The Times Free Press, in an article entitled, Scholarship cuts upset students at Sewanee: University of the South, highlights a recent 10% tuition cut at the University of the South. Many students and higher education critics viewed this as a positive step forward in an environment when tuition has historically been on the rise. After 5 years of tuition increases at the school, students were excited and proud that their school had decided to help them in this way.
The problem lies in the next communication that students received. A short time later, students received an email stating that merit students would have their scholarships cut. Many students have reported that the decrease in scholarships makes up for any savings in tuition. According to Tony Pals, spokesman for the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, "it is not uncommon for insitutions that cut their price to also scale back on the institutional aid provided." This seems deceptive, and students at the University of the South agree. According to the article, roughly 22% of students at the insitution receive non-need based scholarships. This seems to be a relatively high number and consequently their seems to be a high number of upset students. While some have conceded that they are still saving in the long run considering that tuition will not continue to increase in the future, they still feel duped. Many students are questioning the honesty and integrity of their institution in light of this recent news. Administrators countered that they made the decision to reduce tuition without a complete understanding of what the financial aid picture would look like for the academic year.
If the administration is being truthful in their assertion that they had not thought it through then this seems like the result of short-sighted thinking. If this is not true, and the college knew that this would be a consequence of the tuition decrease, then it seems that the school was in the wrong for not being more transparent about how the tuition decrease and scholarship decrease would actually effect students. When considering a topic as important as cost of education it seems that the administrators could have done more to make students aware of the consequences of their decision.
The institution also claims that it reduced non-need based scholarships so that they could put more money toward need based scholarships in an effort to recruit more low to middle-income students. This is a great goal and I think we need to be careful not to let the dissatisfaction of the minority (22% receiving non-need based scholarship), dictate our feelings toward this decision. In the end, the majority of the students will save money. The 78% of students who did not have their awards reduced will continue to save over their experience at the college.
This article made me wonder about what it will take to make students happy. As administrators I think we know that we will never be able to cater to every students every need. When administrators make tough decisions to assist the majority of the campus community, there will inevitably be those who speak out against new policies and procedures. We can only make decisions based upon how it will effect that larger campus community as a whole. It is our responsibility though, to make sure that our decisions are disseminated in a transparent manner. By doing this, we eliminate the tendency to claim impropriety on our parts.
I think the college made a good decision to reduce tuition and help make up some of these costs through a reduction in non-need based scholarships. What they did not do so well was think about all of the possible ramifications that this would have and assure that these ramifications were disseminated to students from the outset.
I believe the title of your post says it all. As you mentioned in your post, no decision made by administrators will please every student. However, the university is responsible for maintaining its integrity by being transparent with students on how the decisions made will potentially benefit and consequence them.
ReplyDeleteThis post makes me question what other "issues" are taking place within higher education that are covered up by marketing efforts on behalf of institutions? Although this may not have been the intent of Sewanee, it only added fuel to a fire that has been burning for quite some time.
I think there will always be some contention between students receiving need-based aid and those receiving merit-based aid. At a CDHE meeting last year, public comments were being taken about the projected funding of state need-based aid and our Director of Financial Aid was working to round up a few students to go and provide testimony about how the state aid had helped and / or made it possible for them to attend college.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, our students who ended up attending the meeting were students receiving merit-based aid and while there made public comment that they felt need-based aid was wasted on some students. Um, that was not exactly what we were hoping for.
As you so aptly stated, institutions do have a responsibility to communicate with their students, all of their students, regarding changes in tuition and scholarships. While it would be disturbing to think that this institution made these decisions purposely, it's almost as disturbing to think that they made such a decision without really thinking about how students would be impacted. With 22% of their students receiving merit-based aid, that's a good chunk of their students to forget about.