Paper: Nearly $2 Billion in Taxpayer Dollars Go to Sub-Par Selective, Public Universities
By Allie Bidwell, Communications Staff
Taxpayers provide funding for public higher education because the institutions are intended not only to educate students and help prepare them for the workforce, but also to provide other benefits to society at large through research and social mobility. But a significant amount of taxpayer dollars are being funneled to selective public institutions that fulfill neither of those broader duties, according to a new paper from The Brookings Institution.
The paper evaluated 342 selective, four-year public universities, not including those with very specific missions, such as historically black colleges and universities, public liberal arts colleges, or military-oriented institutions. Using tax data from the Equality of Opportunity Project at Stanford University to measure social mobility, and an independent ranking from the Carnegie Foundation to measure research activity, the authors found that about 25 percent of the colleges failed on both measures, performing low in both social mobility and research activity.
"One might hope that schools with little success in promoting opportunity make up for it with their research output," the study said. "Unfortunately, there seems to be little negative correlation between research output and success in generating mobility. The majority of low-mobility universities also produce little to no research."
Another 17 percent of the institutions were categorized as "labs" – ranking high in research activity, and low in mobility. More than one-third of the institutions (38.3 percent) were dubbed "ladders" that ranked high in mobility and low in research activity. Finally, about 20 percent of the institutions were found to be leaders in both categories.
What's more, because the share of relatively affluent students in these institutions is so high – almost one-third come from families with incomes in the top quintile – nearly $2 billion in taxpayer subsidies go to wealthier students at "laggard" universities each year, the paper found. Fewer than 10 percent of students enrolled at the so-called "laggard" institutions come from families with incomes in the bottom quintile.
"Such expenditures seem almost indefensible," the study said. "Why should taxpayers pay to send relatively affluent students to public universities that both fail to produce research and fail to facilitate social mobility? There is a strong case that this money could be spent more wisely."
The authors argued that approaches to reforming public higher education should focus more on supporting alternative paths outside of the traditional four-year degree, such as apprenticeships and community colleges.
"A university education is a wonderful thing. But there are many wonderful things in life, and the government doesn't need to pay for all of them," the paper said. "We are a very long way from the ideal of higher education as the 'great equalizer,' with colleges acting as engines of mobility, leveling the playing field for each generation. Rather, public higher education too often provides yet another chance for the upper middle class to engage in opportunity hoarding at the expense of the taxpayer—and even worse, at the expense of students from low-income families."
Publication Date: 7/19/2017
David H | 7/19/2017 9:46:17 AM
Wealthy students aren't getting federal or state need-based aid regardless of where they attend.
You must be logged in to comment on this page.