View Single Post
Old
12-17-2012, 03:58 PM
  #480
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Unlike you, I don't consider an unlimited stream of funds coming into the coffers of universities. Instead, I realize that there is always going to be shortages in funds. The best universities in the world get the most of out the money they have, McGill has done this for decades. Canadian universities receive less funding, charge lower tuition but yet we have two in the top 20 in the world, and 3 in the top 40.

One of the ways you can deal with lack of funding is to offset the costs onto the students or workers. Laptop computers have become so common place and affordable, they do not need to supply every worker with a computer. Why buy chalk or felt pens en masse costing thousands of dollars when you can get the profs to buy one box for the year. Why run a student kitchen when you can rent out the space to a catering company?

These are just things that universities have to do, that every university has to do.
You don't save money by not buying laptops, you just piss people off by likely being the only top-500 university in the world not to pay for business expenses.

Say you have an employee that costs $50,000/year for 3 years with overhead. You're too cheap to spend $3,000 on a laptop, so you save ~2% of the cost. You feel like a genius. However, you then end up with an individual with vastly lower productivity:

1) If there's any problem with the computer, the sys admins don't know what to do because they didn't set it up. Personal computers are on average, more full of viruses and other problems than work computers.
2) Hard drive failures will be more common, most people don't have double-backups on their personal computers.
3) You hired someone of lower quality in the first place, because only someone with limited choices would go to the institution that does not cover business expenses and therefore pays less money.
4) The worker is less productive because he has an inferior computer system. A computation that should take a day takes a week, etc.

In the end you actually losing tons of money. You have less competent workers who are less productive than they otherwise would be. It's a false saving, it's equivalent to the idiocy of the Quebec government saving money by infrastructure by having the worst roads in North America and having bridges crumble on top of people and killing people. In the end it ends up costing money in otherways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Canadian universities receive less funding, charge lower tuition but yet we have two in the top 20 in the world, and 3 in the top 40.
Simply not correct. No ranking seems to support your claim.

I just looked at the 2012-2013 Times Higher Education Supplement.
There are zero canadian universities in the top-20:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.u.../world-ranking
Toronto is 21st, UBC is 30th, McGill is 34th.

On the 2012 Shanghai rankings, there are again zero canadian universities in the top-20:
http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2012.html
Toronto is 27th, UBC is 39th, and McGill is 63rd

On the 2012 US News & World Report rankings:
http://www.usnews.com/education/worl...s-in-the-world
McGll is 18th, Toronto is 19th, and UBC is 45th.

Meanwhile, the common theme in the top-20 is money, money, money. If you want to be mediocre, which seems to be your preference, that's ok, not everybody has ambition. However, if you want to be excellent, then it's not going to come for free. It's going to take sacrifice.

Excellence always takes sacrifice.

DAChampion is offline