re: Advocate takes on LSU's budget problems today.

They have remained revenue neutral by increasing tuition and enrollment while decreasing expenses. For every high level faculty researcher that left they hired a replacement with a lower salary. The same for all positions at LSU.

While yes the revenue has not declined the quality of the work done has. Either because of the loss of experienced faculty replaced by young faculty or the volume of work taken on by holes in staffing.

quote:

---

Among the state’s 14 four-year public universities, LSU is the only one that has seen its overall revenue go up appreciably since 2008, thanks to dramatic increases in tuition and fees.

---

Taken from the lnked article.

quote:

---

They have remained revenue neutral by increasing tuition and enrollment while decreasing expenses. For every high level faculty researcher that left they hired a replacement with a lower salary. The same for all positions at LSU.

---

LSU has not remained revenue "neutral", revenues increased "appreciably". So why would they not have the funds to replace people that leave?

quote:

---

While yes the revenue has not declined the quality of the work done has. Either because of the loss of experienced faculty replaced by young faculty or the volume of work taken on by holes in staffing

---

So why are they hiring substandard people when they have money to pay good people? Is the money going to their pet projects? Their "friends" in the faculty? What's really going on? Too much administration?

You tell us, because at LSU revenues are up despite the recession we went through.

Poor choice of words by me. Revenue has increased as they stated. Expenses have also increased with additional students.

My point was there is not a surplus of funds to advance the University, they are barely keeping the status quo. It very much is an effort of trying to keep the quality from decreasing. The article is the best effort I've seen to actual describe the impacts at LSU.

I can't speak to other schools, I'm sure the impact is greater there since they don't have the enrollment to offset but I have no real idea.

quote:

---

I dont think they want to, but they are forced to. Without all the things you listed, how else do you attract students/money?

And btw the student fees pay for a lot of what you listed...like the Rec Center upgrades at LSU.

---

Universities are forced to include the bells and whistles only because they think they have to. How else do you attract students/money? By being LSU, and giving them the best damn bang for their buck academically that you can.

Look, what are all the young people complaining about? The cost of attending college. It's all over the news. I'm just saying there's a market for affordable college, and you can be an affordable college with good academics if you WANT it. But that means getting out of the "keeping up with the Joneses" race with other universities and focusing on YOUR university.

Universities have lost sight of being academic and research centers in favor of becoming communities. And while that has some good things attached to it, it also blurs focus on what's most important.

And yes, I know, student fees fund the Union, the Rec Center, and all that. What if fees were lower? Or what if we used student fees to build a new library instead of a lazy river? Or what if we used student fees to supplement the cost of labs and books instead of funding Groovin on the Grounds?

I'm not saying strip all the fun out of college. I'm saying spend less on frivolous pursuits. Let's say you're a budding biology major. What's going to get you to go to LSU? Top-notch undergraduate research opportunities or a killer intramural sports facility? If the answer is the latter, then why is LSU pursuing that kind of student to begin with?

I guran-fricking-tee that if LSU got serious about the classroom and cutting the cost of attendance, the quality students would follow. In DROVES.