Economics of non-profit versus for-profit schools

hearsay not heresay.

 

I'm still not convinced of that. And are there additional sources of money, from private investment to sales of R&D services, that a for-profit could tap more easily than a non-profit?

But you have already conceded that there is nothing preventing for-profits from conducting research. I would like to point out that 'USNews' America's Best Colleges' lists about 1400 schools, of which about 200 are research universities. The other 1200, overwhelmingly state run and private non-profit institutions, don't conduct very much research either.

So is the problem with the form of incorporation, or with the ecological niche that the school occupies? A school that specializes in night-school MBAs can't be compared with the University of Chicago's research efforts. And that's true regardless of whether the MBA school is non-profit or for-profit.

I am also troubled by the suggestion that providing the public a service that it needs and desires doesn't benefit society. If people want to earn an MBA at night, then setting up a school for them to do so is a public service, isn't it?

 

John - I don't disagree that the non-profit statutues have been abused in the past - including some DL institutions. But in the Internet enabled age the situation has changed. Reporting requirements now in effect (primarily the IRS Form 990) make all 501c3 organizations file a document that reports on their financial dealings. Increasingly, these are posted on the public Internet.

Go to www.guidestar.org. Enter your favorite instution name in the search field. You'll be able to see an image of the form 990 - including the salaries of top paid people and the number of employees paid more than $50,000.

Non-profits can't hide - their financial status, including the salaries of their highest paid officers and employees are very public today.

Regards - Andy

------------------
Andy Borchers, DBA
NSU (1996)

 

Academic quality is like pornography... difficult to define but you know it when you see it.

 

A tip of the hat to you sir... nice to see a DL person advocating high standards instead of being in the "faster, cheaper, easier" crowd.


I'll never work for a for-profit academic institution. My reputation means too much to me.

Regards - Andy



[/B][/QUOTE]

 

I think you have me confused with somebody else.

 

Let me apologize for the slightly off-topic post that I am about to make. It addresses what I take to be Walter's root complaint: That non-profits have purer and more socially valuable motivations than greedy for-profits, the "whores" in search of a buck. So let's start at the beginning:

People have needs and desires. But they are unable to satisfy most of them by themselves. They need the assistance of other people. So the fundamental question of society is: Why should other people help us meet our needs when they have unmet needs of their own?

Historically, family and clan have provided links of mutual obligation. Religions have tried to create ethics of compassion and duty. But what happens in modern urban civilization where we all live in the company of strangers?

Well, we get the cooperation of strangers by paying them for their goods and services. That's why strangers will work to meet our desires rather than their own. Because by helping us, they acquire the means to get the assistance that they need.

And how do we get the money that motivates strangers? By assisting strangers ourselves. We need to provide goods or services to the community that people are willing to pay us for.

Far from being the "root of all evil", money is our greatest source of social cohesion. It is the glue that holds civilization together. It's why the young woman is behind the counter at Starbucks serving you and not out doing something that she would rather do. It's why you get up and go to work.

Getting back to the subject of this thread, providing goods and services in exchange for money is not a sin. It is not being a "whore". It is simply taking an active and responsible part in society. That's as true in education as anywhere else.

I sense a note of nostalgia in all this. Nostalgia for a medieval world where education was ostensibly dedicated to the *higher* things. But modern universities are not 10'th century Benedictine monasteries. They don't exist to enable a few scholar monks to ascend to God through contemplation.

And I also sense an undercurrent of power. If universities exist to reveal the higher things, then their agenda should be set by those closest to those transcendant realms. Professors come to resemble priests.

But if universities exist to serve the needs of their communities, then the institutional agenda is set by that public demand, and professors assume the role of employees.

That, I suspect, is at the heart of the professoriate's distaste for for-profit education in particular, and the market system in general.

 

I take this as meaning that you were simply spouting off and have absolutely no evidence or data to back up your statements. How disappointing, just another blowhard.
Jack

 

Uh, no. When the cleargy, charities andbe educators seek to serve their "higher" standards they do not seek to serve their communities less... but more. There actions seek to serve the highest ideals to which we should ascribe rather than merely the wishes of the majority (or perhaps of those with the deepest pockets).

Personally, I don't believe the minister who tailors his sermons to gain larger donations from certain parishoners with large bank accounts is the model to which we should ascribe.

 

I have yet to read much reasonable discussion regarding school quality... they usually end up with something like:

Well sir, it must be an excellent school... it is Regionally Accredited.

Well sir, it cannot be an excellent school... it is not Regionally Accredited.

What do you mean xxx university is not as good as Harvard, they both/you are:
a) have exams
b) are regionally accredited
c) have papers
d) elitist
e) against change/innovation

yadda, yadda, yadda.

 

Having just read Walters last two postings I suspect that he began his New Years libations somewhat prematurely. I am about to engage in a pseudoscientific experiment in "state dependent" translation by imbibing in a bit of the "hair of the dog" in order to determine if these messages can be deciphered into anything resembling a cogent answer to my previous questions. I'll report back later with any positive results.
Jack