Стоимость высшего образования в США: рост цен и долговая нагрузка.

Aspect of American higher education

College tuition in the United States is the cost of higher education collected by educational institutions in the United States, and paid by individuals. It does not include the tuition covered through general taxes or from other government funds, or that which is paid from university endowment funds or gifts. Tuition for college has increased as the value, quality, and quantity of education have increased. Many feel that increases in cost have not been accompanied by increases in quality, and that administrative costs are excessive. The value of a college education has become a topic of national debate in the U. S.

The United States has one of the most expensive higher education systems in the world, and also one of the most successful in terms of the boost to earnings from higher education. Public colleges have no control over one major revenue source — the state. In 2016–17, the average cost of annual tuition in the United States ranged from $9,700 for public four year institutions to $33,500 for private four year institutions. Private colleges increased their tuition by an average of 1.7 percent in 2016–17, the smallest rise in four decades, according to the U. S. Consumer Price Index. Due to the high price of college tuitions about 43 percent of students have to reject their first choice of schools.

Between 2007–08 and 2017–18, published in state tuition and fees at public four year institutions increased at an average rate of 3.2% per year beyond inflation, compared with 4.0% between 1987–88 and 1997–98 and 4.4% between 1997–98 and 2007 08. One cause of increased tuition is the reduction of state and federal appropriations to state colleges, causing the institutions to shift the cost over to students in the form of higher tuition. State support for public colleges and universities has fallen by about 26 percent per full time student since the early 1990s. In 2011, for the first time, American public universities took in more revenue from tuition than state funding. About 80 percent of American college students attend public institutions. On the contrary, they appear to be both increasing and much higher than the returns on other investments such as the stock market, bonds, real estate, or private equity. One rebuttal to the claims that a bubble analogy is misleading is the observation that the 'bursting' of the bubble are the negative effects on students who incur student debt. For example, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities reports that "Students are deeper in debt today than ever before The trend of heavy debt burdens threatens to limit access to higher education, particularly for low income and first generation students, who tend to carry the heaviest debt burden. Federal student aid policy has steadily put resources into student loan programs rather than need based grants, a trend that straps future generations with high debt burdens. Even students who receive federal grant aid are finding it more difficult to pay for college."

Another proposed cause of increased tuition is U. S. Congress' occasional raising of the 'loan limits' of student loans, in which the increased availability of students to take out deeper loans sends a message to colleges and universities that students can 'afford more,' and then, in response, institutions of higher education raise tuition to match, leaving the student back where he began, but deeper in debt. College fees begin to accumulate when people start college, such as orientation and freshman fees, and additional charges upon your departure, such as senior and commencement fees. In 1987, then Secretary of Education William Bennett argued that " increases in financial aid in recent years have enabled colleges and universities blithely to raise their tuitions, confident that Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the increase." This statement came to be known as the "Bennett Hypothesis." The nonpartisan New York Fed studied the effect of increased loan supply on tuition following large policy changes in federal aid program maximums available to undergraduate students that occurred between 2008 and 2010 found "that institutions that were most exposed to these [loan limit] maximums ahead of the policy changes experienced disproportionate tuition increases around these changes, with effects of changes in institution specific program maximums of Pell Grant, subsidized." However, many empirical studies that have tested the effects of student loans on college tuition find no evidence of an increase in tuition, especially net of scholarships and after taking into account increases in the quality of education funded by increases in tuition. Moreover, the widespread availability of private student loans makes it unlikely that public student loan availability limits demand for education. An additional rebuttal to the student loan theory is the fact that even in years when loan limits have not risen, tuition has still continued to climb, and tuition has increased more at public institutions than at private institutions. Public college tuition has jumped 33 percent nationwide since 2000. One recent working paper posted online by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 2015 (revised in 2016) concluded that undergraduate institutions more exposed to increases in student loan program maximums tend to respond with modest raises in tuition prices. The working paper has not yet been subject to peer review.

A third, novel theory claims that the recent change in federal law removing all standard consumer protections (truth in lending, bankruptcy proceedings, statutes of limits, the right to refinance, adherence to usury laws, and Fair Debt & Collection practices, etc.) strips students of the ability to declare bankruptcy, and, in response, the lenders and colleges know that students, defenseless to declare bankruptcy, are on the hook for any amount that they borrow, including late fees and interest, which can be capitalized and increase the principal loan amount, thus removing the incentive to provide students with a reasonable loan.

"Disproportional inflation" refers to inflation in a particular economic sector that is substantially greater than inflation in general costs of living. The following graph shows the inflation rates of general costs of living (for urban consumers; the CPI U), medical costs (medical costs component of the consumer price index (CPI)), and college and tuition and fees for private four year colleges (from College Board data) from 1978 to 2008. All rates are computed relative to 1978. Cost of living increased roughly 3.25 fold during this time; medical costs inflated roughly 6 fold; but college tuition and fees inflation approached 10 fold. Another way to say this is that whereas medical costs inflated at twice the rate of cost of living, college tuition and fees inflated at four times the rate of cost of living inflation. Thus, even after controlling for the effects of general inflation, 2008 college tuition and fees posed three times the burden as in 1978.

Most economists believe that the benefits of higher education exceed the costs by a wide margin and that higher education more than pays for itself.

Besides economic effects of rapidly increasing debt burdens placed on students, there are social ramifications to higher student debt. Several studies demonstrate that students from lower income families are more likely to drop out of college to avoid debt. Middle class families are at risk because the increasing cost of college tuition may limit their acquisition of the education that allows them to succeed in their communities. Recent reports also indicate an increase in suicides directly attributable to the stress related to distressed and defaulted student loans. The adverse mental health impacts on the student population because of economic induced stress are becoming a social concern. Though some universities use a cohort tuition model, many universities raise tuition on current students without proportional increases in financial aid to make up the difference. This forces students to decide between taking out more loans or dropping out.

A closely related issue is the increase in students borrowing to finance college education and the resulting in student loan debt. In the 1980s, federal student loans became the centerpiece of student aid received. From 2006–2012, federal student loans more than doubled and outstanding student loan debt grew to $807 billion. Meanwhile, two year default rates increased from 5.2 percent in 2006 to 9.1 percent in 2012 and more than doubled the historic low of 4.5 percent set in 2003. Since data collection began in 1987, the highest two year default rate recorded was 22.4 percent in 1990. In 2011, the Project on Student Debt reported that approximately two thirds of students who graduated with bachelor's degrees from four year nonprofit universities had taken out student loans, with an average debt of $25,250, an overall rise of five percent from 2009. In 2010, student loan debt surpassed credit card debt. In his 2012 State of the Union Address, U. S. President Barack Obama addressed the rising cost of higher education in the United States. Through an executive order in 2011, Obama laid out a student loan plan, "Pay As You Earn", which allows former students to pay education debts as a percentage of their incomes. Furthermore, the Obama administration has developed an optional standardized letter to be sent to admitted students indicating the cost of attendance at an institution, including all net costs as well as financial aid received. Since 2012, the total amount of student debt has increased. Due to the coronavirus, the Relief and Economic Security Act was passed in March 2020, which ensured that the interest rate for federal student loans was set to 0% and most of the student loan payments were on hold until September 30, 2021.