# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1944_S561
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

+

-expects him to pay.

- Brown over ‘the years by small accretions to a comparatively larg
‘ sum and which, moreover, represents payment for intangible benefi

560 . Report of Board for Higher Education

‘part this is offset by remission to Synod of the annual balance in‘
tuition fee account. This last item is of considerable important
because it provides a. fairly reliable estimate of the cost to Syno
general education at Bronxville for this particular year.

The total synodical contributions to the preparatory colleges for #1
fiscal year 1941 are shown. They are reduced to per-capita contrib
_ tions for the entire student body enrolled and for the pretheologic
enrollment only. The latter figures are of more critical importa:
than the former. Since major repairs vary greatly from school
school and from year to year, they are excluded, as were rental values
of the homes provided for the teachers. Economic costs as repr
‘sented by plant depreciation were also excluded. ,

As is to be expected, a definite relationship exists between the pers3
Capita contributions of Synod and the enrollment. The larger
enrollment, the lower the per-capita contributions, They were. high
at Edmonton ($439.59), lowest at Milwaukee ($158.09). At Bré:
ville they were out of line, being higher than expected; at Concor
Portland, and Austin they were lower. The total educational cost
and to a large degree also this fraction of them contributed by Syn
‘may be interpreted in one of two ways: either in terms of the qualit
of the educational program, or in terms of the efficiency of the mani
agement. In view of the obsolete plants at Portland and Concord
the educational services are perhaps not all that could be desired.‘ ‘f;
Bronxville efficiency of the management may not be as good as
quality of the educational services,

2. Charges to Students

It is surprising to note how small a Percentage of the total edu
tional costs is: borne by the pretheological student. He pays for ‘his
meals, but he pays none of the true instructional costs and not even:
major portion of the dormitory costs. (Milwaukee 44 per cent':of
the dormitory costs, Bronxville 36 per cent. Cost analyses of oth
synodical colleges would presumably reveal similar ratios.)

This being the case, Synod has established the regulation that pr
theological students who have received the benefit of these low rates3
and who drop out of the ministerial course for reasons not acceptable;
to the Boards, be required to pay tuition arrears of $40 per year foty
high school and $60-80 for college.’ These payments would. brin;
the student’s share of the total operating costs (exclusive of mai
tenance and depreciation) for meals, dormitory, and instruction ¢
approximately 50 per cent at Bronxville and Milwaukee and
sumably at the other schools... The remaining 50 per cent Synod

N

In the final analysis, this entire procedure is unsound. Hi
nature finds it very difficult to assume a financial obligation which.

received. Unless resort is had to legal processes—and this is unwis