| For release: April 7, 2005
| Contact: |
Joe Elstner |
| |
Office: |
(314) 444-8902 |
| |
E-mail: |
joseph.c.elstner@stls.frb.org |
| |
Mobile: |
(314) 640-3526 |
| |
| |
Charles Henderson |
| |
Office |
(314) 444-8311 |
| |
E:Mail |
charles.b.henderson@stls.frb.org |
| |
Mobile: |
(314) 609-5972 |
| |
Pager: |
(314) 538-9526 |
|
| Online Press Room: |
www.stlouisfed.org/news/press_room/contact.html |
|
Universities Should Work On Improving Own Productivity: St. Louis
Fed’s Poole
link to speech
St. Louis, MO. — Most people would agree that
college tuition has increased dramatically in recent years. Between
1990 and 2000, tuition jumped an average of 5.9 percent a year at
public colleges and 5.5 percent annually at private colleges. That’s
more than double the average consumer price index increase of 2.7
percent.
One key cause, according to William Poole, Federal Reserve Bank
of St. Louis president, could be the lack of cost-saving incentives
faced by public universities compared to private sector companies.
Speaking to students, faculty and community leaders at Webster University,
Poole cited National Center for Education Statistics numbers showing
that administrative expenditures as a percent of total expenditures
at public institutions increased from 30 to 50 percent between 1976
and 2001. “More alarming is that total instructional expenditures
per student dropped 14 percent between 1990 and 2001, while administrative
expenditures increased 14 cent over the same period.”
Poole cited financial aid itself as a possible reason for tuition
increases. “Perhaps paradoxically, the availability of financial
aid may be a reason behind higher tuition. Discussion of the affordability
of higher education has focused attention of governments and donors
on the need for financial aid to the almost complete exclusion of
attention on productivity enhancements that might constrain tuition
increases.”
Poole said universities can reduce costs and improve student quality
in an effort to increase higher education productivity by considering
these issues:
- Defining the university’s objectives
- Defining productivity inputs and outputs
- Measuring productivity and
- Demonstrating productivity improvements
Poole mentioned privatization of certain services as one way of
increasing higher education cost efficiency. “Most universities
are vertically integrated,” he said, “meaning they not
only provide education but also food service, student and faculty
housing cleaning and maintenance, and records management. While
these services contribute to student learning, there is no reason
why these services can’t be performed by private contractors.”
Decentralization of administrative structures can also benefit
universities, said Poole. “This occurs often in the private
sector, but universities generally have not followed suit.”
He said decentralization can give academic departments more control
over their costs and staffing needs and add flexibility in matching
resources to changes in student demands.
Poole also recommended increased flexibility of university faculty
staffing. “To rein in costs, universities must have flexibility
to hire more faculty or increase teaching loads of current faculty
when demand for a major increases, or to reduce both when demand
decreases.” Poole cited academic tenure as “arguably
the greatest obstacle to increased flexibility of faculty. Tenure
prevents significant staffing changes in response to student demands
and also may prevent lower quality faculty from being replaced by
higher quality faculty.”
Poole said that “too few administrators and faculty are
willing to even consider innovations that could make a real difference.
We need thinking on all levels about innovative ways to deliver
educational services. Great universities have a culture of scholarly
excellence, of nurturing students and of open and free inquiry.
They need to add to that culture a spirit of productivity enhancement
so that tuition resources raised from families and funds from state
legislatures and donors are used wisely.”
###
Back to top |