TABLE OF CONTENTS |
FRONT PAGE
| NEXT ARTICLE |
UNC HOMEPAGE
Arguing the need for tuition increases is a lot like pulling teeth with a pair
of pliers. It is always painful work and inevitably leads to protest no matter
how gently one twists and pulls, no matter how meticulously one builds the
case.
That, in short, describes the challenge placed in front of the Tuition Task
Force led by Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Robert Shelton and Study
Body President Justin Young.
The group, a blend of University students, trustees, faculty members and
administrators, met for the last time Jan. 15, when it voted to recommend a
$400 increase for the 2002-03 school year. The recommendation, task force
members said, was based on the realization that putting off an increase
wouldn't solve any of the underlying problems. And would only lead to more
pain.
"I have a hard time not doing something this year when we know we've got to,"
said Timothy Burnett, one of three trustees who served on the task force.
"We've got to do it this year, next year and the year after that."
The full Board of Trustees directed Shelton to form the ad hoc committee when
it met in November. The board is set to act on the committee's recommendations
at its Jan. 24 meeting. Whatever recommendation they make will be forwarded to
the UNC Board of Governors for its consideration.
Though just covering one year, the task force's proposal still embraces a
multi-year approach. A key part of the recommendation is for University
trustees to join other universities in the UNC system, the Board of Governors
and the state legislature to reach consensus on multi-year plans to be used
throughout the UNC system.
A multi-year process, task force members agree, would allow the system to
better address long-neglected needs while, at the same time, give parents and
students some predictability from year to year in what they can could expect to
pay in tuition and fees.
This recommendation for developing a multi-year approach to tuition increases
is in line with discussions at a tuition workshop that the Board of Governors
held Jan. 11.
Chancellor James Moeser was one of three chancellors who spoke during the
workshop. He used the opportunity to emphasize the widening disparity between
the salaries offered by public and private research universities and the threat
that gap poses to Carolina's future. The need to close the salary gap will
become even more critical over the next five years as some 30 percent of the
University faculty reaches retirement age, he said.
A painstaking process
Task Force members began their work at a meeting in early December, and
they did so not by tossing out numbers, or even needs, but by establishing a
set of principles to guide their work.
Douglas Dibbert, head of Carolina's General Alumni Association, presented a set
principles that were all accepted after a bit of tinkering.
One principle dealt with providing need-based aid to all students who would
qualify for it after a tuition increase.
One addressed the goal of building some predictability into tuition increases
for parents and students, barring "extraordinary circumstances."
One urged that all funds generated by increases be used exclusively to "enhance
the education experiences." Foremost among such uses was paying the best
faculty enough money to be able to hire them and then keep them once they are
here.
But perhaps the most operative of those principles for the task at hand was the
first, which said that Carolina "should maintain in-state tuition in the lowest
quartile" when compared to peer institutions with which it competes for top
faculty and students.
Given that principle, the committee had to come up with the appropriate list of
peers. Shelton recommended that the committee select the list of peer
institutions that UNC President Molly Corbett Broad already had established for
Carolina. (See chart below.)
That 16-member list, once the five private universities included on it were
removed, best represents the universities with which Carolina competes directly
for faculty and students, and it already has built-in acceptance from the
president's office.
Of the 11 public universities left on the list, Carolina ranks 10th, above only
the University of Florida. For the current school year, in-state undergraduate
tuition at Florida amounted to $1,670. The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor
charged the highest tuition at $6,523, or nearly triple the $2,328 students pay
at Carolina.
What these numbers seemed to indicate, committee members concluded, was that a
series of campus-led tuition increases could be enacted and Carolina would
still remain safely in the bottom quartile of this peer group.
At the second meeting held Jan. 9, committee members agreed that 40 percent of
any campus-based increase would be reserved for financial aid -- 35 percent for
need-based aid for all students and 5 percent specifically for graduate
students who serve as teaching assistants. This policy is similar to how
additional revenues generated by two earlier $300 tuition increases were
divided. With both increases, 35 percent of added revenues went to need-based
aid.
Remaining money would be split between three other areas: retaining and
attracting the highest-quality faculty; reducing the ratio of students to
faculty, which would increase the percentage of smaller classes (about 20
students or fewer); and providing more financial support for graduate students
who serve as teacher assistants.
Every little bit helps
At the Jan. 9 meeting, Young said the money a tuition increase might
generate would not come close to solving the faculty pay problem. Yes, Burnett
said, that is true, but every little bit helps. There is a big hole that has to
be filled, Burnett said, and it has to be filled with a little shovel full each
year rather than in one fell swoop. But that strategy does not call for
inaction next year.
Shelton began the Jan. 15 meeting with a review of three plans that would have
raised tuition in equal amounts over five straight years, differing only in
amount. One called for a $200 yearly increase, another a $400 increase, another
a $600 increase.
Shelton then showed how each of those figures could be plugged into efforts to
raise faculty pay and reduce class size.
The final vote
But the task force stopped considering the details of the different
scenarios after members reached the conclusion it would be smarter to work with
everybody else in the UNC system when developing a multi-year plan.
After that conclusion was reached, what was left was deciding how much of a
tuition increase to recommend for next year to keep the University from
slipping even further behind its competitors. Most task force members did not
consider doing nothing at all. "We can't afford to sort of sit still while all
these competitive institutions keep moving forward," Dibbert said. "That would
just make the problem worse."
Shelton agreed. "There is this sort of wonderful temptation to pass this on to
the next group, but I don't know if that would be responsible."
The hard part turned out to be deciding the amount. Finally at Dibbert's
urging, Shelton called for a vote on the $400 increase. In the final vote, the
task force approved the recommendation for a $400 increase, with all three
students present voting against it.
When Trustee Richard Stevens asked the students to explain their votes, all
three said they would have approved a smaller increase for next year. All three
supported the plan to work with the Board of Governors and other UNC system
schools to develop a multi-year schedule for tuition increases.
Shirley Ort, the director of the Office of Scholarships and Student Aid,
presented data showing that raising tuition $200, $400 or $600 would not hurt
needy students because of the financial aid revenue generated.
Burnett said keeping tuition low does not hurt students from poor families.
What it does, instead, is allow students from affluent families to continue
paying far less than they can afford.
Indeed, by almost any measure of comparison, Carolina's tuition would remain a
relative bargain even should a $400 increase be approved for the fall.
Among all state flagship universities in the country, for instance, Carolina
ranked 45th out of 50 in the combined amount of tuition and fees it charged its
in-state undergraduates during the 2000-01 school year.
What about the state?
Trustee Russell "Rusty" Carter, who argued for tuition increases all along,
said he still had a philosophical problem with raising tuition in order merely
to keep up with average salary levels at other universities. As he sees it,
that responsibility has always been, and should remain with, the legislature.
Revenues derived from higher tuition, Carter argued, should be selectively used
to attract and keep the best faculty or, as he put it, "We need to add some
cream to the coffee and find a way to do that."
Shelton agreed with the idea that the money generated from the increases should
be used solely for merit rather than for across-the-board increases. Shelton
noted that this is how the consecutive $300 campus-initiated increases have
been used the past two years.
In past years when tuition increases have been proposed, the reaction of many
students and some faculty has been that the state should do more. Doesn't the
state Constitution compel the legislature to keep tuition as low as
"practicable?" And hasn't that formula worked for both the state and students
for the past two centuries?
Stevens said he remains in philosophical agreement with all that, but he warned
the facts get in the way of carrying that argument too far.
During the 2000-01 fiscal year, the legislature appropriated $383.18 million
worth of operating money for Carolina, which amounted to $15,543 for each of
the 24,653 enrolled students. The $15,543 figure for average state
appropriation per student was the highest amount among the 11 peer public
universities. In contrast, the average state appropriation per student was
$7,166 at the University of Virginia, or less than half the average at
Carolina.
Stevens suggested this impressive record of support cannot be ignored nor
should it be allowed to go unappreciated. "The fact is, the state has already
done Carolina well. We should thank them for that."
Carolina supporters should continue to press the legislature for more money,
Stevens said, but be realistic about the chances of getting the amount of money
needed as the state copes with its own financial straits.
More information about the task force's work is available at
www.ais.unc.edu/ir/tuition/index.html
PEER INSTITUTIONS LIST
Institution -- Tuition (2001-2002)*
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor -- $6,523
Ohio State -- $4,410
University of Illinois-Urbana -- $4,410
University of Washington -- $3,593
University of Wisconsin-Madison -- $3,568
University of California-Berkeley -- $3,429
University of California-Los Angeles -- $3,429
University of Virginia -- $3,046
University of Texas-Austin -- $2,520
Carolina -- $2,328
University of Florida -- $1,670
*Undergraduate Resident Students
TABLE OF CONTENTS |
FRONT PAGE
| NEXT ARTICLE |
UNC HOMEPAGE