2017 US News Ranking

[Herman Cain]

We were ranked 86th. Two years in a row at this number. Lovell and Company need to step up their game.  We put this in our strategic plan several years ago and are not only making no progress but are actually going down.

Northeastern which started out in the 140s is now down to 39. So the system can be gamed.

[MU82]

Yet another sign that Wojo can't recruit or coach.

[GOO]

I realized years ago, that MU should really be looking at two things going forward:

1. Get smaller and more selective.  This isn't just about rankings going up, but it would be a byproduct.  The future for a school like MU is going to be to get smaller, not larger.  The cheap and free education available online and used by individuals is only getting started. It will hit all but the top schools at the margins and get worse over time.  We have to plan for this change. 

2.  More scholarships.  I know, I know, it takes money.  Yes.  But we seem to have a fixation on staying competitive through new buildings but not scholarships.  The push has to be on for money for scholarships over first class buildings.  We want both and can't have both.  Choices need to be made.  There has been a change and the selection process by students has changed... a flashy building has less cache than a scholarship in attracting students and great students.  See number one, scholarships are going to be the key to competing.

As an aside, as part if number one, there has also been a change in hiring, where a degree is less emphasized in area such as tech jobs.  A degree is secondary to can you do the job.  If you can learn an area of expertise and can do the job, the degree is less important.  As tech allows employers to evaluate skills of prospects cheaply, more jobs will go to people who can simply do the job versus having a degree.   Now, for the high level jobs, carrier path, CEO, attorney, doctor tract or those with money to pay for college... college will still be important.  But the number of people taking free or cheap alternatives is going to change education except for the elite schools.  A company like coursera.org will become a college for the non-elites.  Motivated people will get the knowledge they want for free... We have to get smaller, more selective, and ramp up scholarships to compete. 

Instead, it seems MU has been trying to grow and admit and take more students instead of shrinking and being more selective and offering more scholarships. 

Tell if I'm wrong, but my impression from kids I'm in contact with is they are being very careful about education debt and looking for value over flash.  This is a good thing, but we have to compete in this new mindset.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

GOO I was thinking about this yesterday on a similar question about school size when scrolling through the rankings.  Locally, Yale is building two new residence halls so that they can admit another 200 students per class and what will eventually add 800 total more students.  The reason was they felt they were passing on too many great students every year.  Hypothetically a school admitting more students should lower their ranking and vice versa if Marquette reduces class size it should increase their ranking.  Manipulation of the numbers.  Will a school like Yale just get more kids applying "thinking" their chances of getting admitted are better with more openings despite there not really being that many more openings?

[GGGG]

1. Get smaller and more selective.  This isn't just about rankings going up, but it would be a byproduct.  The future for a school like MU is going to be to get smaller, not larger.  The cheap and free education available online and used by individuals is only getting started. It will hit all but the top schools at the margins and get worse over time.  We have to plan for this change. 

Schools build their entire financial model on having certain enrollment targets.  So sure, the idea that you could recruit less students...and somehow have them pay more...sounds good and all.  But it isn't really all that realistic.

2.  More scholarships.  I know, I know, it takes money.  Yes.  But we seem to have a fixation on staying competitive through new buildings but not scholarships.  The push has to be on for money for scholarships over first class buildings.  We want both and can't have both.  Choices need to be made.  There has been a change and the selection process by students has changed... a flashy building has less cache than a scholarship in attracting students and great students.  See number one, scholarships are going to be the key to competing.

I'm not really in a position to judge whether or not Marquette's emphasis on infrastructure over endowed scholarships was a good choice to make.  I do know that Marquette's infrastructure was OK, but not great, the last time I toured the place.  (When compared to similar schools.)

As an aside, as part if number one, there has also been a change in hiring, where a degree is less emphasized in area such as tech jobs.  A degree is secondary to can you do the job.  If you can learn an area of expertise and can do the job, the degree is less important.  As tech allows employers to evaluate skills of prospects cheaply, more jobs will go to people who can simply do the job versus having a degree.   Now, for the high level jobs, carrier path, CEO, attorney, doctor tract or those with money to pay for college... college will still be important.  But the number of people taking free or cheap alternatives is going to change education except for the elite schools.  A company like coursera.org will become a college for the non-elites.  Motivated people will get the knowledge they want for free...

Except the gap in income between those with a college degree and those without a college degree continues to widen.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/02/11/study-income-gap-between-young-college-and-high-school-grads-widens

[Herman Cain]

I realized years ago, that MU should really be looking at two things going forward:

1. Get smaller and more selective.  This isn't just about rankings going up, but it would be a byproduct.  The future for a school like MU is going to be to get smaller, not larger.  The cheap and free education available online and used by individuals is only getting started. It will hit all but the top schools at the margins and get worse over time.  We have to plan for this change. 

2.  More scholarships.  I know, I know, it takes money.  Yes.  But we seem to have a fixation on staying competitive through new buildings but not scholarships.  The push has to be on for money for scholarships over first class buildings.  We want both and can't have both.  Choices need to be made.  There has been a change and the selection process by students has changed... a flashy building has less cache than a scholarship in attracting students and great students.  See number one, scholarships are going to be the key to competing.

As an aside, as part if number one, there has also been a change in hiring, where a degree is less emphasized in area such as tech jobs.  A degree is secondary to can you do the job.  If you can learn an area of expertise and can do the job, the degree is less important.  As tech allows employers to evaluate skills of prospects cheaply, more jobs will go to people who can simply do the job versus having a degree.   Now, for the high level jobs, carrier path, CEO, attorney, doctor tract or those with money to pay for college... college will still be important.  But the number of people taking free or cheap alternatives is going to change education except for the elite schools.  A company like coursera.org will become a college for the non-elites.  Motivated people will get the knowledge they want for free... We have to get smaller, more selective, and ramp up scholarships to compete. 

Instead, it seems MU has been trying to grow and admit and take more students instead of shrinking and being more selective and offering more scholarships. 

Tell if I'm wrong, but my impression from kids I'm in contact with is they are being very careful about education debt and looking for value over flash.  This is a good thing, but we have to compete in this new mindset.

The points you are making are very good. I have said for a long time we need a  program like Morehead Cain at UNC or Jefferson Scholars that goes after top kids with full scholarships. I think that helps on multiple fronts. It increases the interest among the better students, the once that earn the scholarship and accept increase our admitted stats and hopefully these good students will have great achievements post MU thus enhancing our reputations.

It seems like the school has a model that targets an enrollment of 2,000 or so each year. My view is to increase the number of applicants significantly.  When kids get their admissions decisions it will help our cause when there are several kids from a high school who don't get it to the one who does get it in. Makes the one who got in value the acceptance more. Human nature.  The snob appeal factor can not be understated in college admissions and acceptance.

We all know MU is a great school but I contend the school has to be much more intelligent about how it markets itself.

[Tugg Speedman]

The points you are making are very good. I have said for a long time we need a  program like Morehead Cain at UNC or Jefferson Scholars that goes after top kids with full scholarships. I think that helps on multiple fronts. It increases the interest among the better students, the once that earn the scholarship and accept increase our admitted stats and hopefully these good students will have great achievements post MU thus enhancing our reputations.

It seems like the school has a model that targets an enrollment of 2,000 or so each year. My view is to increase the number of applicants significantly.  When kids get their admissions decisions it will help our cause when there are several kids from a high school who don't get it to the one who does get it in. Makes the one who got in value the acceptance more. Human nature.  The snob appeal factor can not be understated in college admissions and acceptance.

We all know MU is a great school but I contend the school has to be much more intelligent about how it markets itself.

Again, no one is against any of this, absolutely no one.  Not Lovell, not the Board of Trustees, not the large donors.

So unless you are going to write a $10 million dollar check to MU, a Moorehead Cain type of program is not happening.  The only thing holding it back is the money, not desire to do it.  How is it going to get funded?

Ditto reducing the size of the school.  The school has assets and overhead for a certain amount of students.  Cut that amount of students (and tuition income) and the school runs a deficit.  Who is writing the check to allow the school to downsize?

This thread is starting to sound like sports talk radio where everyone calls in and thinks their baseball team should trade a bag of balls and two has-beens to the Cubs for Kyle Hendricks and Kris Bryant.  And they honestly think that the reason such a trade does not happen is their GM is too stupid to just call the Cubs and make it happen.

[GGGG]

Again, no one is against any of this, absolutely no one.  Not Lovell, not the Board of Trustees, not the large donors.

So unless you are going to write a $10 million dollar check to MU, a Moorehead Cain type of program is not happening.  The only thing holding it back is the money, not desire to do it.  How is it going to get funded?

Ditto reducing the size of the school.  The school has assets and overhead for a certain amount of students.  Cut that amount of students (and tuition income) and the school runs a deficit.  Who is writing the check to allow the school to downsize?

This thread is starting to sound like sports talk radio where everyone calls in and thinks their baseball team should trade a bag of balls and two has-beens to the Cubs for Kyle Hendricks and Kris Bryant.  And they honestly think that the reason such a trade does not happen is their GM is too stupid to just call the Cubs and make it happen.

Yep.  Everyone knows how to run <insert organization> except for those who actually run that organization.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Goo-

You're a bit all over the map.  You talk about becoming smaller, which would raise the cost of tuition.  Yet, you also want to the school to become more affordable.  If financial aid is your concern, donate more and encourage your fellow alumni to do the same.

You also talk about online education and tech jobs.  Is Marquette really competing with the online educators?  The top programs are Business School, PT, Dentistry, Law School...do you want your financial planner, physical therapist, dentist, and lawyer to have online degrees?  Or hands on, class room training?  Note: none of those are tech jobs.

I'm not sure you understand Marquette's niche in the education landscape.  Rankings are nice to get publicity but once the student gets on campus it is up to the individual to put in the effort to get the most out of their education.  Having elite programs is just as important as overall ranking.  UW-Whitewater, UW-Eau Claire, and UW-Stevens Point have nationally known programs.  UW-W, it's marine biology;  UWEC, chemistry; UWSP, theater.  But you won't see these schools on any overall national rankings.

Marquette has some programs with excellent reputations and a few more with quite good reputations.  Those programs will continue to draw top students interested in those field.  I couldn't care less about drawing empty applications to game the rankings system.  And as I stated earlier I don't see getting smaller as an option.

[Tugg Speedman]

MU's problem is simple to say and hard to fix.

The problem ... it has a small endowment.  Private schools are significantly more expensive than public schools.  That is why it is hard to compare MU to Bucky.  In-state for Bucky is $10k versus mid-30k for MU.  This means they are attracting very different students.

My sense, from my personal experience and talking to others, is private schools with large endowments are doing a significant amount of discounting from the list price.  It is not formal programs like Moorehead Cain but rather they call you and after you have been accepted and ask what can you pay, and they negotiate, not unlike you might when buying a car or house.  None of this get shown in the official stats or formal scholarships programs.

So the simple problem, has a hard solution, MU needs more money.  Is everyone here offering solutions regular donors to the school?  I am.

[GGGG]

Jesse that is exactly it.

Simply put, a larger endowment, even if it is not directed at scholarships, reduces dependence on tuition and financial aid income.  For instance, if Marquette could endow ten chairs at $2 million per chair, that $20 million would likely generate $800,000 annually.  That $800,000 would replace budgeted money to pay those respective chairs salaries, benefits, etc.. 

Now that $800,000 can be used to give forty additional students a $20,000 discount.  Or twenty students a full ride.  Which instantly makes Marquette a more attractive option for higher performing students.

[Tugg Speedman]

Jesse that is exactly it.

Simply put, a larger endowment, even if it is not directed at scholarships, reduces dependence on tuition and financial aid income.  For instance, if Marquette could endow ten chairs at $2 million per chair, that $20 million would likely generate $800,000 annually.  That $800,000 would replace budgeted money to pay those respective chairs salaries, benefits, etc.. 

Now that $800,000 can be used to give forty additional students a $20,000 discount.  Or twenty students a full ride.  Which instantly makes Marquette a more attractive option for higher performing students.

And again, to be fair to MU and many other Jesuit/Catholic schools ... until the 1960s they did not think their mission was to have endowment.  The schools were run by priests, took what they needed to run the school and gave the rest to the church and the poor.  A noble cause.

So, 50 years ago, most Catholic schools had no endowment (their are exceptions like ND) meaning they had a very late start.

If MU started increasing their endowment in 1881 (when the school began) instead of the 1960s, and given the stock market is 20x higher than 1881, it might have an endowment with a couple of billion dollars and in a far different position.

Side note, if MU started an endowment in 1881, then they might have had the money for keep a money losing football team in the 1950s and 1960s.

Too bad the Catholic/Jesuit mission is so focused on the poor.  If MU only keep all the money it raised from 1881 to the 1960s for its endowment!!!

[4everwarriors]

Heisy, for da record, dude, it was 1881, ai na?

[Tugg Speedman]

Heisy, for da record, dude, it was 1881, ai na?

Thanks -- corrected

[GOO]

Getting smaller as part of a longer term plan does not have to mean tuition going way up.  In fact there are a lot of smaller colleges that keep tuition down in the mid 20's before scholarships.  If a student reduction is sudden, of course it is harder to manage fixed assets/costs and severance packages, etc in the short term.  If it is planned via attraction and reducing fixed costs, dorms, etc, it does not have to mean tuition going way up. 

I see a trend about to take place that will effect all but the more elite schools.  A mass exodus, no.  But at the margins in the short term and deeper into the margins in the future.  I do see online and cheaper education alternatives gaining much sooner than later.  That is the business plan of places like coursera.org, edx, etc.  They will be offering degrees soon. 

Like it or not, we will be competing with these type of schools.  Will it be the core MU student who has parents more than willing to pay out for an MU education and want and are willing to pay for the 4 year on campus degree, no.  Paying 200K for a mid-tier school will look a lot less like a value proposition in the future, especially if one is taking loans out to do it, or working and trying to go to class, etc. 

New alternatives that are really cheap and online may not be MU's primary competition, but it is wrong to think this will not impact MU and schools like MU.  I think it is wrong to think these changes won't effect MU.  A kid that wants to go to law school and study humanities maybe best served with a nearly free degree if he/she can do well on the LSAT and complete the degree in 3 years for next to nothing.

That's my view and I believe it to be right.  I suspected most would disagree.

I'd be planning for fewer students OR having to admit more and more just to keep the numbers up which is only going to pull MU reputation down and possibly face a downward spiral of having to keep admitting more and more students... OR get $ for scholarships to compete.   Smaller and having scholarship money is the key, of course.   

Choices have to be made between buildings and scholarship money and size.  MU seems to be trying to stay the same size by admitting more and more students and competing with nice buildings.

[GooooMarquette]

I agree with GOO on the point of redirecting more of our existing money to scholarships instead of buildings.

Both of my daughters were admitted to MU, and both were offered an Ignatious Scholarship (it was like $15k/year, if I recall).  While this was nice, it paled in comparison to what they were offered at other schools.  Both would have been near the top of MU's admitted students in terms of ACT scores and GPAs, and this would have improved MU's numerical profile, but both chose other schools because they didn't want the debt.  From a strictly objective standpoint (I.e., numerical profile of admitted students), they would have been a benefit to MU.

If good USNWR rankings is based partly on the academic profile of admitted students, I think getting higher-caliber students in is the key...and IMHO you can do that better with money than shiny new buildings.

I understand that building the endowment is the longer-term fix.  But in the shorter term, my real-life anecdotal experience says we should spend the money we have on students, not buildings.

[Tugg Speedman]

I understand that building the endowment is the longer-term fix.  But in the shorter term, my real-life anecdotal experience says we should spend the money we have on students, not buildings.

People that right checks have big egos.  They want their name in a high profile place, like a building.   Example, the $50 million Eckstein gave for the new Law School.

If not a building, then they want it on some fancy scholarship name (like Moorehead Cain).

What MU needs of money in the general endowment that gives MU money and flexibility to wheel and deal and get GOO's kids into MU. 

Eckstein's $50 million would have been better for the general endowment with unrestricted use.  Much like this ...

Kenneth Griffin makes largest gift in Harvard College history
Alumnus donates $150 million to principally support financial aid
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/02/kenneth-griffin-makes-largest-gift-in-harvard-college-history/
The $150 million gift is principally focused on supporting Harvard’s financial aid program, which Griffin described as “an investment in the next generation of leaders as we continue to break down barriers to an outstanding education.”

-----------------

If your kid gets into Harvard, or another high endowment school, they do not have to pay.  They will do whatever it takes to get them to enroll. (Of course if your kid gets into Harvard they also got into other high endowment schools and they are all offering and dealing for them on the same level.)

Obviously MU cannot compete with the high endowment schools.  But it needs to be able to compete with its peers on price.

[StillAWarrior]

People that right checks have big egos.  They want their name in a high profile place, like a building.   Example, the $50 million Eckstein gave for the new Law School.

If not a building, then they want it on some fancy scholarship name (like Moorehead Cain).

What MU needs of money in the general endowment that gives MU money and flexibility to wheel and deal and get GOO's kids into MU. 

Eckstein's $50 million would have been better for the general endowment with unrestricted use.  Much like this ...

Kenneth Griffin makes largest gift in Harvard College history
Alumnus donates $150 million to principally support financial aid
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/02/kenneth-griffin-makes-largest-gift-in-harvard-college-history/
The $150 million gift is principally focused on supporting Harvard’s financial aid program, which Griffin described as “an investment in the next generation of leaders as we continue to break down barriers to an outstanding education.”

-----------------

If your kid gets into Harvard, or another high endowment school, they do not have to pay.  They will do whatever it takes to get them to enroll. (Of course if your kid gets into Harvard they also got into other high endowment schools and they are all offering and dealing for them on the same level.)

Obviously MU cannot compete with the high endowment schools.  But it needs to be able to compete with its peers on price.

While the financial aid at Harvard (and other high endowment schools) is very good, this is an exaggeration.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Marquette won't shrink its student body. It will expand it.  Gotta lower tuition if we're going to stay relevant.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Goo-

You keep talking about getting smaller.  Let's talk enrollment:  current numbers are roughly 8,300 undergrad and 11,000 total.  Not much different than the enrollment when I graduated in 2003.

So when you say smaller, what enrollment numbers are you targeting?  What schools would match that profile?

[Tugg Speedman]

While the financial aid at Harvard (and other high endowment schools) is very good, this is an exaggeration.

This is for the 2017 class (this year's seniors)

65% of Harvard's kids get a break on tuition.  Only 35% pay the list price of $41k.

Families with AGI (Adjusted Gross Income) less than $75k do not have to pay
Families with AGI between $75k and $150k average $12k/year

Other high endowment schools have similar numbers.

We have had threads on this before.  The high endowment schools have recently (last 10 to 15 years) identified a new minority group, the poor.  They are reaching out to low income communities for their best kids and literally telling them that money will not stand in the way if they get in.  Pay what you can and Harvard will cancel the rest.

They have a new student video with Tommy Lee Jones (Harvard 1968 and Al Gore's Roommate) telling prospective students exactly. that.

[StillAWarrior]

This is for the 2017 class (this year's seniors)

65% of Harvard's kids get a break on tuition.  Only 35% pay the list price of $41k.

Families with AGI (Adjusted Gross Income) less than $75k do not have to pay
Families with AGI between $75k and $150k average $12k/year

Other high endowment schools have similar numbers.

We have had threads on this before.  The high endowment schools have recently (last 10 to 15 years) identified a new minority group, the poor.  They are reaching out to low income communities for their best kids and literally telling them that money will not stand in the way if they get in.  Pay what you can and Harvard will cancel the rest.

They have a new student video with Tommy Lee Jones (Harvard 1968 and Al Gore's Roommate) telling prospective students exactly. that.

And all of this confirms my point:  your statement ("If [a] kid gets into Harvard...they do not have to pay.") was an exaggeration.  The data you've now provided simply helps quantify the exaggeration.  Harvard is doing really good things with financial aid to make it more affordable.  The facts themselves are impressive even without exaggeration.

[Tugg Speedman]

And all of this confirms my point:  your statement ("If [a] kid gets into Harvard...they do not have to pay.") was an exaggeration.  The data you've now provided simply helps quantify the exaggeration.  Harvard is doing really good things with financial aid to make it more affordable.  The facts themselves are impressive even without exaggeration.

I forgot three words as I assumed it was implied ...

If a kid gets into Harvard, they don't have to pay if they cannot.

Billionaire kids are not going to skip Harvard because they refuse to pay.  Poor families are going to skip Harvard because they cannot afford it. 

** Note when Harvard says you do not have to pay, if you are from a very poor family, that means everything, tuition, housing, books, meals and they will even buy you a plane ticket home for Christmas and summer breaks.

[StillAWarrior]

I forgot three words as I assumed it was implied ...

If a kid gets into Harvard, they don't have to pay if they cannot.

Billionaire kids are not going to skip Harvard because they refuse to pay.  Poor families are going to skip Harvard because they cannot afford it. 

** Note when Harvard says you do not have to pay, if you are from a very poor family, that means everything, tuition, housing books, meals and they will even buy you a plane ticket home for Christmas and summer breaks.

That's fine.  And I typically assume that people say what they mean.  I only mentioned the exaggeration because I personally have dealt with more than one person who believed exactly what you wrote -- that if you can get in its free.  It seems that a lot of enthusiastic Harvard supporters (such as yourself) and even Harvard personnel, love to tell people that if you can get in you don't have to pay -- always assuming that people will understand the very significant "implied" limitation.  I'd prefer that they just present the facts as you did in your follow-up post:  Harvard offers extremely generous financial aid and provide specifics.

Perhaps this is unfair to you (and to Harvard), but after dealing with this issue a few times, it kind of starts to feel like a used car salesman who says, "I forgot these three words -- 'does not run' -- as I assumed it was implied."

[Tugg Speedman]

That's fine.  And I typically assume that people say what they mean.  I only mentioned the exaggeration because I personally have dealt with more than one person who believed exactly what you wrote -- that if you can get in its free.  It seems that a lot of enthusiastic Harvard supporters (such as yourself) and even Harvard personnel, love to tell people that if you can get in you don't have to pay -- always assuming that people will understand the very significant "implied" limitation.  I'd prefer that they just present the facts as you did in your follow-up post:  Harvard offers extremely generous financial aid and provide specifics.

Perhaps this is unfair to you (and to Harvard), but after dealing with this issue a few times, it kind of starts to feel like a used car salesman who says, "I forgot these three words -- 'does not run' -- as I assumed it was implied."

Fair enough

My point is their os a lot of discounting going on from the list price at a lot of schools.   If MU has a problem, it's tuition is too high.  The need a bigger endowment so they can offer breaks to those that need it to make the yield go up (which makes their acceptance rate go down).  That will improve the ranking.

Harvard with a $33 billion endowment is the extreme cases that proves the rule.