HA regulars know that I’ve long crusaded for rethinking the way we finance higher education in Washington state (most recently here, here, here and here), arguing for a move away from flat, per-student subsidies, and toward a system where universities would have the option of allowing tuition to rise toward market rates, while funneling a much larger portion of their state funding into needs-based financial aid programs.
Silly, wacko, commie, lefty, fringe idea? Well, given our current budget crisis, no less a mainstream voice than the Seattle Times editorial board doesn’t seem to think so:
THE tuition wars are coming. Over the next few weeks, Washington residents will have to think hard about what they are willing to pay to maintain quality and access at institutions of higher learning.
Demand for higher education has never been higher. Tuition should increase more than the state Senate proposed: 7 percent annually for four-year institutions and 5 percent for community colleges.
No one suggests that cavalierly. Help for middle- and low-income students will be increased.
But a sizable increase in tuition may be the only way to avoid ridiculously large class sizes or doors closed to students seeking an education in their home state.
That’s not much, but it’s an opening, and it shows a willingness from the opinion leaders at our state’s largest daily to use this crisis as an opportunity rethink our state’s long held stubborn assumption that the current “low tuition” model is the best way to expand access to higher education to low and middle income families. Increase tuition while increasing financial aid—that is the policy that lies at the heart of the “high tuition/high financial aid” model I have long promoted.
And it’s not just me and my new allies at the Times. A couple weeks ago Rep. Reuven Carlyle (D-36) wrote a guest column in the Times advocating for exactly this approach:
Compared with other premier public and private universities nationwide, the price of attending Washington’s universities is a smoking-hot deal for students. A bachelor’s degree from them is generally a ticket to tremendous lifelong economic opportunity, yet its cost is a fraction of similar public and private universities in other states.
That’s why, alongside a much more aggressive effort to improve how the universities spend public dollars, I believe it is time to actually raise tuition and use the new dollars to substantially increase both access and meaningful new financial aid for the middle class.
Our state’s tuition structure is backward, regressive and inefficient: We are today using precious tax dollars to in effect take money from the vast majority of genuine middle-class families in order to subsidize wealthier families who haven’t asked for a huge subsidy and have the ability to pay much more than they currently do under our current flat-rate “low tuition” policy.
As we write the most difficult state budget in generations, I’m pushing hard for comprehensive tuition-policy reform. I’m strongly advocating a proposal to grant our state’s public four-year universities the authority to raise resident undergraduate tuition by up to 12 percent annually, elevating the existing 7-percent cap. The schools would be required to designate a substantial portion of the new revenue toward new grants targeted at middle-class students.
And it’s not simply a lefty, Democratic proposal either. Back in 2005, Republican legislators introduced a higher education reform bill that would have, amongst other things, moved to high tuition/high financial aid model as well.
That old trope about the Chinese word for “crisis” being a combination of the words for “danger” and “opportunity” may not be exactly accurate, but it doesn’t make it any less apt. This budget crisis presents an enormous opportunity to rethink some of our state’s core policies, and reform them outside the usual political dithering afforded during an ordinary budget year. As I have previously explained, if properly implemented, a high tuition/high financial aid model could increase overall funding for higher education while decreasing costs to lower and middle income families. Go ahead, check my math.
Then again, I’m just some foul-mouthed blogger. Perhaps with a bit more forceful effort from my friends at the Times and other credible opinion leaders, we might be able to push lawmakers in the right direction.
Well, Goldy, whereas I will be faced with paying for my daughter’s college tuition next year, and whereas there is no, repeat, zero, repeat, zip guarantee that there would be financial aid available to make up for any proposed increase in tuition, therefore be it resolved that until such time as I know exactly what and how much financial aid would be available, and for whom, and under what circumstances, I think your idea is flat full of shit, and I oppose it.
ivan @1,
And it is that sorta attitude that gets in the way of meaningful reform… the devil I know and all that.
I’ve shown my math. It can and does work, if implemented properly. Surely you’re not suggesting that our Democratically controlled legislature is incapable of implementing such a policy shift effectively?
@3: Sorry Goldy, the high tuition “model” flies in the face of the entire purpose of State institutions of higher learning – to provide a quality education at lower tuition.
Since you don’t have college age kids, you may not understand the fiasco that financial aid actually is.
Parents who spent out all their money (on say fancy cars and big houses) and don’t save for college end up benefitting from having less on their FAF.
Those of us who were responsible and tried to save end up getting screwed for our pecuniary sacrifices. Middle income people are simply out of luck for some financial aid and the exhorbitant cost of private schools leads many to public colleges and Universities.
Raising tuition too much for too long will shut out many people who can only hope for public schools to avoid massive debts for college.
A temporary increase that goes away after this budget shortfall is smarter and better for most people.
The real problems are:
A terrible tax base that goes down when we need it the most.
Too much spent on prisons and too many young people in prison.
No protection for higher ed in the budget.
i told u in your last post goldstein, get out of here and go to that garbage dump israel, and take that homo barney frank with u
high tuition/ high aid is the private school model.
public institutions need be publicly funded.
tax income.
Correctornot @3,
Do you bother reading my posts and following my links? I’ve clearly laid it out again and again… if done right, the high tuition/high financial aid model would make college more accessible to lower and middle income families by increasing the number of available slots, and lowering the costs for the majority of students.
Like Ivan, your argument seems to be that, unlike private and public universities in other states, we can’t do it right.
And FYI, I have a 12 year old daughter for whom we bought a GET account 2002.
Shock alert: Here we can agree. The price of a UW education is dirt-cheap for what you get. I’ve been wondering for awhile now why they don’t jack up the tuiton another thousand or two. I mean, really—the actual real cost of the education is like five time what they charge, at present. Maybe even more. Go on, raise tuition at the public universities. There’s no reason not to.
There, now Goldy and I can go out and link arms, for once.
maureeno @5,
Again, folks need to let go of their dogma. Under what I’ve proposed, state colleges and universities would still be publicly funded, but rather than a flat, per student subsidy that goes to rich and poor students alike, tuition rates would rise toward actual costs, with the state subsidy being awarded to students based on financial need. The vast majority of students would not see their costs rise, and many would see them decrease.
But I should add the rates need to go up for everybody. Charging some more so some can pay less is not fair.
@3
NOTRIGHT,
Again, you come up with a fact that’s only in your pea brain.
We thought you went to Canada to get your eyes and other issues you have fixed?
no dogma here
fact is all students are poor it is their families who may be wealthy
fact is it is not only higher education hurting here in Washington, it is public health and human services and ‘basic’ education.
tax income
President Obama has said several times that challenging times are the best times to make long term improvements in our society.
Washington’s model for funding higher ed., as Goldy eloquently points out, is broken and, if we do not do something now Washington will rival Mississippi in terms of the opportunities we offer our citizens.
“Soon” may be as much a euphemism as talk over the last two years about saving the American car industry. Recently I sent Goldy data from across the US on how states fund higher ed and how expected cuts will hurt. Washington State is already close to the bottom of the pile.
What to do?
Tuition is very important. I have opposed Goldy on this because of my belief that the US ought to be competitive with China, India and Brazil .. you know the rich countries where students attend elite universities for free?
If we can no longer go there, then his solution is the only choice we have .. either we raise tuition or rename the state as the Western province of Mississippi.
I suggest, however, that we use this crisis as an opportunity to do more, much more. We CAN make our higher ed system more cost effective by doing three things:
a. increasing opportunities for college degrees via our excellent community college and state college system. The Reprican Troglodytes may not like it but Evergreen, as well as other Washington state colleges rank near the top of their categories nationally. We “do” college very well in this state. Moreover, the colleges are less expensive than UW or WSU.
We should increase the proportion of Washington Stare students getting college from the state colleges and expanded community colleges.
b. Wastate, in the person of the superb compsci and education parts of the UW and, obviously, the denizens of Microsoft, has awesome but largely unused potential for distance education.
c. Instead of using the resources of the UW in this way, we have built grade B- campuses that award UW degrees without UW resources.
Tacoma and Bothell should become state colleges. Bellevue Community College should become a State College.
Instead of one more half hearted UW branch, Everett should also have a state college devoted to technology.
The time is coming where resources at elite schools will be distance marketed, The UW/WSU could and should be in front of this inevitable change.
While decreasing the numbers of students at the UW and WSU, we should focus money on ways the web and programmed instruction UW/WSU resources can strengthen offerings at the college campuses. Evergreen already uses a model like this to enhance its students use of UW resources.
d. Means test to Assure Those Who Can best Use our Resources Can Afford It.
I differ from Goldy in one important regard. The American model of endowing every kid with a BA or BS is BS. A large part of the American college educated class is really no better educated than graduates of gymnasia (secondary) elsewhere.
We should have a far more progressive system for admission to the different levels of higher ed and, as much as possible, we should make it possible for all kids to get the best education for which they are qualified. This too means more kids finishing education by 18, more finishing in community colleges, more going on to state colleges but fewer going to UW/WSU.
@11 Are students all poor?
Not really. My kids were pretty well done by as was I.
There is, however, another issue. Kids only are of college age once. If, during this bad times, we savage our colleges, we will lose kids of the right age, perhaps an entire generation will be dropped out of their chance at an education.
Education can NOT be deferred,
Irony
There is an answer other than Goldy’s proposals for taxes and tuition …
we could just send all of our kids to Germany and China and let them compete for the free education those civilized countries offer!
Goldy @ 2:
The Democratic-controlled Legislature can’t or won’t pass the Worker Privacy Act, can’t or won’t implement I-937, and probably can’t or won’t implement financial aid properly in an increased-tuition world.
To suggest that they can or will just because you might wish it so is nothing more than faith-based blogging. My relationship with public officials is a business relationship, not a relationship based on faith or trust. I save faith and trust for family members and my closest friends.
I don’t give a shit if *your* math works. One person’s “meaningful reform” is a hit in another person’s already thin pocketbook. Your math is not necessarily the Legislature’s math. Show me the money.
1) What about the community colleges?
2) You do understand that the high tuition model essentially privatizes the universities and makes them, in the long run, less responsive to the public?
@16 Bently
Do you really think WASTATE kids with community college BS BA are competitve with kifd who attend Beijing U, Seoul U, Heidelberg, UNC, Berkely, Mumbai, ?????
I actually have argued your side before. Goldy’s idea does, if poorly implimented, make Daddy’s wealth more important than Suzie’s academic needs.
The problem we face is that we are now, Tx to years of idiotic tax cuts, backed into a corner. Either we raise taxes, raise tuition, or rejigger our state to compete with Mississippi and Bangladesh.
BTW, it is worth notong that a number of our psudo private, over endowed top schools doe xcatly what Goldy advocates. My AM, Harvard, has for many years ket admissions and fincial supprt separate and guaranteed that every kid accepted to the Colleg can afford her or his stay (tuition and board!).
As a non profit, Harvard Coolge is as much a state instition as many of the other great schools in other countries where similar policies are totally supported by taxes. Oxford and Cambridge, Heidelberg, the Karolinska, all fit this bill.
Do we really want to offer less to WASTATE kids than the limey, svensk, kraut kids get?
@6: Goldy – I agree in principle with you, but the devil is in the details. Public schools use the FAFSA form – and unless you have ever filled out a FAFSA form and examined the actual formula they use for computing aid for students, then you really can’t understand the intricacies of the process.
While your proposal has some merit – the facts are that the current FAFSA system will not be changed in time to implement the “fair” financial aid and high tuition model nationally – so instead, kids will be left out in the cold.
Having a GET ain’t even the beginning of understanding the process – you have to include home equity, salary of both parents (even if one won’t pay anything but makes a bundle), student assets (counted more than parent assets) and those are just the obviousd parts. I know this process up and down and it is a biased and unfair system.
Kids with well off parents who won’t or can’t contribute (due to debts or other obligations like a sick parent) are screwed on financial aid. Families that saved are screwed if they saved in the kids name. Families that suddenly start making a lot of money (but have not saved) or do not have a capped home equity are screwed.
The UW costs more than 20K a year now (tution plus fees and room and board) and private colleges are running up to 50K. A really good student (academically) can sometimes get a better deal at a 50K private school than going full freight to UW. I know that for a fact – my son is getting a much better deal (paying much less) at a private school than at UW.
UW undergrad is decent – but not all that good. Some community colleges are better than UW for undregrad education, in particular. the sciences undergrad at UW are not all that great – the students are great but the profs are detached, the TAs cover the sections and there are 4-500 in the beginning chem classes. the mphasis is on “weeding out” and not on learning sometimes. Not all classes are like this – but some are.
@10: Dear Truthless moron: What the #$$# are you even talking about?
Your pea brain is failing you again or you need to go back on your meds. How is the antipsychotic therapy working for you? I think you need to up the dose.
I never went to Canada recently: You are confusing me with someone else and my vision is great – no glasses, contacts or Lasik. And the “fact” that I am missing some “fact” – you forgot to even say what that “fact” supposedly was…what a worthless post.
Cliff Mass agrees with Goldy.