MUScoop

I'm excited about the mass email Wojo sent out about the Al renovations. Anyone hear what might be in the works?

On our way to SLUesque 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 06, 2014, 01:51:52 PM
On our way to SLUesque 

what do you mean by that?

Gettin' new crappers too. The last 2 coachin' dudes plugged them all up, hey?

Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 06, 2014, 04:39:54 PM
Gettin' new crappers too. The last 2 coachin' dudes plugged them all up, hey?

Glad the stench left with them!

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 06, 2014, 01:50:23 PM
Wojo mentioned in his mass email last week that MU is going to be looking at renovating the Al's locker room. I have heard that this will also include an in house kitchen for the players and the hiring of a professional dietitian.

Have also heard that long term the administration is looking for space where the can house the other sports. They want to make the Al strictly for basketball and volleyball.

The school would like to build a field house so various outdoor teams could train indoors, this would also include locker room and training facilities. I think it is a bit beyond our budget constraints but a great idea.

Quote from: Texas Western on July 06, 2014, 03:50:27 PM
what do you mean by that?

I would point you toward CBB's use of teal in his post to indicate its sarcastic nature.  In other words, MU's drop in athletic statute to the level of SLU is greatly exaggerated.

Quote from: Texas Western on July 06, 2014, 03:50:27 PM
what do you mean by that?

The predictions of our demise and a landing spot equivalent to Saint Louis (who has made the NCAAs the last two years) was greatly overblown.  MU continues to spend a lot of money on basketball.  The previous coach felt like he couldn't get certain kids to MU because of the dorms, etc.   Many ways to win, many ways to skin the cat, all types of players, individuals, quality hoops players that will want to come to MU.

Read: Goodbye Old Gym (and maybe the Rec?)

Multilevel facilities on a campus already boxed in.

Where else can MU go?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Marquette+University/@43.0357884,-87.9291522,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x55bd51582acc120b

Quote from: 77ncaachamps on July 07, 2014, 03:34:29 AM
Read: Goodbye Old Gym (and maybe the Rec?)

Multilevel facilities on a campus already boxed in.

Where else can MU go?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Marquette+University/@43.0357884,-87.9291522,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x55bd51582acc120b

MU has a long history of buying up buildings, tearing them down, and building what they want in there place.

Quote from: 77ncaachamps on July 07, 2014, 03:34:29 AM
Read: Goodbye Old Gym (and maybe the Rec?)

Multilevel facilities on a campus already boxed in.

Where else can MU go?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Marquette+University/@43.0357884,-87.9291522,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x55bd51582acc120b

There's zero indication that either are slated for the wrecking ball.  The next building razed is the old Jes Res.  That'll become green space while the Schroeder parking lot goes away replaced by the new Jes Res.  I believe but am not certain that the road dubbed 'Shamu' will remain.

Quote from: jsglow on July 07, 2014, 08:19:40 AM
There's zero indication that either are slated for the wrecking ball.  The next building razed is the old Jes Res.  That'll become green space while the Schroeder parking lot goes away replaced by the new Jes Res.  I believe but am not certain that the road dubbed 'Shamu' will remain.

I agree that I don't believe there is currently any plans to tear down other buildings but the university has always found ways to build what they want despite limited availability of space. (i.e. New Engineering Building, The Al, 2nd parking garage, Campus Town expansion)

This sounds like The Fieldhouse that Larry Williams wanted to have built so that soccer & lacrosse among other sports doesn't have to practice all the time in cold weather.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 06, 2014, 04:39:54 PM
Gettin' new crappers too. The last 2 coachin' dudes plugged them all up, hey?

Maybe they can get some Japanese Squat Toliets?

(http://connectere.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/squat_toilet02.jpg)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/How_to_Use_the_Japanese-style_toilet.jpg)

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 06, 2014, 01:50:23 PM
Have also heard that long term the administration is looking for space where the can house the other sports. They want to make the Al strictly for basketball and volleyball.

Is that not already the case? What other sports practice in the Al?

Quote from: 77ncaachamps on July 07, 2014, 03:34:29 AM
Read: Goodbye Old Gym (and maybe the Rec?)

Multilevel facilities on a campus already boxed in.

Where else can MU go?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Marquette+University/@43.0357884,-87.9291522,16z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x55bd51582acc120b

Lots of places MU can go, they just need to buy up property, tear down and build...what they've already been doing the last 20 years.

Tons of space to the west and north of campus.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 07, 2014, 08:49:36 AM
Is that not already the case? What other sports practice in the Al?

The other sports have offices, lockers, and various support resources in the Al.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 09:00:47 AM
The other sports have offices, lockers, and various support resources in the Al.

Gotcha. I thought you meant actual practice facilities.

My guesses for future construction projects.

With the Jes Res coming down, that will offer a lot of green space. But not enough to build a significant building. I think McCormick comes down with it. The administration has been waiting a long time to get rid of it and build new. While I love the tradition of McCormick, it is one of the lowest quality facilities that I have ever seen....and I work in higher education. Once that is down, they will have enough room to build a "super dorm." It will allow the university to expand enrollment and create a new high quality living space (maybe the new home for athletes?).

I also think the rec needs to come down. Another extremely sub par facility. You could build new with enough space to shove winter practice facilities in there for the other sports. That may require tennis to be on the chopping block though

Is there plans to build 2 or 3 basketball courts outside?  Campus missing that!

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 09:06:36 AM
My guesses for future construction projects.

With the Jes Res coming down, that will offer a lot of green space. But not enough to build a significant building. I think McCormick comes down with it. The administration has been waiting a long time to get rid of it and build new. While I love the tradition of McCormick, it is one of the lowest quality facilities that I have ever seen....and I work in higher education. Once that is down, they will have enough room to build a "super dorm." It will allow the university to expand enrollment and create a new high quality living space (maybe the new home for athletes?).

I also think the rec needs to come down. Another extremely sub par facility. You could build new with enough space to shove winter practice facilities in there for the other sports. That may require tennis to be on the chopping block though

The problem with tearing down McCormick is where are you going to put however many 100's of freshmen who are housed there. I don't see that dorm coming down until a new one is in place. Same goes for the Rec Center. You have to have some athletic facility for the normal students in the interim.

Would have to find new places to build the new facilities and then tear down and re-purpose the old land.

Quote from: MUMonster03 on July 07, 2014, 09:10:02 AM
The problem with tearing down McCormick is where are you going to put however many 100's of freshmen who are housed there. I don't see that dorm coming down until a new one is in place. Same goes for the Rec Center. You have to have some athletic facility for the normal students in the interim.

Would have to find new places to build the new facilities and then tear down and re-purpose the old land.

It takes some doing but it can absolutely be done. Or you get rid of the sophomore live on requirement (we are one of a very few who still require this) and you move them all to Schroeder. You make up for the lost sophomores by expanding freshmen enrollment. (Which would allow for lowered tuition)

To get this back on topic though what are some of the things at the Al that need to be updated? The facility is over a decade old now. We have been able to use it as a great tool for recruiting but if we don't stay on top of keeping it up to date it will be less of a help in future recruiting. Is there any glaring things that the Al is currently missing?

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 09:06:36 AM
My guesses for future construction projects.

With the Jes Res coming down, that will offer a lot of green space. But not enough to build a significant building. I think McCormick comes down with it. The administration has been waiting a long time to get rid of it and build new. While I love the tradition of McCormick, it is one of the lowest quality facilities that I have ever seen....and I work in higher education. Once that is down, they will have enough room to build a "super dorm." It will allow the university to expand enrollment and create a new high quality living space (maybe the new home for athletes?).

I also think the rec needs to come down. Another extremely sub par facility. You could build new with enough space to shove winter practice facilities in there for the other sports. That may require tennis to be on the chopping block though

I think all of that sounds good, and I know why MU would want to do it (gotta keep up with the Jones'!).

However, I'm still more concerned with the rising cost of tuition, and I'd be more interested in how MU is going to remain cost competitive and produce valuable degrees for future grads.

I'm not trying to be a wet blanket, because capital expenditures are sexy, but at the rate we are going, my children unfortunately will not be able to go to MU (unless it's on a scholarship).

I'm fearful that MU might price itself out of the market, and it would be very tough to recover from that.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 09:06:36 AM
My guesses for future construction projects.

With the Jes Res coming down, that will offer a lot of green space. But not enough to build a significant building. I think McCormick comes down with it. The administration has been waiting a long time to get rid of it and build new.

Hate to burst your bubble but McCormick isn't coming down anytime soon.  But you are certainly correct that its replacement remains a long term administration goal.  I just don't see it in the next 5 years minimum and I've been present for numerous presentations by Planning VP Tom Ganey.  One of the big problems is that the university would need the replacement beds already in place before it could come down.  We're not even close at this time.  I do think MU remains open to the possibility of purchasing existing near campus residential structures if they ever become available on the open market.

Quote from: jsglow on July 07, 2014, 09:23:13 AM
Hate to burst your bubble but McCormick isn't coming down anytime soon.  But you are certainly correct that its replacement remains a long term administration goal.  I just don't see it in the next 5 years minimum and I've been present for numerous presentations by Planning VP Tom Ganey.  One of the big problems is that the university would need the replacement beds already in place before it could come down.  We're not even close at this time. I do think MU remains open to the possibility of purchasing existing near campus residential structures if they ever become available on the open market.

I would even go so far as to say they prefer it.

That seems to be MU's MO...buy up old apartment buildings, hotels, or even hospitals (Abbottsford, McCabe, Straz, Humphrey, Mashuda, etc.) rather than build new. IIRC, McCormick, Schroeder and O'Donnell are the only remaining dorms actually constructed by the university as dorms from the start, and those were all built 40+ years ago. Everything since then has been purchased and remodeled.

Concur Bleu.  I simply try not to put too many words in their mouth.  It's not difficult at all to know what their two targets might be.  But remember it always takes two to tango.

I will note that MU was strongly in favor of the new privately funded apartment going up this summer on 14th and Wells.  Private investment in the community is encouraged so long as it fits MU's mission.  Had MU not liked the plan, I have little doubt that they would have purchased the parcel themselves.

What about the old building that had Heg's that was torn down? Nothing has been done with it yet and it is right across from the Al. Surely they will want to do something there soon.

Quote from: jsglow on July 07, 2014, 09:38:04 AM
Concur Bleu.  I simply try not to put too many words in their mouth.  It's not difficult at all to know what their two targets might be.  But remember it always takes two to tango.

I will note that MU was strongly in favor of the new privately funded apartment going up this summer on 14th and Wells.  Private investment in the community is encouraged so long as it fits MU's mission.  Had MU not liked the plan, I have little doubt that they would have purchased the parcel themselves.

Haven't been back for a while but where at 14th & Well's? Are they tearing down the old China Garden/Sweeney's?

Also, I have thought that if they really want new dorms just tear down O'Donnell. Finding temporary spaces for 300 students is a lot easier than the near 1000 in McCormick. Then build a new larger dorm where O'Donnell was. That way the new dorm can handle some of the displaces students when you go to replace the next one. (While this makes sense to me O'Donnell does hold a soft spot for me since it was my freshman dorm.)

Quote from: MUMonster03 on July 07, 2014, 10:22:32 AM
Haven't been back for a while but where at 14th & Well's? Are they tearing down the old China Garden/Sweeney's?

Yes, they tore down that whole strip mall.

Don't make sophomores live on campus. Then you have ask the replacement housing you need in order to treat down and build new any building. It also allows Marquette to expand enrollment. If they add between 500 and 1000 students to the average freshmen class, they will be able to lower tuition.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 10:43:37 AM
Don't make sophomores live on campus. Then you have ask the replacement housing you need in order to treat down and build new any building. It also allows Marquette to expand enrollment. If they add between 500 and 1000 students to the average freshmen class, they will be able to lower tuition.

Sounds like an easy solution, but I think that would be pretty controversial.

Having sophomores on campus is pretty important to Marquette. They talk about it quite a bit as being central to the school's mission. I don't think you can just flip that switch without a bunch of debate. I think it is a big part of their strategy on controlling underage drinking and drug use.

I really liked the 2 years on campus and 2 years off campus. I thought it was the perfect balance. Anymore than 2 years on campus I would have felt like a total weirdo, but any less I would felt like I would have missed out a bit on the whole dorm experience that is part of the overall college experience.

I know it's a trick legal maneuver these days, but what about eminent domain?  Granted, MU does not have its own eminent domain powers; however, I believe a recent SCOTUS decision no longer requires the ultimate beneficiary of an eminent domain taking to be a public entity (presuming that there is some sort of material benefit to the public in doing so).  So in theory, the city could condemn property north of Kilbourn - as an example - and turn around and sell it to MU or a private developer, no?

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 10:43:37 AM
Don't make sophomores live on campus. Then you have ask the replacement housing you need in order to treat down and build new any building. It also allows Marquette to expand enrollment. If they add between 500 and 1000 students to the average freshmen class, they will be able to lower tuition.

Having more students enrolled won't drop tuition. When I started in 1999 Marquette had 7000 undergrads and 10,000 plus total. Now they have 8000+ undergrads and 12,000 total students and tuition and room and board has more than doubled in those 15 years.

Quote from: Benny B on July 07, 2014, 10:47:57 AM
I know it's a trick legal maneuver these days, but what about eminent domain?  Granted, MU does not have its own eminent domain powers; however, I believe a recent SCOTUS decision no longer requires the ultimate beneficiary of an eminent domain taking to be a public entity (presuming that there is some sort of material benefit to the public in doing so).  So in theory, the city could condemn property north of Kilbourn - as an example - and turn around and sell it to MU or a private developer, no?

This is why an armed and vigilant population was deemed essential by Mr. Jefferson

Quote from: MUMonster03 on July 07, 2014, 10:22:32 AM
Haven't been back for a while but where at 14th & Well's? Are they tearing down the old China Garden/Sweeney's?

Also, I have thought that if they really want new dorms just tear down O'Donnell. Finding temporary spaces for 300 students is a lot easier than the near 1000 in McCormick. Then build a new larger dorm where O'Donnell was. That way the new dorm can handle some of the displaces students when you go to replace the next one. (While this makes sense to me O'Donnell does hold a soft spot for me since it was my freshman dorm.)

Wouldn't tear down OD after the investment in the "man cave".  But I agree if they were to build a dorm there, or expand it into the field next door to it then it'd be a great place for a new dorm. 

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 10:43:37 AM
, they will be able to lower tuition.

There are three absolutes in life--death, taxes and colleges never lower tuition.

Quote from: keefe on July 07, 2014, 10:55:34 AM
This is why an armed and vigilant population was deemed essential by Mr. Jefferson

While I might concede that the population north of Kilbourn is likely armed.  I'm not certain that they can be considered capable of a vigilant state.

Quote from: Badgerhater on July 07, 2014, 11:15:08 AM
There are three absolutes in life--death, taxes and colleges never lower tuition.

I'd like to see if they can flatten the curve on tuition increases.

I just don't think the way they are headed is sustainable, and something has to give.

I'd be more interested in cost-effective uses for current facilities vs building new or large scale remodels.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 07, 2014, 10:47:36 AM
Sounds like an easy solution, but I think that would be pretty controversial.

Having sophomores on campus is pretty important to Marquette. They talk about it quite a bit as being central to the school's mission. I don't think you can just flip that switch without a bunch of debate. I think it is a big part of their strategy on controlling underage drinking and drug use.

I really liked the 2 years on campus and 2 years off campus. I thought it was the perfect balance. Anymore than 2 years on campus I would have felt like a total weirdo, but any less I would felt like I would have missed out a bit on the whole dorm experience that is part of the overall college experience.

If they did it, I would assume it would be a one year exception.  Let Sophomores live off campus the year of construction, and the freshman theoretically displaced from McCormick would use the extra space vacated by the sophomores choosing to live off campus.  Then the following year reinstate the old rule when you have the extra dorm space again.

McCormick has such a prominent location on campus, basically the entrance from the west, that it would be nice to have a more impressive looking building there as a landmark.

Quote from: Litehouse on July 07, 2014, 11:43:01 AM

it would be nice to have a more impressive looking building there as a landmark.

Bring back the Pabst Mansion

Quote from: keefe on July 07, 2014, 12:11:42 PM
Bring back the Pabst Mansion

It hasn't left. http://www.pabstmansion.com/ (http://www.pabstmansion.com/)

Quote from: Benny B on July 07, 2014, 10:47:57 AM
I know it's a trick legal maneuver these days, but what about eminent domain?  Granted, MU does not have its own eminent domain powers; however, I believe a recent SCOTUS decision no longer requires the ultimate beneficiary of an eminent domain taking to be a public entity (presuming that there is some sort of material benefit to the public in doing so).  So in theory, the city could condemn property north of Kilbourn - as an example - and turn around and sell it to MU or a private developer, no?

Kelo v. New London.  Granted, taking by eminent domain is rare and I doubt MU would want the extremely bad press that would come along with that.  Not to mention, the only properties that would really qualify would be too far north anyway (past State or Highland.)

In terms of different comments about how to logistically tear down McCormick, doesn't it make sense to just build the new dorm on the parking lot site immediately north?  I know that parcel was supposed to include a twin McCormick tower way back when anyway, before funding disappeared.  MU could build the tower there, move students over when it's completed, and then tear down McCormick to replace with whatever.  I thought a multi-story Rec Center was an initial idea.

Anyway, obviously all very long-term things.

Quote from: Heavy Gear on July 07, 2014, 12:40:01 PM
It hasn't left. http://www.pabstmansion.com/ (http://www.pabstmansion.com/)

Actually, I meant the Plankinton Mansion!

(http://media.jsonline.com/images/28007169_preserve_plankintonafter.jpg)

Quote from: MU Curler on July 07, 2014, 12:41:08 PM
Kelo v. New London.  Granted, taking by eminent domain is rare and I doubt MU would want the extremely bad press that would come along with that.  Not to mention, the only properties that would really qualify would be too far north anyway (past State or Highland.)

In terms of different comments about how to logistically tear down McCormick, doesn't it make sense to just build the new dorm on the parking lot site immediately north?  I know that parcel was supposed to include a twin McCormick tower way back when anyway, before funding disappeared.  MU could build the tower there, move students over when it's completed, and then tear down McCormick to replace with whatever.  I thought a multi-story Rec Center was an initial idea.

Anyway, obviously all very long-term things.

Thanks MU Curler.  I was going to state that.

You're right about bad press.  The whole reason for the imminent domain court case was for Pfizer.  Pfizer has a large manufacturing facility in Groton (the submarine capital of the world) and in the go-go pharmacy 90's they expanded by building a big research lab across the river in New London, right on the waterfront in the middle of residential neighborhood.  The state restored the next door historic Fort Trumbull as a tourist attraction and the city planned to redevelop the remainder of the neighborhood to make it more tourist & corporate friendly to complement Pfizer & the Fort.  Soon after the Supreme Court ruling Pfizer announced a worldwide reorganization and among the re-org would be the closing of the New London research facility.  Nothing ever got built in the neighborhood, but they did raze the houses.  I think a UConn branch location moved into the former Pfizer building which was the only thing keeping it from staying vacant.

Between 19th and 20th and wisconsin and cylbourn. Other than miss Katie's and a new apartment building on the south side it is all parking lot, vacant space, and a church that no one ever goes to. I think you could plunk a decent facility on that land

My suggestions for campus improvements?

New Dorm #1:  After building renovations are completed at Sensenbrenner & Marquette Halls, move the current tenants over.  Renovate the old 707 building into a dorm.  Structurally sound enough to add an extra floor I believe.

New Dorm #2:  Tear down the old Boiler Plant, Helfaer Building. Parent Child & Academic Support buildings located between 17th & 18th Sts., just East of Wells St.  Build a nice 5-10 story dorm.

New Dorm #3:  Build a nice 3-5 story dorm in place of the existing parking that is across from the AL.  Include underground parking so that the big wigs at Zilber & the AL have some place nice to park.

New Rec Center:  After the three new dorms are built, demo McCormick and the Weasler Auditorium parking lot.  Build a nice new Rec Center from Wisconsin to Wells in its place

New D1 Sports facility:  Renovate the old Rec Center into a decent D1 sports facility that could house the men's & women's tennis, cross country, track/field & lacrosse teams.  The men's tennis team can use the old Humphrey hall practice space where the dance teams, etc., currently are.  All the men's tennis team really needs is putting space and a driving net.  Also keeps the D1 sports teams closer to Valley Fields for when the weather is decent enough to venture outdoors.

The Old Gym:  Remove the two eye sores that diminishes the beauty of the old gym.  Turn the building into a MU sports museum.

New green space:  Level O'Donnell and build a nice outdoor space.  Something that the kids in Humphrey, Mashuda & new dorm #2 can use.

A space for the ROTC's:  Build a small building to house the Air Force, Army & Navy ROTC's where Haggerty's use to be.  Include enough classroom space, a weight/training area & office space.

This will give MU three new/renovated dorms West of Wisconsin and close to student activities.  A much needed D1 sports facility South of Wisconsin Ave., a new Rec Center that will be North of Wisconsin Ave., and closer to student housing, some additional green space and gets the non-revenue producing D1 sports teams out of the basement of the old gym and gets the ROTC's out of the dingy spaces they currently occupy and out of sight of the MU academic community.

All that is needed is the money earmarked to do so.

Quote from: deep vacuum on July 07, 2014, 01:24:58 PM
My suggestions for campus improvements?

New Dorm #1:  After building renovations are completed at Sensenbrenner & Marquette Halls, move the current tenants over.  Renovate the old 707 building into a dorm.  Structurally sound enough to add an extra floor I believe.

New Dorm #2:  Tear down the old Boiler Plant, Helfaer Building. Parent Child & Academic Support buildings located between 17th & 18th Sts., just East of Wells St.  Build a nice 5-10 story dorm.

New Dorm #3:  Build a nice 3-5 story dorm in place of the existing parking that is across from the AL.  Include underground parking so that the big wigs at Zilber & the AL have some place nice to park.

New Rec Center:  After the three new dorms are built, demo McCormick and the Weasler Auditorium parking lot.  Build a nice new Rec Center from Wisconsin to Wells in its place

New D1 Sports facility:  Renovate the old Rec Center into a decent D1 sports facility that could house the men's & women's tennis, cross country, track/field & lacrosse teams.  The men's tennis team can use the old Humphrey hall practice space where the dance teams, etc., currently are.  All the men's tennis team really needs is putting space and a driving net.  Also keeps the D1 sports teams closer to Valley Fields for when the weather is decent enough to venture outdoors.

The Old Gym:  Remove the two eye sores that diminishes the beauty of the old gym.  Turn the building into a MU sports museum.

New green space:  Level O'Donnell and build a nice outdoor space.  Something that the kids in Humphrey, Mashuda & new dorm #2 can use.

A space for the ROTC's:  Build a small building to house the Air Force, Army & Navy ROTC's where Haggerty's use to be.  Include enough classroom space, a weight/training area & office space.

This will give MU three new/renovated dorms West of Wisconsin and close to student activities.  A much needed D1 sports facility South of Wisconsin Ave., a new Rec Center that will be North of Wisconsin Ave., and closer to student housing, some additional green space and gets the non-revenue producing D1 sports teams out of the basement of the old gym and gets the ROTC's out of the dingy spaces they currently occupy and out of sight of the MU academic community.

All that is needed is the money earmarked to do so.

This is a reasonable plan. We need to expand our endowment to make this happen.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 07, 2014, 10:47:36 AM
Sounds like an easy solution, but I think that would be pretty controversial.

Having sophomores on campus is pretty important to Marquette. They talk about it quite a bit as being central to the school's mission. I don't think you can just flip that switch without a bunch of debate. I think it is a big part of their strategy on controlling underage drinking and drug use.

I really liked the 2 years on campus and 2 years off campus. I thought it was the perfect balance. Anymore than 2 years on campus I would have felt like a total weirdo, but any less I would felt like I would have missed out a bit on the whole dorm experience that is part of the overall college experience.

+1.  Not happening.

Quote from: deep vacuum on July 07, 2014, 01:24:58 PM
My suggestions for campus improvements?

New Dorm #1:  After building renovations are completed at Sensenbrenner & Marquette Halls, move the current tenants over.  Renovate the old 707 building into a dorm.  Structurally sound enough to add an extra floor I believe.

New Dorm #2:  Tear down the old Boiler Plant, Helfaer Building. Parent Child & Academic Support buildings located between 17th & 18th Sts., just East of Wells St.  Build a nice 5-10 story dorm.

New Dorm #3:  Build a nice 3-5 story dorm in place of the existing parking that is across from the AL.  Include underground parking so that the big wigs at Zilber & the AL have some place nice to park.

New Rec Center:  After the three new dorms are built, demo McCormick and the Weasler Auditorium parking lot.  Build a nice new Rec Center from Wisconsin to Wells in its place

New D1 Sports facility:  Renovate the old Rec Center into a decent D1 sports facility that could house the men's & women's tennis, cross country, track/field & lacrosse teams.  The men's tennis team can use the old Humphrey hall practice space where the dance teams, etc., currently are.  All the men's tennis team really needs is putting space and a driving net.  Also keeps the D1 sports teams closer to Valley Fields for when the weather is decent enough to venture outdoors.

The Old Gym:  Remove the two eye sores that diminishes the beauty of the old gym.  Turn the building into a MU sports museum.

New green space:  Level O'Donnell and build a nice outdoor space.  Something that the kids in Humphrey, Mashuda & new dorm #2 can use.

A space for the ROTC's:  Build a small building to house the Air Force, Army & Navy ROTC's where Haggerty's use to be.  Include enough classroom space, a weight/training area & office space.

This will give MU three new/renovated dorms West of Wisconsin and close to student activities.  A much needed D1 sports facility South of Wisconsin Ave., a new Rec Center that will be North of Wisconsin Ave., and closer to student housing, some additional green space and gets the non-revenue producing D1 sports teams out of the basement of the old gym and gets the ROTC's out of the dingy spaces they currently occupy and out of sight of the MU academic community.

All that is needed is the money earmarked to do so.

Truthfully, student resident housing is notoriously difficult to fund.  I really think Bleu's strategy of picking up and renovating existing residential space is the likely first alternative.  And one thing I think you're forgetting is Phase 2 of the Engineering building.  That's already on the agenda.  Same with the Den school.  Lastly, there are considerable university wide cutbacks underway as part of the overall strategic plan.  And not government style 'slow the growth' cutbacks.  MU has erected a great deal of brick and mortar in the last 10 years starting with Raynor.  It's going to slow.  Promise.

Quote from: jsglow on July 07, 2014, 01:50:01 PM
MU has erected a great deal of brick and mortar in the last 10 years starting with Raynor.  It's going to slow.  Promise.

As it should.

I mean, new buildings are sexy and all, but MU can't keep this up.

Quote from: MUMonster03 on July 07, 2014, 10:53:34 AM
Having more students enrolled won't drop tuition. When I started in 1999 Marquette had 7000 undergrads and 10,000 plus total. Now they have 8000+ undergrads and 12,000 total students and tuition and room and board has more than doubled in those 15 years.

Difference between lowering tuition and not having it go up as much may be what he meant.  Costs are going to go up whenever you deal with people, question is if it will go up at the same rate which is always difficult to gauge. 

When dealing with people, if you want to retain them you have to pay them and that is going to raise your costs in salary, benefits, etc. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2014, 03:22:38 PM
Difference between lowering tuition and not having it go up as much may be what he meant.  Costs are going to go up whenever you deal with people, question is if it will go up at the same rate which is always difficult to gauge. 

When dealing with people, if you want to retain them you have to pay them and that is going to raise your costs in salary, benefits, etc. 

As I believe you are trying to elude to more students means more faculty and classes especially since Marquette likes to advertise their student to teacher ratio.

Either way tuition cannot continue to rise at its current rate. A lot of majors are already getting to the point of the investment not being worth the return. The only way any of my children are going to Marquette, or anything else besides a in state school at this point is if they get major scholarship help. Otherwise you graduate and are already under immense debt.

Quote from: jsglow on July 07, 2014, 09:38:04 AM
Concur Bleu.  I simply try not to put too many words in their mouth.  It's not difficult at all to know what their two targets might be.  But remember it always takes two to tango.

I assume one is the Catholic Life Insurance building.  What's the other?  Does someone else still occupy that building next to Cobeen?

Quote from: Litehouse on July 07, 2014, 03:50:34 PM
I assume one is the Catholic Life Insurance building.  What's the other?  Does someone else still occupy that building next to Cobeen?

The 707 Building was purchased by MU from the former Old Line Life Insurance Co. (owned by USLife and later American General) in the early 2000s.  It currently houses university offices.  I've got a personal attachment to that building.  My dad spent his entire 39 year professional career on the 3rd floor.  As he used to say, he never left campus.

As to a second target I'd bet on the Ardmore Building although I have never even heard that specifically mentioned in the rumor mill.  But do understand that MU owns everything else in that square block between 16th and 17th.  Another plausible candidate could be the Sovereign Building on 18th and WI.

Quote from: MUMonster03 on July 07, 2014, 03:42:01 PM
As I believe you are trying to elude to more students means more faculty and classes especially since Marquette likes to advertise their student to teacher ratio.

Either way tuition cannot continue to rise at its current rate. A lot of majors are already getting to the point of the investment not being worth the return. The only way any of my children are going to Marquette, or anything else besides a in state school at this point is if they get major scholarship help. Otherwise you graduate and are already under immense debt.

Actually, I was eluding to simple retention of faculty and staff.  If you're good, others will want you and you need to give them a reason to stay. If MU wants to continue to improve its reputation, etc, than you need to retain quality people to do so.  Your point also well taken on class size.

90% of MU students get financial aid of some kind.  There are a number of majors already that have hit that tipping point in my opinion.  Plenty of discussions on here over the years on that subject here. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2014, 04:31:31 PM
Actually, I was eluding to simple retention of faculty and staff.  If you're good, others will want you and you need to give them a reason to stay. If MU wants to continue to improve its reputation, etc, than you need to retain quality people to do so.  Your point also well taken on class size.

90% of MU students get financial aid of some kind.  There are a number of majors already that have hit that tipping point in my opinion.  Plenty of discussions on here over the years on that subject here. 

This is all part of the secondary education shell game that's going on. Obviously that's not limited to MU, but at some point "actual cost" is going to come into play, and I'm afraid that it's going to hurt the private schools more than public.

Will somebody pay $300,000 to become a teacher? How about playing $500,000 to major in Communications? Will MU eventually have to just eliminate some majors? Law, engineering, dental, business, science. Cut everything else?   

I hope MU has some smart people working on this stuff, because I can't imagine how this is all going to work.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 09:00:47 AM
The other sports have offices, lockers, and various support resources in the Al.

Support resources, yes.  Academic support is in the Al, as is the main weight room.

The offices and locker rooms for everything that's not basketball or volleyball are in the Old Gym or, in the case of the lacrosse offices, the 707 building.  As far as I know, the lacrosse teams do not have a locker room space on campus.

Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on July 07, 2014, 04:55:25 PM
This is all part of the secondary education shell game that's going on. Obviously that's not limited to MU, but at some point "actual cost" is going to come into play, and I'm afraid that it's going to hurt the private schools more than public.

Will somebody pay $300,000 to become a teacher? How about playing $500,000 to major in Communications? Will MU eventually have to just eliminate some majors? Law, engineering, dental, business, science. Cut everything else?   

I hope MU has some smart people working on this stuff, because I can't imagine how this is all going to work.

I asked that question here several years ago and again last year and this year on this site.  Quite frankly, if my child said they wanted to become a teacher, I'm not sending them to a private school.  Why on earth would I.  No ROI.  I'd say the same thing for many other majors.  Makes no sense at all.   

Online education may make much of this moot in the next 20 years anyway.  Institutions with the right brand will be able to educate throughout the country (world) as class size means nothing, but as long as you get your degree from XYZ (Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, etc) associated school and that degree then that's what one will pay for.  I suspect a number of smaller private schools go under and some state campuses will no longer be needed.  There will always be a place for the student to go physically to school on a campus, but long distance education or low cost in state education via technology will make things interesting.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 10:43:37 AM
Don't make sophomores live on campus. Then you have ask the replacement housing you need in order to treat down and build new any building. It also allows Marquette to expand enrollment. If they add between 500 and 1000 students to the average freshmen class, they will be able to lower tuition.

If anything, there is a desire among students and their parents to have more housing on campus, not less.  There is a waiting list for the university-run apartments every year.  Also, based on the way things have gone for the more desirable housing, freshmen would feel pressure to sign leases for sophomore-year apartments 6-8 weeks after arriving on campus, before they are even really settled into their freshman-year dorms.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2014, 07:01:28 PM
I asked that question here several years ago and again last year and this year on this site.  Quite frankly, if my child said they wanted to become a teacher, I'm not sending them to a private school.  Why on earth would I.  No ROI.  I'd say the same thing for many other majors.  Makes no sense at all.   

Online education may make much of this moot in the next 20 years anyway.  Institutions with the right brand will be able to educate throughout the country (world) as class size means nothing, but as long as you get your degree from XYZ (Harvard, Stanford, UCLA, etc) associated school and that degree then that's what one will pay for.  I suspect a number of smaller private schools go under and some state campuses will no longer be needed.  There will always be a place for the student to go physically to school on a campus, but long distance education or low cost in state education via technology will make things interesting.

yup, lots of change coming  ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-brian-c-mitchell/the-future-of-higher-educ_b_5563285.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-brian-c-mitchell/the-future-of-higher-educ_b_5563285.html)

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2014, 07:01:28 PM
I asked that question here several years ago and again last year and this year on this site.  Quite frankly, if my child said they wanted to become a teacher, I'm not sending them to a private school.  Why on earth would I.  No ROI.  I'd say the same thing for many other majors.  Makes no sense at all.

I've got one at home just getting ready to start his senior year (and another starting sophomore), so I can really relate to this issue.  I've often said that it was absolutely crazy for me to travel half-way across the country and have my parents pay what they did for me to obtain a communications degree.  It made no sense whatsoever.  I'm glad they did, but it was crazy.

My son is also thinking about getting a more "generic" undergraduate degree with an eye toward graduate school.  Although he still hasn't narrowed his list too much, his preferred profile is smallish (4,000 - 8,000) liberal arts schools.  I'm having a hard time figuring the ROI for these schools.  He's visiting Miami (OH) on Friday morning, and I'm really hoping he likes it.  It's a great school and I haven't seen anything that even remotely compares from a value standpoint.  I hate thinking in these terms, but the costs are so overwhelming at this point -- especially when you have four kids -- that it's impossible not to.

Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 07, 2014, 10:43:37 AM
Don't make sophomores live on campus. Then you have ask the replacement housing you need in order to treat down and build new any building. It also allows Marquette to expand enrollment. If they add between 500 and 1000 students to the average freshmen class, they will be able to lower tuition.

So you would send, what, 1,500 additional students onto the rental market around campus?  Do you think that there is the capacity to handle that safely and effectively?  Do we want students living further west or north than they do already?

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 08, 2014, 09:14:16 AM

So you would send, what, 1,500 additional students onto the rental market around campus?  Do you think that there is the capacity to handle that safely and effectively?  Do we want students living further west or north than they do already?

That's an interesting topic.

I'd like to see MU & Milwaukee do a better job of driving neighborhood improvements. MU isn't an island. Like it or not, it's a part of the overall neighborhood, so the University and the city need to work together to help improve the neighborhood from the bottom up. Adding new buildings is nice, but the real improvements will come when the neighborhood residents get involved and start driving the changes.

It's not easy, and it's a long-term vision, but there is some decent real estate just west of campus (historic homes), and north/northeast of campus (just west of the Pabst/downtown).

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 08:59:51 AM
Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

Yes.  Had one for each child.  One fully exhausted with daughter now graduated; second working its way down with son a Junior now.  We found them to be useful.  Every check we wrote directly to MU came out of the 529s.  Help with rent when they were upperclassmen did not.  2 more years until my 'raise' Bleu.

What is the cost of tuition and room & board now for a semester? When I was at MU, tuition and room & board went up $200 each per semester each year. Pretty good deal now looking back.

Quote from: Heavy Gear on July 08, 2014, 10:00:22 AM
What is the cost of tuition and room & board now for a semester? When I was at MU, tuition and room & board went up $200 each per semester each year. Pretty good deal now looking back.

$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2014, 04:31:31 PM
Actually, I was eluding to simple retention of faculty and staff.  If you're good, others will want you and you need to give them a reason to stay. If MU wants to continue to improve its reputation, etc, than you need to retain quality people to do so.  Your point also well taken on class size.

90% of MU students get financial aid of some kind.  There are a number of majors already that have hit that tipping point in my opinion.  Plenty of discussions on here over the years on that subject here. 

I think upgrading the quality of the faculty is the single most important factor in improving our reputation.  We offer a decent educational value but with upgraded faculty we could move up to the next tier.
Getting back to the point of the thread. By keeping the Al up to date, we are maintaining our investment in our most visible asset the basketball program. Continued success on the court will eventually translate into endowment dollars. I would like to see the endowment get closer to $1 billion.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 08:59:51 AM
Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

I have two plans for each child.  Yes, useful.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:04:59 AM
$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

Jesus.

It was under 30k when I started in 2004.

That is not sustainable.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 10:15:32 AM
Jesus.

It was around $30k when I was there 6 years ago.

I started there in 09 and it was like 36K if I remember correctly.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:04:59 AM
$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

Holy crap. mid 30s from 03-07. Can't believe that.

I love Marquette, and I realize rising tuition is a problem that is bigger than Marquette.

But this is totally counter to their mission. Containing tuition increases should be priority #1, not new construction.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 08:59:51 AM
Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

Plus it brings down your tax liability which is nice too.  But, I imagine you know, make sure retirement funds are up and kicking before even thinking about college savings accounts.  Don't want to be stealing food from your kids college cafeteria because you can't afford to eat.

I recall the guy down the floor from me in McCormick had a bunch of t-shirts made that said
"9 month party, $10,000 cover charge" around the MU logo.

I think he paid his cover charge.

And that's about what it cost wen I went there.

Can't imagine $47k now.  I'd only pay that for business or engineering for my kids.  State schools for them if they want to major in underwater basketweaving.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:04:59 AM
$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

I graduated from undergrad in 2007 with obscene debts. I would bet that by 2017 my debt level from then will be about average, though. Don't know how this is sustainable. No way I would ever recommend someone do it again.

Unless you are loaded beyond belief, I don't know why any degree or experience at full cost at Marquette is worth it compared to Madison (or U of Ill if you're from Ill).

I mean really, should the reasonably successful guy who makes low six-figures and has modest savings with 3-4 kids believe that it's a good investment to spend another $20-25k per year on ANY degree from MU compared to Madison?

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 10:31:21 AM
I love Marquette, and I realize rising tuition is a problem that is bigger than Marquette.

But this is totally counter to their mission. Containing tuition increases should be priority #1, not new construction.

Bingo.

Capital expenditures are sexy, but the school really needs to get it's economics in order. Can they be more efficient with what they have?

At some point in the future, they are going to price themselves out of the market, and that's going to be a PAINFUL lesson... especially on a campus full of shiny new buildings.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 10:31:21 AM
I love Marquette, and I realize rising tuition is a problem that is bigger than Marquette.

But this is totally counter to their mission. Containing tuition increases should be priority #1, not new construction.

I don't recall the exact increase this upcoming year (to the $47K I reported) but it was the smallest percentage increase in something like a dozen years.  Everyone understands that there is a problem and that affordability coupled with a shrinking 18 y/o population are the greatest long term risks to the university.  As I said in this thread, real cuts are happening and McCormick isn't coming down.  

And do understand, there are some who believe that basketball expenditures at the levels historically seen aren't warranted.  I will tell you that's a minority as most recognize the value.

One more quick comment.  $47 is the 'rack rate'.  If your student is highly sought after, significant scholarships really bring that down.  It's how private universities compete for the best and brightest.

But for the kid with the 3.0 HS GPA and a 27 on his ACT......

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 08:59:51 AM
Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

I have one for each daughter.  When the time comes it won't pay for a year at Marquette but I figure anything is better than nothing.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 08:59:51 AM
Don't have kids yet, not even married yet...but does anyone here have a 529 plan for their kid(s)?

How effective a mechanism is it for saving for college?

I got a plan for my kids... it's called enrolling them in the least popular scholarship sport.  No soccer, no football, no baseball, no basketball, no gymnastics.  One daughter will be a bowler, the other will play golf or hockey, and my son will be a wrestler.  If that doesn't pan out, they can go get a surg tech degree or something at the community college and be making more money at 20 y/o than it would have cost for a year of private college tuition.

Quote from: Benny B on July 08, 2014, 10:53:54 AM
I got a plan for my kids... it's called enrolling them in the least popular scholarship sport.  No soccer, no football, no baseball, no basketball, no gymnastics.  One daughter will be a bowler, the other will play golf or hockey, and my son will be a wrestler.  If that doesn't pan out, they can go get a surg tech degree or something at the community college and be making more money at 20 y/o than it would have cost for a year of private college tuition.

HVAC: People will always want to be cool in the summer, and warm in the winter.

Marry money

Quote from: Benny B on July 08, 2014, 10:53:54 AM
I got a plan for my kids... it's called enrolling them in the least popular scholarship sport.  No soccer, no football, no baseball, no basketball, no gymnastics.  One daughter will be a bowler, the other will play golf or hockey, and my son will be a wrestler.  If that doesn't pan out, they can go get a surg tech degree or something at the community college and be making more money at 20 y/o than it would have cost for a year of private college tuition.

My kids have been doing archery.

I heard some story, that decades ago a wealthy alum left tons of money to (I think) George Washington University for Badminton scholarships and that a good number are available every year simply because no one know about them so know one applies.  

How do you start a 529? Someone once told me that you can start it before you even have kids? Is that true?

Do you get it through Fidelity or Vanguard or something?

Quote from: warrior07 on July 08, 2014, 11:07:57 AM
How do you start a 529? Someone once told me that you can start it before you even have kids? Is that true?

Do you get it through Fidelity or Vanguard or something?

Each state runs it's own 529 program, so just look up who your state uses.  Here is a helpful link: http://www.savingforcollege.com/529_plan_details/

As for starting before a child is born, yes you can.  In creating a 529, name yourself the beneficiary, then after Warrior07 junior comes along, name them the beneficiary.  This article breaks it down.  http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2013/07/31/kick-off-college-savings-before-a-child-is-born

Quote from: Benny B on July 08, 2014, 10:53:54 AM
I got a plan for my kids... it's called enrolling them in the least popular scholarship sport.  No soccer, no football, no baseball, no basketball, no gymnastics.  One daughter will be a bowler, the other will play golf or hockey, and my son will be a wrestler.  If that doesn't pan out, they can go get a surg tech degree or something at the community college and be making more money at 20 y/o than it would have cost for a year of private college tuition.

Just got to make your son the best long snapper or kicker possible. I went to high school with a guy who couldn't play offensive line to save his life, but got a scholarship to Syracuse for long snapper. Pretty smart.

Quote from: reinko on July 08, 2014, 11:13:14 AM
Each state runs it's own 529 program, so just look up who your state uses.  Here is a helpful link: http://www.savingforcollege.com/529_plan_details/

As for starting before a child is born, yes you can.  In creating a 529, name yourself the beneficiary, then after Warrior07 junior comes along, name them the beneficiary.  This article breaks it down.  http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2013/07/31/kick-off-college-savings-before-a-child-is-born

Or see your financial advisor. 

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 08, 2014, 09:14:16 AM

So you would send, what, 1,500 additional students onto the rental market around campus?  Do you think that there is the capacity to handle that safely and effectively?  Do we want students living further west or north than they do already?

In short, yes.

But I would actually lift the bans on upperclassmen living on campus. Most universities use a model where freshmen must live on campus and the rest have the option to. But freshmen get first priority.

The tuition raising is a terrifying prospect. Student loan reform is coming in the next ten years. Forget about students having massive debt when they graduate, they literally won't be able to assemble the loans in order to come to Marquette.

I really don't think curbing tuition's rise is enough. I think drastic changes need to be made in order to actually lower tuition from it's current point. If we don't, I think we will survive student loan reform, but we won't thrive.

We could see 100s of universities closing in the next 50 years. I think our prestige will save us, but small, private, liberal arts universities are going to take huge hits. The ROI simply isn't good enough compared to the large state research 1 universities.

Quote from: swoopem on July 08, 2014, 11:20:16 AM
Just got to make your son the best long snapper or kicker possible. I went to high school with a guy who couldn't play offensive line to save his life, but got a scholarship to Syracuse for long snapper. Pretty smart.

I've always said the easiest way to a professional sports career is looking backwards through your legs (long snapper) or looking sideways at homeplate (sidearm/submarine lefty reliever).

Quote from: Benny B on July 08, 2014, 12:32:06 PM
I've always said the easiest way to a professional sports career is looking backwards through your legs (long snapper) or looking sideways at homeplate (sidearm/submarine lefty reliever).

Have your son grow up playing soccer, in high school, have them dual-sport in football/soccer as a kicker. Get help learning how to kick/punt - scholarship.

Quote from: Benny B on July 08, 2014, 12:32:06 PM
I've always said the easiest way to a professional sports career is looking backwards through your legs (long snapper)

I tried long snapping but the ball kept getting batted forward.

Quote from: keefe on July 08, 2014, 12:41:34 PM
I tried long snapping but the ball kept getting batted forward.

That's gotta hurt!

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 08, 2014, 12:09:31 PM
In short, yes.

But I would actually lift the bans on upperclassmen living on campus. Most universities use a model where freshmen must live on campus and the rest have the option to. But freshmen get first priority.

There is no "ban." If you are a junior or senior and want to live on campus, there are options available to you, primarily in Humphrey or Campus Town.

No, you can't live in McCormick, but its not like MU says you can't live on campus.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 08, 2014, 12:23:49 PM
The tuition raising is a terrifying prospect. Student loan reform is coming in the next ten years. Forget about students having massive debt when they graduate, they literally won't be able to assemble the loans in order to come to Marquette.

I really don't think curbing tuition's rise is enough. I think drastic changes need to be made in order to actually lower tuition from it's current point. If we don't, I think we will survive student loan reform, but we won't thrive.

We could see 100s of universities closing in the next 50 years. I think our prestige will save us, but small, private, liberal arts universities are going to take huge hits. The ROI simply isn't good enough compared to the large state research 1 universities.

I agree.

I think what needs to happen is that students pay a smaller fee up front (<$10,000 per year for tuition/room board, less than that if you live off campus) and then also have some sort of arrangement where alumni pay a percentage of take home pay (10%? 15%? 20%?....whatever the right number statistically is for it to be sustainable for the university and for the graduate) for X number of years (10 years? 15 years?...again, there are people smarter than I who could do the actuarials).

The other thing that needs to happen is that universities need to foster entrepreneurship and small businesses by students and use these ventures to generate revenue. For example, dozens of companies are founded at MIT by its students each year. There has to be ways for universities to monetize these ventures.

Another example is that Loyola Chicago has a hotel on campus that its students run and manage. I'm not sure how much profit it generates, but universities need to think outside the box and diversify revenue streams besides just donations and tuition.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 08, 2014, 12:23:49 PM

We could see 100s of universities closing in the next 50 years. I think our prestige will save us, but small, private, liberal arts universities are going to take huge hits. The ROI simply isn't good enough compared to the large state research 1 universities.

Concur.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 02:38:48 PM
The other thing that needs to happen is that universities need to foster entrepreneurship and small businesses by students and use these ventures to generate revenue. For example, dozens of companies are founded at MIT by its students each year. There has to be ways for universities to monetize these ventures.

WARF is the private entity that holds all of UW-Madison's research licensing.  It provides UW-Madison with $45 million annually.  How much is $45M to UW-Madison?  1.6% of its annual budget of $2.8B.

Alternative revenue streams are always talked about, but they are extremely difficult to accomplish because colleges and universities are not venture funds.  It isn't what they do.  And even if they can figure it out, they aren't that lucrative.  (See UW-Madison example.)  It is simply a drop in the bucket when compared to items like tuition.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 08, 2014, 02:56:41 PM

WARF is the private entity that holds all of UW-Madison's research licensing.  It provides UW-Madison with $45 million annually.  How much is $45M to UW-Madison?  1.6% of its annual budget of $2.8B.

Alternative revenue streams are always talked about, but they are extremely difficult to accomplish because colleges and universities are not venture funds.  It isn't what they do.  And even if they can figure it out, they aren't that lucrative.  (See UW-Madison example.)  It is simply a drop in the bucket when compared to items like tuition.

Right, but it needs to be a combination of things, like I said in my post. Alternative revenue is just one piece of the pie.

Agree it won't solve all the problems. But $45 million annually would be helpful.

Quote from: keefe on July 08, 2014, 12:41:34 PM
I tried long snapping but the ball kept getting batted forward.

I got a similar issue when long snappin'. My view of the punter is completely blocked. Don't know if its day or night.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:04:59 AM
$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

$47K for a SEMESTER?

Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on July 08, 2014, 10:42:24 AM
Bingo.

Capital expenditures are sexy, but the school really needs to get it's economics in order. Can they be more efficient with what they have?

At some point in the future, they are going to price themselves out of the market, and that's going to be a PAINFUL lesson... especially on a campus full of shiny new buildings.

How do you suggest doing it while also attracting very good students, very good faculty, having the latest in technology and facilities for kids to learn?  Stuff costs money.  Professors and staff want COLA raises if not merit raises, technology costs $$, infrastructure needs upgrading, and fair or not the shiny new toys attracts students because it is "state of the art" for the same reason why MU built the Al, to recruit student athletes...the Old Gym wasn't cutting it.

The easy thing to say is get stuff under control, costs, etc.  How, is the question. 

Here's a crazy idea that will have heads explode, but it has been suggested at some schools.  Let in less students that are needs based?  That puts MU out of the money loaning \ giving business.  Now, is that against our mission?  Sure is.  Would I advocate it?  Nope, but that's part of the problem as well, you need to be able to afford that money you are granting, etc. 

Here is the "RATE CARD"  http://www.marquette.edu/mucentral/bursar/documents/RateGuide14-15.pdf

Thing is, how many are truly spending this kind of cost, or the retail cost?  Not many. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2014, 04:54:30 PM
How do you suggest doing it while also attracting very good students, very good faculty, having the latest in technology and facilities for kids to learn?  Stuff costs money.  Professors and staff want COLA raises if not merit raises, technology costs $$, infrastructure needs upgrading, and fair or not the shiny new toys attracts students because it is "state of the art" for the same reason why MU built the Al, to recruit student athletes...the Old Gym wasn't cutting it.

The easy thing to say is get stuff under control, costs, etc.  How, is the question. 

Here's a crazy idea that will have heads explode, but it has been suggested at some schools.  Let in less students that are needs based?  That puts MU out of the money loaning \ giving business.  Now, is that against our mission?  Sure is.  Would I advocate it?  Nope, but that's part of the problem as well, you need to be able to afford that money you are granting, etc. 

Here is the "RATE CARD"  http://www.marquette.edu/mucentral/bursar/documents/RateGuide14-15.pdf

Thing is, how many are truly spending this kind of cost, or the retail cost?  Not many. 

I'm all for giving professors COLA raises, investing in research, labs, classrooms, technology, etc.

What I'm not for is building dorms that rival 4 star hotels, the ridiculous "student life" programming, collecting activity fees to be distributed to all of the student groups, subsidizing movies at the varsity theater, the insane number of support staff (do we really need a paid full-time hall director and full-time paid layperson chaplain in every single residence hall?)

If someone at Marquette wants to form a club, fine, they can be self-funded. MU doesn't need to be doing this stuff for adult students.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 07:18:52 PM
What I'm not for is building dorms that rival 4 star hotels...

As someone who has toured a few schools in the last six months, I can attest to this.  When I look at some of the dorms we've toured (Dayton comes to mind), it's hard to imagine the conditions we lived in at McCormick.  There are some absolutely beautiful dorms and other facilities out there.

To be fair to MUs tuition it turned out that after scholorships and financial aid that the cost for me at least going to MU was actually cheaper than an in state school like U of I. After I left the dorms its even more managable and really not too bad of a price for college these days.

Quote from: chitownwarrior2011 on July 08, 2014, 08:52:40 PM
To be fair to MUs tuition it turned out that after scholorships and financial aid that the cost for me at least going to MU was actually cheaper than an in state school like U of I. After I left the dorms its even more managable and really not too bad of a price for college these days.

Same here. I got a merit-based scholarship that made the decision to go to MU very easy.

Quote from: source? on July 08, 2014, 09:01:58 PM
Same here. I got a merit-based scholarship that made the decision to go to MU very easy.

True for many top students.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:47:14 AM
One more quick comment.  $47 is the 'rack rate'.  If your student is highly sought after, significant scholarships really bring that down.  It's how private universities compete for the best and brightest.

But for the kid with the 3.0 HS GPA and a 27 on his ACT......

I had a 3.2 GPA and a 29 ACT and received 9-10K off per year from Marquette. So there are definitely scholarships available even for students who excel in one of the two factors.

Quote from: MUEagle1090 on July 08, 2014, 09:35:39 PM
I had a 3.2 GPA and a 29 ACT and received 9-10K off per year from Marquette. So there are definitely scholarships available even for students who excel in one of the two factors.

Yep. And congrats.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on July 08, 2014, 04:11:53 PM

I got a similar issue when long snappin'. My view of the punter is completely blocked. Don't know if its day or night.

I know the feeling. In fact, the coach had me go over to the TV Camera stand so they could stabilize the picture

Quote from: source? on July 08, 2014, 09:01:58 PM
Same here. I got a merit-based scholarship that made the decision to go to MU very easy.

Yup. During my senior year, Loyola was actually my #1 choice, until I got MU's scholarship offer which was much higher. Loyola wouldn't match it, and so off to Milwaukee I went. Excellent decision.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 07:18:52 PM
I'm all for giving professors COLA raises, investing in research, labs, classrooms, technology, etc.

What I'm not for is building dorms that rival 4 star hotels, the ridiculous "student life" programming, collecting activity fees to be distributed to all of the student groups, subsidizing movies at the varsity theater, the insane number of support staff (do we really need a paid full-time hall director and full-time paid layperson chaplain in every single residence hall?)

If someone at Marquette wants to form a club, fine, they can be self-funded. MU doesn't need to be doing this stuff for adult students.

Thing is, the tuition and board at MU has gone up without those new dorms, for example.  My guess is a student life person somewhere is losing their mind at your comments (not that I disagree with your comments), but who is going to think about the LGBT students or the international students or the Harry Potter club, etc, etc. 

I suspect the largest line item on MU's budget is salary and benefits.  Tough to cut expenses just with student life changes.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 02:33:28 PM
There is no "ban." If you are a junior or senior and want to live on campus, there are options available to you, primarily in Humphrey or Campus Town.

No, you can't live in McCormick, but its not like MU says you can't live on campus.

I meant from residence halls specifically. Marquette bans juniors and seniors (except in rare cases) from living in residence halls. The on campus apartments are a separate entity and are exclusively open to upper classmen.

Quote from: Bleuteaux on July 08, 2014, 07:18:52 PM
What I'm not for is building dorms that rival 4 star hotels, the ridiculous "student life" programming, collecting activity fees to be distributed to all of the student groups, subsidizing movies at the varsity theater, the insane number of support staff (do we really need a paid full-time hall director and full-time paid layperson chaplain in every single residence hall?)

If someone at Marquette wants to form a club, fine, they can be self-funded. MU doesn't need to be doing this stuff for adult students.

The problem is, we need to do these things in order to keep up with the Joneses. Our dorms are on the very low end of quality, trust me. But depending on which study you read, quality of dorm is somewhere between 3rd and 1st most important factor in students deciding on university. "Ridiculous" student life programming is an essential aspect of the college experience. A majority of learning on college campuses occur outside the classroom and student life sponsored activities are one of the strongest venues for that. Quality of student life type programs is also one of the top factors in student retention and persistence to graduation.

As for support staff, I agree that we have too many, but Marquette is actually on the low end of this as well. The examples you gave were interesting as there are only 9 hall directors (one for each hall) and somewhere between 9-18 hall ministers. The hall directors are absolutely essential staff. Every one of our peer institutions utilizes a similar position for each of their halls. The halls could not operate without them. The hall ministers on the other hand....certainly not essential, but they go towards the mission and values. These are also two of the lowest paid positions at the university.

As Chicos pointed out, the student affairs side of things is a very small percentage of the budget. Cutting from there won't get you what you need. You need to cut from Academic Affairs, Athletics, and Administration. That's where the biggest pieces of the pie are. My suggestions would be cutting down on support staff across the board, cutting tennis, and axing most of the "low ROI" departments/majors. I would also cut down on the amount of colleges we have. We currently have what? Like 8 colleges. Cut that number to 4 or 5. Communication and Education can be rolled into arts and sciences. Professional Studies can be rolled into business. Even nursing could be put in arts and sciences if necessary. That would cut down on a lot of support staff and upper administration. Why pay for 8 deans when you could only have to pay for 4?

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 08, 2014, 11:59:47 PM
I meant from residence halls specifically. Marquette bans juniors and seniors (except in rare cases) from living in residence halls. The on campus apartments are a separate entity and are exclusively open to upper classmen.

Really?  That's certainly a change.  I remember a number of juniors living in Mashuda back in the day, of course that was before the apartments were opened up.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 09, 2014, 12:21:10 AM

As Chicos pointed out, the student affairs side of things is a very small percentage of the budget. Cutting from there won't get you what you need. You need to cut from Academic Affairs, Athletics, and Administration. That's where the biggest pieces of the pie are. My suggestions would be cutting down on support staff across the board, cutting tennis, and axing most of the "low ROI" departments/majors. I would also cut down on the amount of colleges we have. We currently have what? Like 8 colleges. Cut that number to 4 or 5. Communication and Education can be rolled into arts and sciences. Professional Studies can be rolled into business. Even nursing could be put in arts and sciences if necessary. That would cut down on a lot of support staff and upper administration. Why pay for 8 deans when you could only have to pay for 4?

If you cut tennis, we are below the NCAA minimum and cannot stay Division I. 

I agree with merging some of the colleges, even though politically on campus people would freak and morale low, but this is the way of the real world with mergers, consolidation, etc.  Redundancy is eliminated.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 09, 2014, 12:27:34 AM
If you cut tennis, we are below the NCAA minimum and cannot stay Division I. 

I agree with merging some of the colleges, even though politically on campus people would freak and morale low, but this is the way of the real world with mergers, consolidation, etc.  Redundancy is eliminated.

When we added lacrosse we moved to 8 mens and 8 womens sports. The minimum is 7 and 7.

Just eliminate any major where over 20% of the grads are employed by Wal Mart or Starbucks.

Quote from: jsglow on July 08, 2014, 10:04:59 AM
$47K per year.  That was painful to type.

That's still comparatively inexpensive as the private schools around here like Quinnipiac, Sacred Heart & our fellow Jesuit institution of Fairfield U. are way more than that.  That was always my pitch at college fairs.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2014, 04:54:30 PM
How do you suggest doing it while also attracting very good students, very good faculty, having the latest in technology and facilities for kids to learn?  Stuff costs money.  Professors and staff want COLA raises if not merit raises, technology costs $$, infrastructure needs upgrading, and fair or not the shiny new toys attracts students because it is "state of the art" for the same reason why MU built the Al, to recruit student athletes...the Old Gym wasn't cutting it.

The easy thing to say is get stuff under control, costs, etc.  How, is the question. 

Here's a crazy idea that will have heads explode, but it has been suggested at some schools.  Let in less students that are needs based?  That puts MU out of the money loaning \ giving business.  Now, is that against our mission?  Sure is.  Would I advocate it?  Nope, but that's part of the problem as well, you need to be able to afford that money you are granting, etc. 

Here is the "RATE CARD"  http://www.marquette.edu/mucentral/bursar/documents/RateGuide14-15.pdf

Thing is, how many are truly spending this kind of cost, or the retail cost?  Not many. 

I understand it's easy to say "control costs!" and a lot harder to actually execute.

HOWEVER, MU can't keep doing what it's doing. They can't just keep raising tuition 5 grand per year from now into eternity. It ain't gonna work.

This goes for every college. The demand for secondary education isn't inelastic. Shiny new buildings are great at attracting students, but are people willing to pay $500,000 for their education because they like the dorms?

I think it's easy to say: "We gotta keep up!" and crank out new buildings and continue to jack tuition up. I think it's a lot harder to accept that for MU's long term benefit, they might have to make the best of what they have for a while. I don't know that 100K tuition in 2025 with a bunch of great dorms is an equation that is going to work.

I'm not asking MU to be the Wal-Mart of education, but I think they need to work a little harder and getting costs under control and figuring out how this is all going to work in the long run. The landscape of secondary education is changing. MU needs to be very smart how they are operating, or else this could get ugly.

The thing I keep wondering is how much longer can the schools that are not top 200 - private schools - stay in business? I'm thinking the Alvernos and Ripons of the world. Maybe you can say Alverno is in MKE so it's going to have some business, but a Ripon or a Beloit? Who is thinking that it makes sense to spend $49,970 at Beloit College versus any degree at any UW extension school?

http://www.beloit.edu/financialaid/policies_procedures/costs/

Marquette's tuition is crazy, but I have to admit that they're no worse than most private schools out there. Who is honestly paying 50 grand per year at Beloit?

Ripon, $42,567

http://www.ripon.edu/admission/costs/

St. Norberts, $41,478

http://www.snc.edu/bursar/costs.html

Edgewood, $34,563

http://www.edgewood.edu/Prospective-Students/Undergraduate/Freshman/Freshman-Financial-Aid

Lawrence U, $51,465 (Edit: wrong Lawrence)

http://www.lawrence.edu/admissions/afford/financial

I guess I'm just amazed people think they are getting their money's worth out of these places.

By comparison, total cost per school year to attend Georgetown is 62k, Villanova is 59k, Seton Hall is 49k, Creighton is 48k, DePaul is 49k, Xavier is 47k, Butler is 49k, Providence is 58k and St. John's is 57k. Also, ND is 60k for this year.

Got these numbers from http://www.collegedata.com/ (http://www.collegedata.com/)

Personally, I face one more tuition bump for jsglow jr.'s Senior year.  I'll avoid the $50K threshold by a whisker.  Frankly it seems to get a bit easier when they are upperclassmen as the MU room and board charge goes away and is replaced by our direct help for rent and groceries.  That feels like another mortgage payment every month.

But there's no way I could have put 4-5 kids through and we did expect meaningful contributions from both our kids in the form of schollys, some relatively modest loans, and jobs while they were in school.  Everyone in our family pulls on that very heavy oar.

Quote from: Heavy Gear on July 09, 2014, 08:22:50 AM
By comparison, total cost per school year to attend Georgetown is 62k, Villanova is 59k, Seton Hall is 49k, Creighton is 48k, DePaul is 49k, Xavier is 47k, Butler is 49k, Providence is 58k and St. John's is 57k. Also, ND is 60k for this year.

Got these numbers from http://www.collegedata.com/ (http://www.collegedata.com/)

It's a good point, and I think a lot of schools (particularly private schools) might be in for a rude awakening.

I don't mean to sound like some sort of doomsdayer, but these schools can't possibly sustain this kind of economic growth.

There is a breaking point where people will just choose other options. It might not be today, it might not be in 5 years. But, at this rate, secondary education, and particularly private schools are going to hit the ceiling. I hope MU doesn't smash it's head.

Quote from: warrior07 on July 09, 2014, 08:14:46 AM
Marquette's tuition is crazy, but I have to admit that they're no worse than most private schools out there. Who is honestly paying 50 grand per year at Beloit?

Bob Benson

(http://assets-s3.rollingstone.com/assets/images/story/who-is-bob-benson-20130513/1000x306/benson-306v-1368197474.jpg)

Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on July 09, 2014, 08:40:34 AM
It's a good point, and I think a lot of schools (particularly private schools) might be in for a rude awakening.

I don't mean to sound like some sort of doomsdayer, but these schools can't possibly sustain this kind of economic growth.

There is a breaking point where people will just choose other options. It might not be today, it might not be in 5 years. But, at this rate, secondary education, and particularly private schools are going to hit the ceiling. I hope MU doesn't smash it's head.

Yeah but this is all about the math.  The vast, vast majority of people don't pay the list price. 

I would have thought that a bunch of the smaller, liberal arts colleges would have disappeared with the last recession.  But most survived.  A number of poor and rural schools closed.  But for instance there hasn't been a four year school closing in Wisconsin since Mt. Scenario in the late 90s.  (School located in Ladysmith with a focus on educating Native Americans and they lost their main funding source...DeRance Foundation.)  Many of the other little ones (Silver Lake, Mount Mary, Viterbo, Northland, etc.) seem to be doing just fine.

But we'll see...

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 09:31:36 AM

Yeah but this is all about the math.  The vast, vast majority of people don't pay the list price.  

I would have thought that a bunch of the smaller, liberal arts colleges would have disappeared with the last recession.  But most survived.  A number of poor and rural schools closed.  But for instance there hasn't been a four year school closing in Wisconsin since Mt. Scenario in the late 90s.  (School located in Ladysmith with a focus on educating Native Americans and they lost their main funding source...DeRance Foundation.)  Many of the other little ones (Silver Lake, Mount Mary, Viterbo, Northland, etc.) seem to be doing just fine.

But we'll see...

When you look at the grads that the smaller liberal arts schools are turning out and where they're going to work, I don't see the new education model as a threat... the vast majority of my liberal arts buddies are B2B sales, police officer, institutional administrator, HR generalist, RN, and PR/media liaison types... these are critical-to-society jobs that are not at all conducive to online, distance or self-education models.  For the "new education" model to be successful, you have to have students who have the analytical skills and EQ to flourish in what basically amounts to a self-teaching environment... and these kids are going to be more attracted to careers in science, math & technology than service, communications and law enforcement.

The real threat to the liberal arts schools are the tech schools and community colleges... MATC and MSOE have been around longer than many liberal arts schools, and not only are their funding sources a little more reliable, but they're slowly moving in on the territory of the liberal arts schools in their course and curricula offerings.  It's not long before every community college is offering the same bachelor programs as the Lawrences, Cardinal Stritches and Concordias of the world.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 09:31:36 AM

Yeah but this is all about the math.  The vast, vast majority of people don't pay the list price. 

I would have thought that a bunch of the smaller, liberal arts colleges would have disappeared with the last recession.  But most survived.  A number of poor and rural schools closed.  But for instance there hasn't been a four year school closing in Wisconsin since Mt. Scenario in the late 90s.  (School located in Ladysmith with a focus on educating Native Americans and they lost their main funding source...DeRance Foundation.)  Many of the other little ones (Silver Lake, Mount Mary, Viterbo, Northland, etc.) seem to be doing just fine.

But we'll see...

That's because the federal government was still handing out student loans like candy. This will not be so in the next 5-15 years.

Really, these schools should have gone down during the last recession. But there is so little education on financial planning as it results to college choice. Students go to what school they want with little thought of how long the loans will take them to pay off. Personally, I think it is unethical for some of these schools to take on students when they know full well that the student will be unable to pay off their loans. Why would anyone want to pay near $50,000 for a year at Beloit? What kind of ROI can they really expect?

A few years back, former Secretary of Education William Bennett made the claim that only 150 out of 3500 colleges are worth the price of tuition. His study has been debunked some, but the general point he was trying to make still stands. Fortunately, Marquette is currently on the list with the 123rd best ROI. But if tuition keeps rising, I don't know if that will be true for long.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 09, 2014, 12:36:29 AM
When we added lacrosse we moved to 8 mens and 8 womens sports. The minimum is 7 and 7.

My bad, you are right.  Keep forgetting about Lacrosse.

Quote from: TAMU Eagle on July 09, 2014, 10:04:15 AM
That's because the federal government was still handing out student loans like candy. This will not be so in the next 5-15 years.

I wonder how many of these very small liberal arts schools would disappear almost overnight if the student loans from government ended.

I'm also not sure that schools are interested in dropping "low ROI" majors. To the school, I wonder if these are not the major money makers. Think about it. An engineering major and a history major pay the same tuition, but how much more does it cost to pay the engineering prof and to build a brand new engineering building, versus having the history major take all his classes in Weir Chemistry or whatever.

Stupid majors are money makers for universities.

Quote from: warrior07 on July 09, 2014, 10:11:41 AM
I wonder how many of these very small liberal arts schools would disappear almost overnight if the student loans from government ended.

I'm also not sure that schools are interested in dropping "low ROI" majors. To the school, I wonder if these are not the major money makers. Think about it. An engineering major and a history major pay the same tuition, but how much more does it cost to pay the engineering prof and to build a brand new engineering building, versus having the history major take all his classes in Weir Chemistry or whatever.

Stupid majors are money makers for universities.

That's true but only one small piece of the puzzle.

Which college do you think rakes in more donations from their alumni, Education or Engineering? That's where the real money comes in.

Quote from: Canned Goods n Ammo on July 09, 2014, 08:40:34 AM
It's a good point, and I think a lot of schools (particularly private schools) might be in for a rude awakening.

I did not even consider a single public school.  Due to the cost disparity, my kids will only go to private schools if we can get a lot of help (merit/need/other).  Further "complicating" matters is that there are some very good public schools in the state and their merit-based scholarships are very competitive.  Miami, for example, gives an automatic 50% tuition reduction for a 32 on the ACT with a 3.5+ -- and quite possibly more.  That brings Miami tuition down to $6,500 or so.   That's very hard to compete with.  Kenyon (a very good private school in Ohio) would have to give a scholarship of nearly $40,000 to bring their cost in line with that.  I've heard they offer a lot of scholarship money, but not that much.  Historically Ohio University (not as strong as Miami or Kenyon) has offered an automatic full-tuition scholarship for 32/3.5, making the cost of attending OU (including R&B) less than a lot of private high schools in Ohio.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 09:31:36 AM

Yeah but this is all about the math.  The vast, vast majority of people don't pay the list price. 

I would have thought that a bunch of the smaller, liberal arts colleges would have disappeared with the last recession.  But most survived.  A number of poor and rural schools closed.  But for instance there hasn't been a four year school closing in Wisconsin since Mt. Scenario in the late 90s.  (School located in Ladysmith with a focus on educating Native Americans and they lost their main funding source...DeRance Foundation.)  Many of the other little ones (Silver Lake, Mount Mary, Viterbo, Northland, etc.) seem to be doing just fine.

But we'll see...

I guess I'm looking at 10-15 years down the line. College tuition is far exceeding inflation, so while some schools are "okay" for now, I don't think most can continue at the rate they are going.

I personally wouldn't pay 50K to go to Beloit... but obviously some people do. But, what's the breaking point? Can Beloit charge 100K? 200K?

I know that "list price" isn't what most kids pay, but there is no doubt that tuition is going up faster than inflation, and at some point economics are going to play a role in enrollment (for all colleges).

Quote from: Benny B on July 09, 2014, 09:57:31 AM
The real threat to the liberal arts schools are the tech schools and community colleges... MATC and MSOE have been around longer than many liberal arts schools, and not only are their funding sources a little more reliable, but they're slowly moving in on the territory of the liberal arts schools in their course and curricula offerings.  It's not long before every community college is offering the same bachelor programs as the Lawrences, Cardinal Stritches and Concordias of the world.

You do know that MSOE is a four year school right?  With majors beyond engineering.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 11:21:26 AM

You do know that MSOE is a four year school right?  With majors beyond engineering.

They had to add Nursing to try and get some poon to enroll there.

Quote from: warrior07 on July 09, 2014, 10:11:41 AM
I wonder how many of these very small liberal arts schools would disappear almost overnight if the student loans from government ended.

I'm also not sure that schools are interested in dropping "low ROI" majors. To the school, I wonder if these are not the major money makers. Think about it. An engineering major and a history major pay the same tuition, but how much more does it cost to pay the engineering prof and to build a brand new engineering building, versus having the history major take all his classes in Weir Chemistry or whatever.

Stupid majors are money makers for universities.

Well a couple of things....

As someone who majored in history, I never thought my major was "stupid" and simply a "money maker" for Marquette.  I have a son who is majoring in Art, granted not at a private school, and neither my wife nor I view his major as "stupid."  So I would watch it with the judgemental language about what majors are worthy and which aren't.  You can make a living doing all sorts of stuff with all sorts of academic backgrounds.

As as far limiting student loans.  Well good luck with that.  I would argue that incurring $40,000 in debt is worth it *for most students* when considering the alternative such as entering the workforce with a HS education.  You want to talk ROI take a look at this chart.

http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

The average individual with a bachelor's degree makes $450 week more than with a high school diploma.  That's $23,000 a year.  That means in essentially two years, the average person with a BA has already had a positive return on investment on $40,000 in student loans.

And you want that to be cut off or curtailed?  I don't think college should only be accessible to those who can write a check for it.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 11:33:32 AM

Well a couple of things....

As someone who majored in history, I never thought my major was "stupid" and simply a "money maker" for Marquette.  I have a son who is majoring in Art, granted not at a private school, and neither my wife nor I view his major as "stupid."  So I would watch it with the judgemental language about what majors are worthy and which aren't.  You can make a living doing all sorts of stuff with all sorts of academic backgrounds.

As as far limiting student loans.  Well good luck with that.  I would argue that incurring $40,000 in debt is worth it *for most students* when considering the alternative such as entering the workforce with a HS education.  You want to talk ROI take a look at this chart.

http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

The average individual with a bachelor's degree makes $450 week more than with a high school diploma.  That's $23,000 a year.  That means in essentially two years, the average person with a BA has already had a positive return on investment on $40,000 in student loans.

And you want that to be cut off or curtailed?  I don't think college should only be accessible to those who can write a check for it.

Add me to the list of people who majored in history, don't regret it, and are doing just fine. I think Chicos falls into that category as well.

I can compose an email better than 90% of the people in my company. I credit that to my liberal arts background.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 11:33:32 AM

Well a couple of things....

As someone who majored in history, I never thought my major was "stupid" and simply a "money maker" for Marquette.  I have a son who is majoring in Art, granted not at a private school, and neither my wife nor I view his major as "stupid."  So I would watch it with the judgemental language about what majors are worthy and which aren't.  You can make a living doing all sorts of stuff with all sorts of academic backgrounds.

As as far limiting student loans.  Well good luck with that.  I would argue that incurring $40,000 in debt is worth it *for most students* when considering the alternative such as entering the workforce with a HS education.  You want to talk ROI take a look at this chart.

http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

The average individual with a bachelor's degree makes $450 week more than with a high school diploma.  That's $23,000 a year.  That means in essentially two years, the average person with a BA has already had a positive return on investment on $40,000 in student loans.

And you want that to be cut off or curtailed?  I don't think college should only be accessible to those who can write a check for it.

Sorry to offend. Two of my majors were political science and international affairs. Complete waste of time. And I say that having loved every professor I had in both areas. It did not make sense to incur debt for those majors.

Subsidies raise the cost of everything. Just look at ethanol and gas prices. You reduce the availability of cheap loans and if fewer students can afford $50 grand for Beloit, Beloit is going to have to drastically cut down on costs in order to survive. Everyone wins except educational bureaucracies.

Quote from: The Sultan of Sunshine on July 09, 2014, 11:21:26 AM

You do know that MSOE is a four year school right?  With majors beyond engineering.

That's why I alluded to them already moving in on "liberal arts territory."

Will MSOE eventually have to change the name to Milw. School of Education?