Showing posts with label William and Mary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label William and Mary. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Statues in the Snow, William and Mary 2017



Thomas Jefferson


John Marshall and George Wythe


Lord Botetourt


James Monroe


James Blair

Friday, November 21, 2014

William and Mary and Richmond to Meet for 124th Time

Tomorrow William and Mary and Richmond will continue their gridiron rivalry.  Unlike rivalries that some believe to be contrived, the Tribe/Spider rivalry is the oldest in the South.  The teams first played in 1898, and tomorrow's game will mark the 124th time the two have met.  The two schools will thus tie the Wisconsin-Minnesota rivalry for the fourth most prolific in college football history, behind Lehigh-Lafayette (150 games), Princeton-Yale (136 games), and Harvard-Yale (131 games). Once known as the I-64 bowl, the teams now play for the Capital Cup, in recognition of the fact that both Richmond and Williamsburg have served as capitals of the Commonwealth. 

William and Mary leads the series 61-57-5.  Richmond has shut out the Tribe 23 times, and the Tribe has returned the favor 19 times. The teams have played to three zero-zero ties, and the Tribe holds the record for the most points scored in a game, 59, in 2003.  (For the source of these data, adjusted to reflect last year's result, go to this source updated in 2014.)

The rivalry's 124th game has more than historical significance.  Both CAA teams are 7-4 and rank 21 (Richmond) and 22 (William and Mary), respectively in the Sports Network Poll of FCS teams.  One observer has speculated that the winner of tomorrow's game (and only the winner), will earn a playoff spot.  Kickoff will be at 7:30 PM, and tickets are still available!  (For detailed game notes, go here.)  Those unable to attend the game in person can watch on the NBC Sports Network.  Good luck to both teams, and Go Tribe! 


Saturday, March 9, 2013

Tribe Announces 2013 Football Schedule

 

He'll Be There.  Will You?
 
William and Mary has released its football schedule for the 2013 season.  The slate includes six home games against: Hampton, Rhode Island, U. Penn., James Madison, New Hampshire and Towson.  The Tribe will open with FBS opponent West Virginia.   As Tribe fans know, the Tribe always opens with an FBS opponent; the Mountaineers will be the first non-ACC FBS opponent since the Tribe played Marshall in the fall of 2005.  Other highlights of the schedule include away games against arch-rivals Villanova and Delaware, as well as home games against James Madison and New Hampshire.  Moreover, as it has done over 100 times before, the Tribe will play Richmond, for the Capital Cup, so named because both Williamsburg and Richmond have served as the Commonwealth's Capital.  As previously explained on this blog, this is one of the longest-running rivalries in College football, in which the Tribe holds a slight edge.
 
One thing to watch:   For the second year in a row, the Tribe will play Lafayette, from the Patriot League. As previously explained on this Blog, the Patriot League, made up of private universities, contains several schools of similar academic profile to William and Mary, often referred to as a "Public Ivy."   Indeed, some who support expansion of the Patriot League have advocated inclusion of William and Mary in such an expansion, an eventuality that seems more likely, now that the Patriot League has resumed offering football scholarships.  Hopefully the Tribe will make a better showing against Lafayette than last year, when Lafayette defeated the Tribe 17-14, despite the best efforts of the William and Mary Griffin, pictured above at last year's game. 
 
Here is the schedule.  Home games are in bold.  All times are to be announced.
 
August 31       West Virginia 

Sept. 7             Hampton

Sept. 14           Lafayette

Sept.  21          Rhode Island

Oct.   5             Villanova

Oct.   12          Penn

Oct. 19            Maine

Oct. 26            James Madison

Nov.    2          New Hampshire

Nov.  9            Delaware

Nov. 16           Towson

Nov.  23          Richmond

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

On the Alleged "Higher Education Bubble"



Still a Good Investment?

In recent months many pundits and scholars have repeatedly claimed that higher education's current economic model is unsustainable.  Some have even analogized the economic landscape of higher education to the housing bubble that helped precipitate the recent Great Recession.  According to these advocates, the increased availability of federally-subsidized guaranteed student loans has unduly enhanced the demand for higher education, increased tuition and made college less accessible.  As evidence, these pundits, including Jeff Selingo at the Chronicle of Higher Education, point to high tuition --- sometimes over $40,000 per year at some institutions --- as well as large debt burdens borne by some graduates of American colleges and universities. Indeed, as Selingo and others have pointed out, Americans now hold nearly $1 trillion in student loan debt, an amount greater than the debt for car loans.  Moreover, two scholars affiliated with the Mercatus Center, Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan,  recently argued that "the Higher Education Bubble Will be Worse than the Housing Bubble," repeating similar arguments made in a previous essay.   Even George Will has jumped on the "Higher Education Bubble" bandwagon, pointing out that  "[t]uitions and fees have risen more than 440 percent in 30 years as schools happily raised prices — and lowered standards — to siphon up federal money."  (See here).  An Op-ed in today's San Diego Tribune, by Dan Bauder, joins this chorus, which also include Glenn Reynolds,  and others (see here and here).

Thus far, efforts to analogize the economic condition of higher education to the housing bubble are not persuasive, for several related reasons.

First, pundits overstate the price of higher education and the impact of that price on access to college.  True, many private universities, like the fictitious Faber college that John Blutarski (pictured above) attended,  have sticker prices of $40,000 per year and above.  (Though many also provide generous financial aid to needy students.)  However, prices at public universities, which educate most of America's college graduates, are much lower.  As previously explained on this blog, even the University of Virginia, an elite public university, charges tuition and fees of only $12,224 for Virginia residents.  At William and Mary, another elite public university, the figure is $13,570.  Tuition and fees at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are lower than at either of these schools: a mere $7,008.   (Of course, such students must also pay room and board, but individuals must incur these expenses whether or not they attend college.  Thus, room and board is not an actual cost of attending college.)  Moreover, these figures apply only to students who pay full price; many public universities offer generous financial aid packages, sometimes paying 100 percent of the cost of attendance, including even room and board.  At UVA, for instance, students from families with incomes at 200 percent of the federal poverty line or less attend UVA for free, unless they have family assets of $75,000 of more.  Given the federal definition of the poverty line, a student in a family of 7 that earned $70,000 per year would attend UVA for free; so would a student in a family of four that earned $46,000 per year.   Students from familes whose income exceed the 200 percent of poverty threshold but still demonstrate financial need receive a mix of grants and loans and thus pay less than the sticker price.    Most individuals who incur significant debt to attend private universities could have instead attended a public university and thus incurred significantly less debt or no debt at all.

Second, and as previously explained on this blog, higher education is an investment in human capital, an investment that can increase the economic productivity of students who incur such debt.  Indeed, according to one recent study discussed here, individuals with a college degree earn an average of $2.27 million over their lifetimes, compared to just $1.30 million for individuals who simply complete high school.  This million dollar gap between the lifetime earnings of college and high school graduates reflects the market's assessment of the value of higher education.  This basic economic fact undermines any analogy between higher education, on the one hand, and houses and cars, on the other, the latter of which do not enhance the productivity of their owners.  Moreover, the increase in lifetime earnings attributable to a college degree dwarfs the average debt --- $23,000 --- incurred by that subset of individuals who do borrow to finance a portion of their education.   In short, a college education is a very good investment, one that society should encourage.

Third, those who invoke rising tuition as evidence of an unsustainable bubble financed by debt ignore the fact that tuition at public and some private universities pays only a portion of the full cost of the education provided.  In the case of public universities, states still provide subsidies, albeit subsidies that are lower than they once were.  Moreover, tuition at many public universities, while higher than it once was, is still a tremendous bargain, with UVA, William and Mary and UNC serving as prime examples.   To be precise, these institutions charge tuition and fees that is about one third (or in UNC's case, one fifth) the price of attending private universities of similar caliber.  (For instance, Boston College, ranked 31st in U.S. News, charges tuition and fees of $42,204, while Tufts, ranked 29th, charges $42,962).  UVA, UNC and William and Mary rank 25th, 29th and 33rd, respectively.)   It's no surprise, then, that, as previously explained on this blog, applications to schools like UVA and William and Mary continue to rise.

Fourth, these criticisms also treat previous tuition levels as a baseline for comparison, on the implicit assumption that such levels reflected a well-functioning market for higher education, a market subsequently distorted by widely-available and subsidized student loans.   However, as Nobel Laureate Gary Becker has explained, and as previously explored on this blog, the market for higher education financing is characterized by a market failure.  In particular, the background legal framework prevents individuals who invest in education from granting creditors a security interest in their most valuable asset, namely, the human capital that a college education creates.  (A creditor cannot "foreclose" on an individual's college degree if the individual defaults on a student loan.)

Such a market failure will of course lead to under-investment in higher education and thus demand for such education that is lower than what a well-functioning market would produce.  According to Becker, federal student loans overcome this market failure, thereby ensuring that investment in higher education better replicates that which a well-functioning market would produce.  These additional investments would, of course, predictably manifest themselves as increased demand for higher education and higher tuition.  In other words, while the ready availability of subsidized loans may well be responsible for rising tuition, that result may merely confirm that the federal loan program is counteracting a market failure and thereby assuring optimal investments in human capital.  That's not a bubble; that's progress.

(It should be noted here that there is an additional reason that a purely private market would result in underinvestment in higher education.  Simply put, because national and state governments levy taxes on incomes, individuals do not capture the full benefits of their investments in human capital.  As a result, private investment in education will be less than optimal; direct state subsidies and student loans can help ensure the appropriate magnitude of investment.)

Fifth, $1 trillion is admittedly a lot of debt.  But it is important to put this number in some perspective.  This figure represents all the debt that students have accumulated over the years; the usual term on a federally-guaranteed student loan is 10 years,  By contrast, the nation's annual GDP in 2011 was about $15 trillion, or $13.3 Trillion in 2005 dollars.   Over the past ten years, GDP has totaled over $130 trillion in 2005 dollars.  (Go to this website, which allows one to construct a GDP time series in real 2005 dollars.)  Thus, student debt constitutes a tiny fraction of the nation's economic productivity during the period in which the debt was accumulated and will remain so even if GDP remains flat for the foreseeable future.   Moreover, and as previously explained on this blog, one third of college students graduate with no debt whatsoever.   For those students who do take on debt, the average indebtedness upon graduation is $23,000, less than the cost of many minivans.  Finally, the median indebtedness of college graduates is even lower, just under $20,000 according to one source.


Sixth, there is no doubt that many recent graduates of America's colleges and universities are struggling to pay various debts, including student loans.    Many apparently attribute this struggle to the cost of higher education and the resulting debt itself.  However, there is a more fundamental explanation for this economic distress, namely, a struggling national economy.  As previously explained on this blog, the current economic recovery compares quite unfavorably to the last recovery from a deep recession, in 1983-1984.  College graduates can only reap the benefits of investments in human capital if good jobs await them once they earn their diploma.  If the current recovery was creating jobs at the same rate as the 1983-84 recovery, resulting in more than 400,000 jobs per month (compared to less than 100,000 per month over the past few months), one suspects that concerns over the "student debt crisis" and "higher education bubble" would be muted.    

Seventh, none of this is to say that higher education is perfect and above the need for the reform.  For instance, college completion rates are too low at some institutions.  Moreover, some contend that schools should focus more financial aid on students in the middle class.  Others argue that professional schools are pricing themselves out of the market; this post has focused on undergraduate education.  There is always room for improvement in any industry.  However, proof that institutions could better allocate their existing resources does not establish the existence of an unsustainable bubble.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Will the Griffin Fly the Coop?

A recent article in the Richmond Times Dispatch recounts speculation that Old Dominion University, Virginia Commonwealth University and George Mason University might take their basketball programs and leave the Colonial Athletic Association for other conferences (the Atlantic 10 for GMU and VCU, and Conference USA for ODU).  Such departures would leave only 8 basketball programs left in the league:

Delaware

Drexel

Hofstra

James Madison

Northeastern

Townson

UNC-Wilmington

William and Mary

Departures by such marque programs would obviously be a blow to the CAA's national profile and thus the ability of CAA schools to recruit highly sought-after college athletes.  GMU, VCU and ODU have won twelve of the last thirteen CAA mens basketball championships, thereby earning automatic berths in the NCAA tournament.  Both VCU and GMU have, in the past decade, made it to the "Final Four."

If in fact all or even just some of these schools depart the CAA, the remaining schools will have three options: (1) Soldier on with eight basketaball programs of relatively modest national profile; (2) invite new and hopefully higher profile schools to join the CAA or (3) depart from the CAA for other conferences.  Of course, some combination of options 2 and 3 is possible.  That is to say, some schools could depart from the CAA which could in turn invite and welcome new programs.

Both the Times-Dispatch article and a separate piece in the William and Mary Flat Hat have speculated that William and Mary could ultimately choose to depart from the CAA and join the Patriot League, for basketball.

According to the Times-Dispatch, for instance:

"If William and Mary decided to leave [the CAA for basketball], it might find a partner in the Patriot League, which features similar institutions with high academic profiles."

The Patriot League, it should be noted, consists of the following teams.

American

Army

Bucknell

Colgate

Holy Cross

Laffayete

Lehigh

As the story notes, these schools have academic profiles more similar to that of William and Mary than the teams of the CAA.  For instance, the College of the Holy Cross has a 4 year graduation rate of 87 percent, while William and Mary's is 89 percent.  By contrast, the  4 year graduation rate at Towson State is 43 percent and 23 percent at Drexel.  (Though it should be noted that these rates rise to 73 and 68 percent, respectively, after 6 years.)  (The 4 year graduation rate at VCU is 24 percent, while the 6 year rate is 50 percent.)    Moreover apparently athletes have even higher graduation rates at some Patriot League schools.  Indeed, according to this story, 21 Holy Cross teams recently achieved a 100 percent graduation rate.  At the same time, the Patriot League would provide stiff competition on the court for the Tribe.  Both Bucknell and Lehigh, for instance, ended the 2011-2012 season with higher RPI rankings (87 and 94, respectively) than ODU (107).  Holy Cross (182) and American (158) ended with higher RPI rankings than William and Mary (293).  (Colgate earned an RPI ranking of 295.)

Of course, any speculation that William and Mary will some day join the Patriot League for basketball is just that, speculation.  This author knows of no evidence that William and Mary is considering such a move.

UPDATE:  Earlier today (May 17, 2012) Old Dominion announced that it will leave the CAA for Conference USA.  ODU's announcement follows by a day VCU's announcement that it will leave the CAA for the Atlantic-10 conference.  By contrast, George Mason University announced less than a week ago that it will remain in the CAA.  Unlike VCU, whose move only affects basketball, ODU will be moving its football program as well, thereby allowing it to move into the FCS division, where it will reportedly begin play in 2015.

Meanwhile, two remaining members of the CAA, Towson State and UNC-Wilmington, may soon find themselves barred from post-season play because of their respective failures to satisfy NCAA academic progress requirements.

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

William and Mary Griffin License Plates Now Available


You know you have arrived when Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles offers to inscribe your likeness on a license plate (for a small fee of course). Juudged by this standard, William and Mary's new Griffin mascot, shown above with your humble blogger, has hit the big time! You can order the new Griffin plate here for a mere $25 premium over and above the ordinary cost of such a plate. The Griffin plates qualify as "revenue sharing plates." Thus, after the first 1,000 plates are sold, 60 percent of the $25 fee is allocated to William and Mary to support scholarships for Virginia residents. As a result, the DMV opines that a portion of the fee "may be tax deductible." (Consult your personal tax advisor for details.)
Not only is the Griffin a great mascot, he/she/it might also help reduce your tax liability! What more could anyone ask!

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Griffin Lands in Williamsburg


Some readers may know that William and Mary recently chose a new mascot, after a bruising competition. The five finalists were:

1) The Phoenix (a mythical bird that is consumed by fire every 10,000 years and then rises from the ashes);

2) A King and Queen;

3) The Wren (a type of bird);

4) The Pug (a type of dog);

5) The Griffin.

Your not-so-humble blogger supported a 6th possibility, that did not make the list of finalists, namely, the Wooly Mammoth, to no avail. Here's the Facebook page of that failed effort.

The Griffin, half eagle and half lion, recently visited the William and Mary Spring football game, played at Zable Stadium on April 16. A local celebrity paused to pose with the Griffin; the photo is reproduced above.

For an account of the spring game, see the following link:

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Privatization Momentum Builds !!

On Friday the William and Mary Flat Hat published an Op-ed by student Alex Ely, calling for privatization of William and Mary. As Ely points out, the College cannot achieve "Greatness" so long as it remains owned and controlled by the Commonwealth of Virginia. I am flattered that Ely reproduces a quote of me from an earlier Flat Hat article on the subject, where I point out that our public status results in an artificial ceiling on the tuition and fees we can charge in state students. Here is that previous article. http://flathatnews.com/content/69306/case-laid-out-college-go-private Ely also refers to previous Op-eds in the Flat Hat, written by yours truly, laying out the case for privatization. Here are links to those Op-Eds: "Private Greatness" http://flathat.wm.edu/2005-09-09/story.php?type=2&aid=3 and "Privatization: A Winning Choice" http://flathat.wm.edu/2006-03-17/story.php?type=2&aid=5. He also notes that privatization would eliminate political interference in the College's internal affairs and that, by raising tuition, the College could generate revenue to fund the ever-more expensive [my characterization] Gateway Program and create a graduate school to train public servants (presumably in addition to the College's Thomas Jefferson program in Public Policy).

Mr. Ely's Op-Ed coincides with one by Mr. Jeff Dailey over at the Virginia Informer, also calling for privatization. Mr. Dailey notes that the Commonwealth has repeatedly cut the College's budget since 2002, leaving the College without the resources necessary to meet its objectives and that, absent a massive infusion of public cash, privatization is the only option. Dailey also points out that the amount of influence the Commonwealth exercises over the College far exceeds its diminishing financial support for William and Mary.

http://media.www.vainformer.com/media/storage/paper1335/news/2009/02/18/SignedEditorials/Privatization.Is.The.Best.Option.For.The.College-3636143.shtml

By posting Mr. Ely's excellent article, I do not mean to endorse all of it. In particular, as some of you know, I am no fan of the Gateway Program. See my Op-Ed on the issue: http://flathat.wm.edu/story.php?issue=2005-09-23&type=2&aid=3While Ely says the program is necessary to ensure access to the College, I don't think that's right. When the College announced the Gateway Program, it reported that there were 300 students of modest means already attending the College; presumably these students were relying upon low interest loans or had served their country in the military and were drawing on the GI Bill. In short, absent Gateway, there are various means of access to William and Mary. By analogy, most of us borrow money to purchase a home or buy a car. No one would say that individuals who must borrow to make such purchases lack "access" to cars or homes. Moreover, unlike Ely, I don't think the College ought to concern itself with training public servants. Indeed, my sense is that the College already graduates an inordinate number of public servants.

These are debatable points, however. Ely's main point still stands. If the College wants to be great, however, defined, it should go private. And, I will add that going private will make it easier to raise money for various programs, e.g., merit scholarships or need-based programs like Gateway, since W&M's President will not have to spend countless hours lobbying Richmond not to cur our budget, change the in-state out of state mix of students, etc. (The President of Duke raised more than $200 million to support its version of Gateway BEFORE implementing the program.) With such free time, the President of a private William and Mary could make contact with more alumni and foundations and raise the sort of endowment the College needs.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Sister Super Bowl Picks Steelers

The Chicago Tribune profiles a local nun who has been predicting the outcome of the Super Bowl for 23 years now, and has a 17-6 record. I wonder if she has a fantasy football team.

Here is the story: "Divine Prediction For the Super Bowl."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-0129-psychic-nunjan29,0,5824918.story

For some reason this reminds me of a line spoke by Coach Dan Devine in the movie "Rudy:" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108002/ "Our Lady of Victory, Pray for us."

Sister Jean predicts a 23-17 Steeler victory. I agree with her prediction, though I am biased, since the Steeler's Coach, Mike Tomlin, is a William and Mary graduate. Tomlin played wide receiver for the Tribe and averaged over 20 yards per catch. His rise to coaching, including his years at William and Mary, is discussed here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/sports/football/26tomlin.html?ref=sports

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Flat Hat Resists More In State Students

Today's William and Mary Flat Hat contains two editorials, one by the paper itself, criticizing proposed legislation that would require eighty percent of William and Mary's undergraduates to be Virginia residents. Currently the figure is sixty-five percent at William and Mary and fifty percent at VMI. As both editorials point out, the proposal would, if enacted, reduce the quality of the College's student body while at the same time depriving the College of revenue generated by charging out of state tuition to the students the legislation would exclude. The timing of this proposal is particularly ironic, given that the Commonwealth has cut the College's budget by more than $10 million in the past 18 months and ordered the College not to raise tuition to offset mid-year cuts. Indeed, in the third item posted below, the Flat Hat called for an increase in the number of out-of-state students at William and Mary, to offset state budget cuts and ceilings on in-state tuition.

Here are the editorials in question.

http://flathatnews.com/content/69722/great-value-comes-price

http://flathatnews.com/content/69716/more-staters-will-only-water-down-college

http://flathatnews.com/content/69692/college-must-go-beyond-virginia