Yours is the second post that has said it's an unfair comparison - but I don't think you offer a very compelling case to prove your case.
Are there differences? Of course. Above, I noted where grade and high schools have a TOUGHER time teaching than universities, so I won't repeat them again.
The schools (6 have kitchens) have to provide lunches. Since not all kids buy lunch, they have staff and facilities, but low utilization. Meals are partially subsidized by state and school taxes. Even in my semi-affluent suburb, there are plenty of kids that get free meals at school (and they're probably the only meals some of these kids get!).
So there is overhead in that regard in local public schools, invalidating your implicit contention that college meal provisions are a unique burden to them.
REGARDLESS... I'm not comparing colleges to urban or rural schools. I'm comparing the author's suggestion that the 'real costs' of a college education are more than double the $30k+ tuition to the costs for education in MY school district. My district has known costs (readily available through the state and district). It has almost 5,000 kids. I think that's a reasonable enough basis for a very fair comparison indeed.
I would welcome your posting of links to recommended studies on this subject - provided they aren't self-serving studies inked to help colleges justify or obfuscate their budgets and spending practices.
About Recession
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment