A Harvard Education - the Benefits are Lost on Some

[dps]

After, all most of them are government-run (though obviously not all of them, and certainly not Harvard).

You mean government funded - not government run. 

Uhm, no, I mean government run.  While there are lots of variations, AFAIK in most cases the groups or individuals who administer state colleges and universities are in some way responsible to some part of the state government, granted that they are usually not directly a part of the state government in the way that, say, the Department of Motor Vehicles or the like is.

[crazy canuck]

After, all most of them are government-run (though obviously not all of them, and certainly not Harvard).

You mean government funded - not government run. 

Uhm, no, I mean government run.  While there are lots of variations, AFAIK in most cases the groups or individuals who administer state colleges and universities are in some way responsible to some part of the state government, granted that they are usually not directly a part of the state government in the way that, say, the Department of Motor Vehicles or the like is.

Being appointed to a position by government doesnt mean the government runs it.

[Grey Fox]

I am not in favor of non-governmental investment. You should know this about me.

I knew you were to the left, but I didn't know you were in favor of the government owning all businesses.  And even then, I still don't get your opposition to colleges and universities investing their endowments.  After, all most of them are government-run (though obviously not all of them, and certainly not Harvard).

There is a scale to this, I think the 500 limit set by the SEC is a good start.

[Admiral Yi]

What 500 limit are you talking about?

[Jacob]

What 500 limit are you talking about?

No more than 500 things at once.

[Valmy]

Wow, That is odd.  What happens with concepts like academic freedom?

They definitely have a multitude of sticks to hit us with if a department just started hiring academics the politicians found particularly unsavory, or did something like create the Che Guevarian Chair for the study of Popular Liberation.  Theoretically, of course, their interests are administrative and making use of University research capabilities for state purposes.

Well that and influencing the hire of football coaches.  The main issue at UT Austin the voters and taxpayers really care about.

[crazy canuck]

Well that and influencing the hire of football coaches.  The main issue at UT Austin the voters and taxpayers really care about.

[Caliga]

Does the President of the University direct the investments of the endowment fund?

No.

[Admiral Yi]

It's the president's job to endow the endowment fund.

[Caliga]

Yes.

What made you think that I thought that the current University systems(in the US or Canada or Quebec) worked? Buut I didn't know that US Universities had giant endowment fund like YI mentioned.

Not sure where to begin here, but I'll give it a shot.

If Harvard stopped investing endowment funds, it would stop receiving endowment gifts.  The donors who establish said funds do it because they want to create something to benefit the university community in perpetuity.  The massive size of Harvard's endowment is one of the reasons that it's widely considered one of the best universities in the world, as it allows the university to attract and retain expensive academics, goes a long way toward defraying the cost of education for its students, and offsets the monumental annual costs of running the university.

Furthermore, the reality is that even if Harvard wanted to stop investing its endowment, it could not.  Endowments are established with specific terms that always include directives to the university to invest the endowment fund.  It would take a court order to overturn/amend such terms, and I doubt a judge would overturn a donor's wishes unless they were utterly obsolete (and even in such cases the university typically would prefer to just let the endowment accumulate and not spend the interest).

I understand that you're one of the posters who thinks that capitalism = evil, but again without Harvard's gigantic endowment it would not be the place that it is today.  It didn't derive its reputation from rainbow-powered hippie love.

[Caliga]

It's the president's job to endow the endowment fund.

Yes.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Endowment funds tend to hire professional money managers, typically guys that have managed large mutual funds as that's basically how an endowment is managed. Or a hedge fund, for that matter.

At CC, in the United States, public colleges are basically the same as our primary schools in that they are overseen by the State. But just like primary schools there are layers of separation.

With primary schools the State is divvied up into districts. The State funds a portion of the district's budget from general revenue (from income, excise etc taxes.) The State will typically have a "governing body" for the State school system, usually called the Board of Education. The Board hires a Superintendent who is basically the chief administrator the state Department of Education, and who oversees its day to day activities. At the State level this typically includes monitoring of the various districts, setting policies, things of that nature.

Each district tends to work the same way, but in miniature. There are school boards for each district (almost always directly elected by citizens resident in the district), and the district school boards hire a district superintendent who is responsible for the day to day running of the district. He hires/fires all the school principals and various other administrative tasks. The local district school boards typically have levy authority, which means they can put levies on the local ballot to raise funds.

With colleges, the States handle them similarly but the organization is slightly different. For one, almost always public colleges are not subordinate at all to the State Board of Education, instead each major college will have its own board with its membership typically appointed by the State Governor. They hire a college/university President, who runs the school and is typically someone with a lot of experience as a college administrator, usually having been a professor and a dean of some sort for years or had previously been a high ranking university official or a university President at another school.

The college/university board functions similarly to a board of directors for a company, they typically have to vote on important decisions, but day to day they don't have a direct  hand in running the school other than that they can fire the President if he/she acts in a way the board finds objectionable.

Most of the actual educators in this scheme have some degree of tenure, this is true of grade school teachers up to college professors. So they are usually well protected from dismissal which limits to some control political control of education. Also at the K-12 level the teachers in most States are unionized which also limits the control of the State (but it just limits it, the State has a lot of power in education.)

The only types of colleges that I believe are typically under the direct purview of a State Board of Education (instead of its own board) would be community colleges / junior colleges, which I think are often ran by the State Department of Ed or similar.

[grumbler]

Yes.

What made you think that I thought that the current University systems(in the US or Canada or Quebec) worked? Buut I didn't know that US Universities had giant endowment fund like YI mentioned.

Not sure where to begin here, but I'll give it a shot.

If Harvard stopped investing endowment funds, it would stop receiving endowment gifts.  The donors who establish said funds do it because they want to create something to benefit the university community in perpetuity.  The massive size of Harvard's endowment is one of the reasons that it's widely considered one of the best universities in the world, as it allows the university to attract and retain expensive academics, goes a long way toward defraying the cost of education for its students, and offsets the monumental annual costs of running the university.

Furthermore, the reality is that even if Harvard wanted to stop investing its endowment, it could not.  Endowments are established with specific terms that always include directives to the university to invest the endowment fund.  It would take a court order to overturn/amend such terms, and I doubt a judge would overturn a donor's wishes unless they were utterly obsolete (and even in such cases the university typically would prefer to just let the endowment accumulate and not spend the interest).

I understand that you're one of the posters who thinks that capitalism = evil, but again without Harvard's gigantic endowment it would not be the place that it is today.  It didn't derive its reputation from rainbow-powered hippie love.

Grey Fox doesn't think universities work, so he'd be in favor of the schools having to return the endowments and then shutting down.  I believe his next step would be to have the government simply declare that everyone is educated, thus saving all the money currently spent on education and, at the same time, leveling the playing field, since everyone would have identical educational qualifications.

I agree with him to the extent that I think the money spent educating him was wasted.










[not really, to any of this, but.. languish]

[Caliga]

Endowment funds tend to hire professional money managers, typically guys that have managed large mutual funds as that's basically how an endowment is managed. Or a hedge fund, for that matter.

It's no different at Harvard.  Harvard's endowment is managed by HMC (Harvard Management Company), which is all Wall street guys.  Every so often the same type of idiots who are whining about this issue will bitch about how much money the HMC money managers make.

[Grey Fox]

I like grumbler's idea.