort size is relatively large. This suggests that rigid supply constraints are not a key factor explaining the estimated enrolment effect of fees(the data is available on request....I am not sure i understand what he means here, but he says some evidence goes against what I just said I thought was going on)
(9)The system estimates point to enrolment demand declining by between 2.5 and 5 percentage points with a
C$1000 increase in tuition fees, even allowing that financial aid may increase with higher fees
(9)estimates that control for financial aid suggest that overall enrolments would have been at least 5 percentage points higher in 2002, or 24 per cent rather than 19 per cent.
(9)The effect is smallest for children from the most advantaged families.(if we can argue the fact that the middle class has been dropping the soap and enjoying prison love for the past 30 years, and link it all with how this policy is further fuckin everyone....political gold also?)
(9)There are indications that fee increases at the time students first become eligible to enter university have a larger effect on enrolments than fee increases in later years. This suggests that either costs of university entrance or benefits to completion of a degree may be important in explaining the profile of responses to tuition fees, and may explain in part the different estimates of the response of enrolments to fee increases found in studies using different samples.
(10)Belanger, J., Bowen,F, & Desbien N.(2011). Soutien aux enseignants – Pas juste une question de ressources. LeDevoir.com. Article written June 1st.
(10)Avec le niveau de qualité existant dans le systèmed'éducation actuel, l'ajout d'argent, s'il n'est pas clairement ciblé pour la mise en oeuvre d'interventions novatrices ou constituant une amélioration des pratiques en place, n'apporte rien à la qualité de l'éducation. Donc des mesures aussi générales que l'ajout de ressources professionnelles sans préciser à quelle fin elles seront utilisées, ne mènera à rien.
(11)Usher, A. (2005). A Little Knowledge is A Dangerous Thing: How Perceptions of Costs and Benefits
Affect Access to Education. Toronto, ON: Educational Policy Institute
(11)their bias : The mission of EPI is to expand educational opportunity for low-income and other historically underrepresented students through high-level research and analysis.we believe that the doors of opportunity can be further opened for all students, resulting in an increase in the number of students prepared for, enrolled in, and
completing post secondary education.
(11)• The average annual income differential between high school and university graduates ($27,191) is underestimated by Canadians in general ($5,337) and by low-income Canadians in particular ($4,885).
(11) Drawing on work such as Heller (1999) and earlier examinations of student price response co-efficients (SPRCs) such as Leslie and Brinkman (1988), the case has been made that even small changes in net cost can have measurable effects on participation, and that these changes in participation are disproportionately concentrated among poorer students
(11)Simply put, the United States has spare capacity in its higher education system and other countries do not. In situations where capacity is constrained, it is unlikely that changes in cost will affect aggregate demand in the way suggested by SPRC models (though it may still affect the social composition of demand).
(11) “popular knowledge” of the costs and benefits of higher education are drastically out of kilter with reality, making higher education seem far less attractive than it actually is. Indeed, the extent to which perceptions differ from reality would appear to be so large that they may form a separate form of barrier to education all on their own.
(11)er to education that receives the most emphasis is the cost of education. Boothby and McMullen (2001) show that 36 percent of Canadian high school graduates who do not go on to post-secondary education within two years cite “financial reasons” as a barrier to post-secondary.post-secondary education (but who still choose not to attend) are excluded. It is not clear that YITS respondents who cite “financial barriers” for non-attendance in post-secondary are actually referring to the cost of tuition as the barrier; after all, close to of thirty per cent of high-school drop-outs also cite “financial barriers” as a reason for not completing secondary school.
(11)r understanding of the term “financial barriers”. As Finnie (2004) has noted, at least conceptually, two types of cost-barriers exist: One relates to cash constraints (i.e. this purchase is a good deal, but it is beyond my means at the moment) and the other relates to cost-benefit analysis (i.e. this costs too much relative to the benefit received).
(11)Is this assumption true? As Junor and Usher (2004) noted, the data presently available to Canadian researchers is insufficient to permit us to determine which of the two cost barriers is the more important deterrent to access to PSE
(11)Anders-Bellamy (1993) has observed that Canadian youth do not rationally calculate cost-benefit ratios when making decisions regarding post-secondary education
(11)COGEM (2002) noted in its study of Canadians in their mid-20s who had not participated in PSE “many participants [in the COGEM study] had concluded that PSE was not worthwhile to them because the cost was too high relative to the expected benefits and the advantages they could reasonably expect to obtain from it”.
(11)Higher education, given the long preparation period and lack of close substitutes is consequently unlikely to be susceptible to short-term changes in tuition.
(11)This same logic suggests that changes in tuition are more likely to affect young people indirectly, by altering parents’ views about the desirability and affordability of post-secondary education in the long-term and thus
their likelihood of raising or lowering their children’s expectations about post-secondary education.
(11)it is not enough to examine young people’s (i.e. the “purchaser’s”) views on costs and benefits, but that of their parents as well, and that in fact it may be the views of the parents that are ultimately more important in the equation.
(11)Families with income under 30k have the higher false estimation of how much tuition costs....
(11)Survey respondents were also asked the following question: “According to the 2001 Census, the average income for a high school graduate is $34,632. What would you guess the average university graduate makes?” Canadians gave a median estimate that university graduates make $39,967, or a mere $5,337 more than high school graduates (see Table 2). The 2001 Census reported that the average university graduate in Canada made $61,823; that is to say $27,191 more than the average high school graduate. In other words, the average Canadian underestimates the actual benefit of university education by a factor of five (me, they are stupid – they created a set point bias with their question of “ given that secondary win xxk per year, how much do you think grad make? Fuckin idiots.)
(11)Canadians from low-income families tend to ascribe lower premiums to a university education than other Canadians do. Those with family incomes under $30,000 estimated the average university graduate’s income at $4,885 more than the average high school graduate, compared to a median estimate of $6,962 more by Canadians with family incomes of $60,000 or more
(11)t. Assume an average tuition cost of $5,000 per year for four years, to take into account annual tuition rises, making the price of a four-year degree $20,000. Assume foregone earnings of $15,000 per year of study, which
is roughly equal to eight months of revenue from a full-time job at minimum wage(weird assumptions,easy to disagree with)
(11)Finally, for the purposes of the calculation, assume that the current income differential between university graduates and high school graduates remains constant at $27,191.(...)
This study equals post secondary education with university.
(11)This demonstrates that, on average, Canadians do not appear to believe that university has very high returns at all
(11)In other words, low-income Canadians, on average, perceive that returns to university are actually negative (see Figure 4). Therefore, given what we know Canadians believe about the costs and benefits of post-secondary education, it would appear that a decision not to attend post-secondary education is completely rational from a cost-benefit point of view
(11)Poor information, therefore, can best be characterized as an income-based, non-financial barrier.
No comments:
Post a Comment