Caroline Hoxby’s Economic Model – Does It Help Explain “A Tale Out Of School” And Other Behaviors?

Maybe it does.  Here is a link to a paper where Prof. Hoxby (Prof. of Econ. at Bekelely, formerly at Harvard and a MacArthur Fellow) describes two models of of institutions of higher education: http://papers.nber.org/tmp/43484-w19816.pdf

The models are described in the first part of the paper.  Prof. Hoxby “…contrast[s] nonselective postsecondary education (NSPE) in which institutions sell fairly standardized educational services in return for up-front payments and highly selective postsecondary education (HSPE) in which institutions invest in students in return for repayments much later in life…” (quoted from her paper)

Though both of these models fit my experience in higher education, I am most interested in the highly selective model.  In particular, I believe, that with some modifications, it might help explain the attitudes that I saw in A Tale Out of School – A Case Study in Higher Education.

Before describing the modifications to Prof. Hoxby’s HSPE model, here is my  summary of that model.  HSPE schools act like venture capital firms in the sense that they invest heavily (well beyond tuition payments) in human capital in the expectation that a small portion of that investment will be returned at a high rate.  The return will come from a small portion of the small number of alumni that are very successful, and who credit some of that success to the university’s investment in them.  They will see what they return to the university as helping later generations follow them.

Here is my modification.  First, if a unversity can acquire a large number of smart students, it can expect some number of those students to be successful, especially if those students come mainly from high income families.  Then, the university can work to make sure that those students leave with a great feeling about the university.  Many will then feel very connected to the school.  The idea is to make the alumni “feel” that the university was an asset to them.

Why would a university take this tack when giving all the students a good education should, in theory, give the school even more of a chance of successful graduates.  I would guess that there are two factors.  First, only a few of the students attending the university might really be talented enough to make it big on their own.  (The most highly talented and dedicated students may have chosen to go to a traditionally top-ranked school.)  Second, the faculty at some schools, good as they are, may not be good enough to both teach at an excellent level, and do research at an excellent level.  Since the school sees research as important to revenue and brand, too, it may just choose the strategy of picking good students (if it can), treating them as special consumers, and hoping.  Maybe that explains what I saw.