Residencies in Medical Physics difficult to obtain

[Choppy]

Right, that's what I figured. So you don't lose money by taking on students. You would lost money, govt. subsidies, if you didnt take on students.

This is at odds with this, , which seems dramatic, makes no fiscal sense and is counter to the explanations that we have gotten.

What part of my explanations don't make sense to you?

 

[ParticleGrl]

Programs are not considered individually, in terms of university finances.

Someone must have those numbers- during budget cutting time at my old graduate school, various departments would send around memos about who was turning a profit and who wasn't as part of their arguments not to get the ax.

The numbers have to balance since we are a non-profit. As you can see, tuition and fees (lab fees, etc.) are insufficient.

Sure, but students can bring in more money than tuition and fees. Teaching a class to X or X+1 students has no additional marginal cost if you already have any necessary equipment. Some of the state subsidy is contingent on student enrollment, and somewhere in there are things like the overhead the university takes from scientific funding grants. Presumably the tuition rates are set considering the subsidies/enrollments required to keep the university solvent. The marginal cost of each student should be either 0 or slightly positive. If its negative, I don't see how the institution can survive.

 

[ModusPwnd]

What part of my explanations don't make sense to you?

None. I have concluded you were engaging in hyperbole.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Someone must have those numbers- during budget cutting time at my old graduate school, various departments would send around memos about who was turning a profit and who wasn't as part of their arguments not to get the ax.

It's interesting: *revenue* is broken down all the way to individual departments, but *expenses* are not. And yes, the detailed cost accounting often causes friction between administrators and faculty.

Sure, but students can bring in more money than tuition and fees. Teaching a class to X or X+1 students has no additional marginal cost if you already have any necessary equipment. Some of the state subsidy is contingent on student enrollment, and somewhere in there are things like the overhead the university takes from scientific funding grants. Presumably the tuition rates are set considering the subsidies/enrollments required to keep the university solvent. The marginal cost of each student should be either 0 or slightly positive. If its negative, I don't see how the institution can survive.

There's a lot here, let's see if I can break it down. First, it does matter if a class has 10 students or 100. Teaching load is defined in terms of course credit hours: I am paid to teach 2 courses per semester. If my classes only have 5 students each, I am only generating a fraction of the revenue required to pay my salary. From the administration's perspective, maximum revenue will be generated by having adjuncts/part time faculty teach large introductory lecture courses, while maximum loss occurs by having full professors teach small enrollment courses.

Here's another angle- our department does not offer a PhD, but since I have a secondary appointment in Biology, I have access to their PhD students. We get 'credit' equivalent to 1 class per semester for being a PhD advisor. So I get physics course credit for non-physics students; alternatively, the Physics department is subsidizing the Biology departments' student because someone has to teach the class I would normally be teaching.

The state subsidy formula is a secret (to prevent unfair manipulation), but does factor in enrollment. It also factors in graduation and retention rates, the course level (subsidies are different from 200-300 level and 500-600 level courses), etc. The state subsidy has been decreasing annually for at least a decade- it's the easiest line item for a governor to cut. Last year it was reduced 15%.

Overhead (indirect cost recovery) is in that 'other' category- note that it is miniscule compared to the other items. FWIW, I'm responsible for about 2% of that number.

Tuition increases are capped by the state, currently indexed to inflation. My understanding is that 'educational costs' rise approximately double the rate of inflation, which means that enrollment must increase to offset the decreased purchasing power of the institution. Increasing enrollment is opposed by the desire to increase graduation/retention rates, for example by increasing admission standards. Increased graduation/retention rates are desired to increase the state subsidy, or at least slow the decrease in state subsidy.

 

[ParticleGrl]

My understanding is that 'educational costs' rise approximately double the rate of inflation

I don't at all understand why this should be the case. The actual buildings are largely a fixed cost, the cost of instruction has been dropping pretty dramatically with the increase in part-time/non-TT faculty. I doubt instructional lab-equipment is being purchased with enough regularity to dramatically exceed the inflation rate, etc. Are administrators gobbling up increasing costs, or is it expanded amenities (i.e building a rock-wall in the gym to attract students)? Or something else I'm not seeing?

First, it does matter if a class has 10 students or 100.

Sure,on the revenue side, but not the cost side. My point was the marginal cost of enrolling another student is very small, as the difference between 10 and 11 students (or 100 and 101) is basically 0. The marginal revenue increase is fixed to the cost of tuition/fees.

note that it is miniscule compared to the other items

Sure, but its also spread over a smaller number of researchers and students (research faculty + phd/masters students). i.e. if medical physics grants are responsible for a fair chunk of it, then that revenue number needs to be factored in when you evaluate whether or not medical physics students are a net gain.

 

[jesse73]

Are administrators gobbling up increasing costs, or is it expanded amenities (i.e building a rock-wall in the gym to attract students)? Or something else I'm not seeing?

This along with increasing the building costs by updating buildings less than 50 years old. Building new building for the sake of attracting students by showing how much money you spend kind of like law/business schools.

 

[PBD]

As the lowly fodder for these programs , could I ask if it would be useful to take the physics GRE if it's not required?

 

[Choppy]

As the lowly fodder for these programs , could I ask if it would be useful to take the physics GRE if it's not required?

I suppose it depends on where it is or is not required. If you're sure you'll get into a program that doesn't require it then I suppose there isn't much to get out of taking it... aside perhaps from the benefit of studying for it. If on the other hand, you're also considering other graduate options or medical physics programs that require it, then it's probably a good idea to take it.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I don't at all understand why this should be the case. <snip> Or something else I'm not seeing?

Definitely.

Sure,on the revenue side, but not the cost side.

The two are not separable in any rational business model.

Sure, but its also spread over a smaller number of researchers and students (research faculty + phd/masters students). i.e. if medical physics grants are responsible for a fair chunk of it, then that revenue number needs to be factored in when you evaluate whether or not medical physics students are a net gain.

You still don't understand how money flows within a large institution.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Are administrators gobbling up increasing costs, or is it expanded amenities (i.e building a rock-wall in the gym to attract students)? Or something else I'm not seeing?

Yes and yes. Also, the number of majors (which influences the number of faculty) is increasing, particularly for majors attractive to 18-year olds. 25 years ago, perhaps two schools offered an actual degree in Film. Today there are more than 50.

Getting back to the point at hand, one reason that a college has a weak program in an area- any area - is that it it is hoping to build that into a strong one someday.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Definitely.



The two are not separable in any rational business model.



You still don't understand how money flows within a large institution.

You are assuming that colleges and universities offer a rational business model. I wonder to myself if colleges/universities in the US and Canada are actually spending the money that flows into their schools wisely or appropriately for their primary missions (e.g. teaching, research, particularly if administrators are gobbling up the costs and facilities are being built which may not necessarily be needed, as implied by jesse73 and Vanadium 50.

Which leads me to ask -- are colleges and universities required to make public their revenues and expenditures (in the form of an annual report)?

 

[Andy Resnick]

Which leads me to ask -- are colleges and universities required to make public their revenues and expenditures (in the form of an annual report)?

All non-profit institutions are required to file a 990 Form with the Internal Revenue Service, and these are publicly available.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>Are administrators gobbling up increasing costs, or is it expanded amenities (i.e building a rock-wall in the gym to attract students)? Or something else I'm not seeing? <snip>

While admin salaries and shiny buildings get all the attention, reality is much more mundane. Once you understand institutional finances, you will better understand the pressures to oversubscribe popular programs like for example, Medical Physics.

Some costs apply across the institution: Who pays the janitors in those buildings? Who pays campus security? During the summer when enrollment is very low, does campus remain fully open? Other costs do not occur uniformly, but are limited to specific colleges/departments/programs, such as: hazardous waste disposal, insurance premiums (not just lab equipment, but also liability insurance), safety office personnel, consumable items, etc.

How are these expenses paid for? Tuition and lab fees cover a large percentage. Tuition money is distributed to colleges and departments in a very straightforward way: multiply the number of 'student credit hours' (a number obtained from the registrar) by the cost of a credit hour and you're done. Of course, not *all* the tuition money can be distributed to colleges, since the janitors have to get paid.

At the college level, there are again 'institutional' costs (hazardous waste disposal, etc.) that uniformly apply, and departmental-specific costs (faculty and staff salaries, lab costs, etc) that do not. So again, at the college level they look at the distribution of student credit hours and give that money to the departments (less their 'cut'). I'm not sure what fraction goes to the college and what fraction goes to the department, but a reasonable estimate (based on how my indirect costs are distributed- we haven't even started on extramural funding...) is that 50% stays with the institution, 25% goes to the college, and 25% goes to the department.

Our typical medical physics class has about 10 graduate students (we don't restrict enrollment just to med. phys. students), so each class generates $20k of tuition revenue (10 students, 4 credit hour class, $500 per credit hour (in-state)). We don't get the whole $20k. A lot of it stays even higher to pay for journal subscriptions and wireless network installation and all that other stuff. That means the medical physics class generates $5000 in revenue for the college and $5000 in revenue for the department.

What are some department expenses? The largest is salary. Let's see if the Medical physics class revenue covers my salary expense. Nominally, I am contractually obligated teach 4 courses per academic year. My salary is publicly available information, to which 33% must be added for fringe benefits. Now the question is obvious: are the student credit hours high enough to cover my salary? For some classes, yes. For other classes, no. If the department's costs were strictly limited to salaries and I taught *only* medical physics classes, then if my salary is higher than $20k, the department would be unable to pay me. This is a problem- at least for me (and the institution, should it wish to retain faculty for any length of time). Hence, there is real pressure to increase enrollment as high as possible.

I'm not sure what the 'break-even' point is for class enrollment, but it's clearly higher than 10 (remember that we can only accommodate 4 med phys students per year, and of those, 1 or 2 are guaranteed residencies).

Not all classes are low enrollment. I also teach college physics I and II, with an average enrollment of 40 students (at 5 credits, this generates $77,200 per semester!). Redirect one credit towards lab costs, and the department receives $15440 towards my salary (even so, it still doesn't fully cover the required fraction of my salary). That is, the intro class 'subsidizes' the medical physics class. Extramural research actually works the opposite direction: I am granted course release time without having my salary covered by the grant, so tuition dollars subsidize my research time. As an aside, given that many NIH awards *do* cover salary, faculty at research-intensive institutions are much more dependent on obtaining NIH funding to ensure they get paid (so-called 'soft money').

We don't control enrollment (other than having admissions standards, which necessarily *lowers* enrollment from what it could be), so why should the institution allow low-enrollment programs to exist? Sometimes, they don't- programs are closed down all the time. OTOH, if the low-enrollment program is viewed as 'potential for growth', it can exist (as long as it is subsidized somehow). But it should be clear that there's no way for an *intentionally* low-enrollment program to exist indefinitely without an explicit effort to ensure it remains subsidized.

Alternatively, we could admit as many med phys students as we can fit into a lecture hall. But, IMO, that's not in the best interest of the student.

 

[bluemoon_]

Hello there... I am a medical physics student. i would like to contact choppy. choppy can u please give me your mail id.

 

[Choppy]

Hi BlueMoon,

Feel free to private message me if you have something you do not want to talk about in the forums. I think you just click on my name to go to my profile and start a conversation.