Swimming Pools and Granite Countertops: How College Dorms Got So Expensive(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Swimming Pools and Granite Countertops: How College Dorms Got So Expensive
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/college-housing-dorms-cost-tuition-9d98c1a4
81 comments
One under-discussed aspect of this is that so a few of these children have shared a bedroom due to lack of many siblings and oversized houses that they demand their own space in college.
This cultural change has doubled the square footage required in dormitories.
This cultural change has doubled the square footage required in dormitories.
For what it’s worth, the cultural expectation to share a room in college is not universal. In the UK, Australia and many parts of Europe are often horrified to find that American students share a bedroom.
For Finland, private bedrooms are standard and have been for years. Other spaces might be shared between 4-10 people.
Still, even that arrangement has been losing popularity for a while. Even if there is lot of cost savings.
Still, even that arrangement has been losing popularity for a while. Even if there is lot of cost savings.
Interesting, I often wondered the opposite.
Coming from Europe, I would never EVER share a room with someone not bound by blood / romance. And for a house only in exceptional cases (vacation with friends etc).
But living in the USA I sometimes hear that people have strangers living in their house, renting out a room, or sometimes, even roommates.
And then I wonder, is it more acceptable here because they got over it when going to college?
Sidenote: I wonder if the concept of roommates pushed up the prices of 1 bd apartments, as now you can have 2 people in there, who combined pay more than a single person.
Coming from Europe, I would never EVER share a room with someone not bound by blood / romance. And for a house only in exceptional cases (vacation with friends etc).
But living in the USA I sometimes hear that people have strangers living in their house, renting out a room, or sometimes, even roommates.
And then I wonder, is it more acceptable here because they got over it when going to college?
Sidenote: I wonder if the concept of roommates pushed up the prices of 1 bd apartments, as now you can have 2 people in there, who combined pay more than a single person.
> I wonder if the concept of roommates pushed up the prices of 1 bd apartments
I reckon no, since you'd have to pay more than half of the original rent for the price to go up, but you at most get to have just half the room. A higher cost per square footage, which doesn't seem like a good deal, if you could have already afforded the full rent intially.
I reckon no, since you'd have to pay more than half of the original rent for the price to go up, but you at most get to have just half the room. A higher cost per square footage, which doesn't seem like a good deal, if you could have already afforded the full rent intially.
If 1bd is $1,200 and you have 2 people willing to live together each being able to afford $700 doesn't that push up the price to $1,400?
Although historically my University (in the UK) did still have some student halls with double rooms, they were already uncommon to the point of vanishing by the time I attended almost thirty years ago.
I don't see how this doubles square footage though. You can obviously provide significantly smaller study bedrooms for individuals, I'd have expected this to mean maybe the space for 1000 students (sharing, blergh) now has capacity for only 800 (single), something like that.
I don't see how this doubles square footage though. You can obviously provide significantly smaller study bedrooms for individuals, I'd have expected this to mean maybe the space for 1000 students (sharing, blergh) now has capacity for only 800 (single), something like that.
My US college had the opposite trend 10 years ago. Rising enrollment but no increase in housing led to single rooms becoming doubles, doubles becoming triples, and the shared lounges to become quads.
So glad I lived off-campus (5-10 minute drive) every year after freshman year. Twice the space, better amenities, no fire alarms, nobody trashing the bathrooms, and all for half the cost.
So glad I lived off-campus (5-10 minute drive) every year after freshman year. Twice the space, better amenities, no fire alarms, nobody trashing the bathrooms, and all for half the cost.
Doubles in the US are barely largely than singles. Imagine your single, but with another bed in it.
A triple is a double with one of the beds turned into a bunk bed and the other bed raised to stick another desk under it.
Because I persuaded my parents to spring for one of the nicer options, you actually could have fitted another bed into my room - it would be a squeeze but possible. But for many UK students that would be impossible.
Since I liked this city and never left I actually walked past my old halls earlier this evening, I was tempted to ask a kid to let me take a photo to prove the point but it's now well into holiday break season, anybody left in those halls likely has nowhere else to go so that's pretty bleak.
Instead, here's a brochure, check the top (cheapest and most plentiful) bedroom photos.
https://www.southampton.ac.uk/student-life/accommodation/hal...
Since I liked this city and never left I actually walked past my old halls earlier this evening, I was tempted to ask a kid to let me take a photo to prove the point but it's now well into holiday break season, anybody left in those halls likely has nowhere else to go so that's pretty bleak.
Instead, here's a brochure, check the top (cheapest and most plentiful) bedroom photos.
https://www.southampton.ac.uk/student-life/accommodation/hal...
When I was in college two decades ago, my room was marginally better than army barracks. And that was in one of the nicer buildings.
It's not clear to me (the article is paywalled and I'm not giving Rupert Murdoch a fucking cent) how widespread these luxury dorms are -- I wouldn't trust WSJ to report accurately on this sort of thing -- but this kind of experience doesn't sound very common based on the experiences of recent college kids I've talked to. Some of whom went to very expensive universities.
Is this the 21st century equivalent of Reagan's "welfare queens?"
Get back to be when see a sudden rise in "non-traditional" older students who just want to experience such opulence.
Student life is so fun that everyone is in a hurry to leave and, despite many misty-eyed stories to the contrary, nobody wants to return to it.
Get back to be when see a sudden rise in "non-traditional" older students who just want to experience such opulence.
Student life is so fun that everyone is in a hurry to leave and, despite many misty-eyed stories to the contrary, nobody wants to return to it.
oh_sigh(7)
> Housing is one of the biggest drivers of rising college costs in the U.S.
While some people might otherwise choose to live in the middle of nowhere where they have to pay you to take a house, the data suggests that most people (especially young people most likely to take an interest in college) already live in the places where the colleges are found.
For all intents and purposes, isn't the housing cost expended regardless of college enrolment? In other words, it is not a college cost.
While some people might otherwise choose to live in the middle of nowhere where they have to pay you to take a house, the data suggests that most people (especially young people most likely to take an interest in college) already live in the places where the colleges are found.
For all intents and purposes, isn't the housing cost expended regardless of college enrolment? In other words, it is not a college cost.
The article does a fairly detailed analysis of this: Housing affiliated with universities has gotten much more expensive relative no housing unaffiliated with universities over the past twenty years. Combine that with requirements to live on campus and such, and it is more expensive.
Yes, everyone needs a place to live. But not everyone needs to live in a fancy and expensive dorm room like those that come with universities.
Yes, everyone needs a place to live. But not everyone needs to live in a fancy and expensive dorm room like those that come with universities.
All the way back in ‘03, in two college towns I’m aware of, it was significantly cheaper to get a 12-month lease on a 1-bedroom or studio apartment within a 5-minute walk from campus than to live in the dorms, even without a roomate (which you’d have in the dorm). And you’d have your own bathroom and kitchen, and more total space.
Both universities required freshmen to live in the dorms, unless they were living with family.
Both universities required freshmen to live in the dorms, unless they were living with family.
What is the relevance of university affiliation with respect to the assertion? Housing cost is merely a function of what the buyer is willing to bear. They could spend the same amount on an off-campus house – the cost would be the same. But is that actually a cost of college?
My university required freshmen to live in dorms. Many colleges do.
Universities often require students live on campus. So yes.
So, in that case, that's like a quarter of a million dollar loss (based on the article's figures) just on the housing portion of college alone. How does one ever recover from the financial hit?
Especially if we assume that the cost of housing continues to climb like it has (maybe not, but let's go with it for the sake of discussion). The person who didn't go to college and bought a home instead will be likely end up half a million dollars or more richer without lifting a finger.
I suppose you're going to college because you don't already have the basic life skills to figure that out.
Especially if we assume that the cost of housing continues to climb like it has (maybe not, but let's go with it for the sake of discussion). The person who didn't go to college and bought a home instead will be likely end up half a million dollars or more richer without lifting a finger.
I suppose you're going to college because you don't already have the basic life skills to figure that out.
>The person who didn't go to college and bought a home instead
What fairytale land do you live in that a high school graduate can purchase a home?
What fairytale land do you live in that a high school graduate can purchase a home?
Back when I was debating between buying a triplex and ending my gap year, that fairytale land was the northern Twin Cities suburbs.
Looking at current stats, a pizza driver could still do that today (working 60+hr/week since you can't get ahead of rent on a reasonable timescale otherwise, saving for 1yr if you go with a low-down FHA loan, 2 if you need 20% down). It's not ideal, and if that high school student has a kid or anything it won't be an option, but a 4/15 schedule still left me with a 3-day weekend, a full night's sleep, and I just cruised around listening to the radio and eating free pizza. It wasn't harder than college by any means.
Looking at current stats, a pizza driver could still do that today (working 60+hr/week since you can't get ahead of rent on a reasonable timescale otherwise, saving for 1yr if you go with a low-down FHA loan, 2 if you need 20% down). It's not ideal, and if that high school student has a kid or anything it won't be an option, but a 4/15 schedule still left me with a 3-day weekend, a full night's sleep, and I just cruised around listening to the radio and eating free pizza. It wasn't harder than college by any means.
And if pizza delivery doesn't pay, one can always become a software developer. Lots of people do that job while still in high school.
Yep, definitely. I called it out as an option because of firsthand experience and because 90+% of HS grads are definitely qualified.
> 90+% of HS grads are definitely qualified.
Oh? While ~90% of the adult population in the US have a driver's license (data is lacking for the high school grad subset, but likely similar), I doubt a significant number of high school grads on the older end of the spectrum are any longer qualified to work 60+ hour weeks. ~25% of the adult population are elderly (again, likely similar for HS grads).
In fairness, I expect you are meaning recent grads. The kids today, however, have really backed away from driving. Only 60% of those 18 years of age in the US have a driver's license. Without that, you are definitely not qualified. 90+% among recent HS grads appears impossible.
I concede you may have been envisioning them delivering pizza on a bicycle. But "driver" in this context usually refers to operation of licensed motor vehicles.
Oh? While ~90% of the adult population in the US have a driver's license (data is lacking for the high school grad subset, but likely similar), I doubt a significant number of high school grads on the older end of the spectrum are any longer qualified to work 60+ hour weeks. ~25% of the adult population are elderly (again, likely similar for HS grads).
In fairness, I expect you are meaning recent grads. The kids today, however, have really backed away from driving. Only 60% of those 18 years of age in the US have a driver's license. Without that, you are definitely not qualified. 90+% among recent HS grads appears impossible.
I concede you may have been envisioning them delivering pizza on a bicycle. But "driver" in this context usually refers to operation of licensed motor vehicles.
[deleted]
Yes, it's more like "the person who went to a state or community college and lives in their parents' house, commuting to save money." Not spending money on housing already cuts down a lot on the money spent on college.
Wait until you find out about mandatory meal plans!
I knew it. Rising food costs are the real reason college is no longer affordable. Monsanto strikes again.
Not in particular, no. You seem unacquainted with the college fee structure. Some of them have Big Tuition, but almost all of them do the death of a thousand cuts, where you are subject to an endless parade of fees, so shameless that even the telcos are envious of the boldness of the bursar. It isn't merely mandatory meal plans and two years of students staying in the dorms, you have mental health fees and student union fees and ... well, it just keeps going.
Really, as universities transform into "business for the sake of business" organizations, you get administrative bloat, which gets fed through an endless series of tacked-on charges.
Really, as universities transform into "business for the sake of business" organizations, you get administrative bloat, which gets fed through an endless series of tacked-on charges.
With tone deaf pedantry like that, I'm surprised you didn't also call out that Monsanto is no more. Its assets were bought up by Bayer and BASF quite a few years ago. You are slipping, my friend.
I have friends at Bayer, so I am well aware. I got the joke, I just ... decided to ignore it because you've been doing this odd mixture of wildly-uninformed and vaguely hostile bits like "I suppose you're going to college because you don't already have the basic life skills to figure that out." for most of the conversation rather than engaging with the article or the rest of us.
Yes, I know you got the joke. Nobody would have posted that if they thought I was being serious. It says nothing and doesn't make any sense with respect to the discussion that was in place before the dumb jokes started. That is why I continued to joke with you.
I would have loved to talk about the original subject in sincerity – I maintain it is an interesting question – but nobody else wanted to. Not even you. Oh well. Such is life.
I would have loved to talk about the original subject in sincerity – I maintain it is an interesting question – but nobody else wanted to. Not even you. Oh well. Such is life.
As I interpret it, the subject is "One of the causes of rising college costs is very fancy dorms." It appears I was talking about that, via the "yes, you have to stay in the dorms in many places" route. What were you talking about? I don't joke much on Hacker News, the culture doesn't really encourage it.
I love to talk about this subject, as I have some insight into it, having my sticky hands deep into the faculty and staff data in a university for about a decade.
I love to talk about this subject, as I have some insight into it, having my sticky hands deep into the faculty and staff data in a university for about a decade.
> As I interpret it, the subject is "One of the causes of rising college costs is very fancy dorms."
The subject – which is really a question – asks why is housing considered a college cost when one has to incur a housing cost no matter what (at least for all practical purposes)?
The closest thing we got as a response to that was a couple of people who felt it was a college cost because some institutions require freshmen to stay in campus-operated housing. There is certainly something to that on the surface, but we never managed to go deeper. Like, is the full rental cost a college cost, or only the cost difference between the student housing and an equivalent off-campus house? What about the colleges that have no such requirement? What about students who are not freshmen?
While the food tangent was introduced in jest, it would have also been interesting to explore that as if housing is a college cost, then it stands to reason that food is also a college cost. Along with entertainment, car ownership (for those who own a car while in college), contraception, etc.
We could have also discussed if that logic extends to other areas of life. Are housing costs a cost of running a business? That would be especially interesting as the tax man usually says no, except maybe allowing a small portion of the total cost to be reserved as an office cost. In that vein, perhaps only a small portion of one's student home – where they do their homework – should be considered a cost of college?
But there was no interest. Which is fine. The jokes most everyone else brought instead were entertaining too.
The subject – which is really a question – asks why is housing considered a college cost when one has to incur a housing cost no matter what (at least for all practical purposes)?
The closest thing we got as a response to that was a couple of people who felt it was a college cost because some institutions require freshmen to stay in campus-operated housing. There is certainly something to that on the surface, but we never managed to go deeper. Like, is the full rental cost a college cost, or only the cost difference between the student housing and an equivalent off-campus house? What about the colleges that have no such requirement? What about students who are not freshmen?
While the food tangent was introduced in jest, it would have also been interesting to explore that as if housing is a college cost, then it stands to reason that food is also a college cost. Along with entertainment, car ownership (for those who own a car while in college), contraception, etc.
We could have also discussed if that logic extends to other areas of life. Are housing costs a cost of running a business? That would be especially interesting as the tax man usually says no, except maybe allowing a small portion of the total cost to be reserved as an office cost. In that vein, perhaps only a small portion of one's student home – where they do their homework – should be considered a cost of college?
But there was no interest. Which is fine. The jokes most everyone else brought instead were entertaining too.
I would count food as a college cost, certainly, due to meal plans. Many colleges, like the one I worked at, had an outside vendor working many of the eateries. They had such a stranglehold that they (anti-competitively) did not want the places they didn't run (usually little student-run things attached to a particular school, vending machines, foot carts) listed at all. First they got the contract and wowed us with some great food. Over the years, however, their prices went up, and both the portion size and the quality decreased.
Additionally, many students with the mandatory meal plans had excess points at the end of the semester or year. No refunds.
Even at the university I attended, way back when, what I got for my money when I moved out of campus was a lot better than what I got when I had to have a dorm room and eat in the cafeteria from what was provided. Better space, better food. Or you could save your money and live in the much-smaller rooms which were next to campus.
I would start counting things as "college costs" when there was a some intersection of outside vendor, profit center, and mandatory subscription. You can see parallels with "textbooks" (freshly printed, spiral-bound, new-each-semester, written-by-the-prof) you must get at some incredible cost, often in excess of two hundred dollars. I'm not one of those people who bangs on about the free market all the time, but there's some serious quasi-regulatory capture going on there.
Additionally, many students with the mandatory meal plans had excess points at the end of the semester or year. No refunds.
Even at the university I attended, way back when, what I got for my money when I moved out of campus was a lot better than what I got when I had to have a dorm room and eat in the cafeteria from what was provided. Better space, better food. Or you could save your money and live in the much-smaller rooms which were next to campus.
I would start counting things as "college costs" when there was a some intersection of outside vendor, profit center, and mandatory subscription. You can see parallels with "textbooks" (freshly printed, spiral-bound, new-each-semester, written-by-the-prof) you must get at some incredible cost, often in excess of two hundred dollars. I'm not one of those people who bangs on about the free market all the time, but there's some serious quasi-regulatory capture going on there.
Sure, you have to live somewhere but:
"While rental prices rose nationwide in this period, an analysis of Census data shows median rates increased at a slower pace in the areas immediately around all 12 schools than the pace for the least expensive options on those campuses."
ie, the cost of living in a dorm is rising faster than the cost of living off campus.
Some colleges require freshman to live in dorms.
"While rental prices rose nationwide in this period, an analysis of Census data shows median rates increased at a slower pace in the areas immediately around all 12 schools than the pace for the least expensive options on those campuses."
ie, the cost of living in a dorm is rising faster than the cost of living off campus.
Some colleges require freshman to live in dorms.
> ie, the cost of living in a dorm is rising faster than the cost of living off campus.
And the article is about how there is now more choice in dorm rentals (i.e. from basic accommodations to mansion-living). Generally there was no mansion option in the past, and now there is, and that means some students will opt to pay more for the nicer accommodations – and that is going to reflect in the numbers.
If a neighbourhood with 100 modest houses sees construction of 100 mansions, the median value of houses in the area is going to skyrocket too. That doesn't mean the modest houses suddenly cost more.
The same article indicates that a basic unit is $500 per month. I'd love to know where you can rent an off-campus place for less than that. You would never find such a thing around here – not even if you are willing to settle for a crack den.
And the article is about how there is now more choice in dorm rentals (i.e. from basic accommodations to mansion-living). Generally there was no mansion option in the past, and now there is, and that means some students will opt to pay more for the nicer accommodations – and that is going to reflect in the numbers.
If a neighbourhood with 100 modest houses sees construction of 100 mansions, the median value of houses in the area is going to skyrocket too. That doesn't mean the modest houses suddenly cost more.
The same article indicates that a basic unit is $500 per month. I'd love to know where you can rent an off-campus place for less than that. You would never find such a thing around here – not even if you are willing to settle for a crack den.
> isn't the housing cost expended regardless of college enrollment
For an article about specifically those arrangements that include dorms, this is overly general.
Dorms used to be the defacto, cheapest living arrangement.
For an article about specifically those arrangements that include dorms, this is overly general.
Dorms used to be the defacto, cheapest living arrangement.
> Dorms used to be the defacto, cheapest living arrangement.
Has that changed? The article suggests $500 per month for a basic room. There is no way I could find anywhere to live for that much around here, not even in a crack shack, and I live in a small town where housing tends to be cheap compared to the cities where colleges are found. In which cities is $500 per month for rent above market?
Sure, you can opt to spend upwards of $2,000 per month (per the article) if you want to live in what is effectively a mansion, which may be something new, but you're going to spend more than that to live in a mansion off campus too, surely?
Has that changed? The article suggests $500 per month for a basic room. There is no way I could find anywhere to live for that much around here, not even in a crack shack, and I live in a small town where housing tends to be cheap compared to the cities where colleges are found. In which cities is $500 per month for rent above market?
Sure, you can opt to spend upwards of $2,000 per month (per the article) if you want to live in what is effectively a mansion, which may be something new, but you're going to spend more than that to live in a mansion off campus too, surely?
Here is the data. It’s interesting to see how much is varies by type, but with only 25 percent of students attending undergrad programs living at home it does seem like it’s a major part of the college expense.
https://collegeaffordability.urban.org/prices-and-expenses/r...
https://collegeaffordability.urban.org/prices-and-expenses/r...
The data does not answer the question of whether or not housing is reasonably considered a cost of college. Only human analysis can answer that question.
Indeed. It does answer the question of housing costs and type for college students, but you’d have to design a conclusion for what “reasonableness” actually means to answer the question: it’s a deeply subjective terminology.
For one person spending 6,000 a year on housing may be profoundly difficult. For another, 26,000 a year is no problem. And it is especially interesting that 25 percent of students live at home — that’s a lot higher than I expected.
But of course what makes that “reasonable” is entirely in the eye of the human analyst which is why I provided the source data.
For one person spending 6,000 a year on housing may be profoundly difficult. For another, 26,000 a year is no problem. And it is especially interesting that 25 percent of students live at home — that’s a lot higher than I expected.
But of course what makes that “reasonable” is entirely in the eye of the human analyst which is why I provided the source data.
> It does answer the question of housing costs and type for college students
It would answer that question, but why would anyone want that question answered...?
The question in question asked whether or not housing is a college cost. We could ask the same of food, clothing, entertainment, etc. If you buy a new Ferrari while attending college, does that mean your college bill went up hundreds of thousands of dollars more?
Or, if you want to look at this from a different perspective, is housing an employment cost if you have a job? If you volunteer at the soup kitchen, is housing a soup kitchen cost? If you like to race cars, is your house a racing cost?
If the answer is yes, does that mean students who do things other than study have lower college costs? As in, if rent is $500 per month, also having a job means the cost would be divided between activities; let's, for the sake of discussion, say $250 attributable to college and $250 to employment. Whereas someone who only goes to school is paying the full $500 in college costs. Meaning that, all else equal, the person with the job pays $250 per month less for college than the person who has dedicated all of their time to school.
> it’s a deeply subjective
Of course it is subjective. That's why we are asking people about their subjective takes. If it were some kind of cold hard truth, what would there be to say about it?
It would answer that question, but why would anyone want that question answered...?
The question in question asked whether or not housing is a college cost. We could ask the same of food, clothing, entertainment, etc. If you buy a new Ferrari while attending college, does that mean your college bill went up hundreds of thousands of dollars more?
Or, if you want to look at this from a different perspective, is housing an employment cost if you have a job? If you volunteer at the soup kitchen, is housing a soup kitchen cost? If you like to race cars, is your house a racing cost?
If the answer is yes, does that mean students who do things other than study have lower college costs? As in, if rent is $500 per month, also having a job means the cost would be divided between activities; let's, for the sake of discussion, say $250 attributable to college and $250 to employment. Whereas someone who only goes to school is paying the full $500 in college costs. Meaning that, all else equal, the person with the job pays $250 per month less for college than the person who has dedicated all of their time to school.
> it’s a deeply subjective
Of course it is subjective. That's why we are asking people about their subjective takes. If it were some kind of cold hard truth, what would there be to say about it?
[deleted]
Why would they be building so many new dorms if most students live at home? Where do all those people in the middle of nowhere go to school?
> Why would they be building so many new dorms if most students live at home?
There is no implication that the students live at home (assuming that means a parent's place). If you mean home as in where one lives, doesn't everyone live at home?
> Where do all those people in the middle of nowhere go to school?
This was already covered.
But in an effort to try and salvage something here: Never underestimate the unreasonable effectiveness of the highway. Quite often people living in the middle of nowhere can get to places in the city faster than those who live inside the city. I know it is common misconception, but living in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean you have to be permanently affixed to it.
There is no implication that the students live at home (assuming that means a parent's place). If you mean home as in where one lives, doesn't everyone live at home?
> Where do all those people in the middle of nowhere go to school?
This was already covered.
But in an effort to try and salvage something here: Never underestimate the unreasonable effectiveness of the highway. Quite often people living in the middle of nowhere can get to places in the city faster than those who live inside the city. I know it is common misconception, but living in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean you have to be permanently affixed to it.
[deleted]
Exactly. Many college towns (esp. Big Ten) are in cities well out of commuting distance for most students.
Student housing is a distinct class of real estate. At least, it used to be.
But hosing for students is not limited to student housing. At least not at any legitimate institution.
All of that is to say: our dorms were expensive because the university had a de jure monopoly.