Search News


Browse Archives

News

Beyond the Flagships

December 22, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

A couple dozen of the nation’s elite private institutions and flagship publics have steadily committed over the past few years to pick up the tuition tab in packaged “promise” programs targeted for the neediest students. But, as some commentators have pointed out, the typically wealthy institutions that have committed to cover tuition costs for low-income students also generally have high admission standards and limited low-income enrollment -- meaning that their actions, however well-intentioned, still fall far short of reaching the vast majority of students from low-income families.

That may be changing in one of the country's most populous states, where the message of access that these programs send may soon sound in a unified and in some ways unprecedented pitch. A new effort espoused by the University of Texas System -- already in practice or in progress at seven of the nine universities -- is expected to extend these types of institutional promises comprehensively and consistently across the UT institutions, many of which serve large low-income populations. At UT's Pan American campus in the Rio Grande Valley, for instance, where an initiative was announced this week, the director of financial aid estimated that about 50 percent of students come from families with incomes of $25,000 or less, the cutoff point for the new programs.

“Over and over again, we’re learning that the biggest barrier is that students are saying they can’t go to college because they can’t afford it. It’s hard to get that message across that they can. We hope that hundreds and ultimately thousands of students will get this message, whether they’re in El Paso or Edinburg or Brownsville or Arlington or wherever they are,” said Geri H. Malandra, interim executive vice chancellor for academic affairs for the UT system.

“From what I’ve been hearing this week,” Malandra added, “I anticipate that we will have all nine of the academic institutions that are part of the UT System involved.”

The UT institutions have been dropping their hats into the ring one after another this past week, with the universities at Arlington, Pan American, Permian Basin, San Antonio and Tyler all announcing their plans to pledge free tuition and fees for Texas residents from families with an income level of $25,000 or below, a substantially lower income threshold than that set by the wealthier publics and privates with similar programs. UT-Austin, Texas’ highly selective flagship, has had a program in place for a couple of years now with a $40,000 income threshold, and UT El Paso, which unveiled in the spring its “UTEP Promise” for students whose families make $25,000 or less, had 590 students affected by the program in its first semester this fall. The remaining two universities, at Brownsville and Dallas, are still considering joining the initiative, Malandra said.

The characteristics of the programs vary from institution to institution, with some open only to incoming freshmen, others to all students. Most of the newly announced programs are set to launch in fall 2007, though the program at Permian Basin will be open to incoming freshmen as of this spring.

However, commonalities abound. To remain eligible, students must attend full-time, completing 30 credit hours each year, and most of the initiatives require that students maintain a minimum of a 2.0 grade point average. Corresponding academic and social support programs are also a common thread. “In addition to sending the right signal to incoming students and countering the fears that have been generated by increased tuition announcements, in addition to all of that, this provides students with some incentives to enroll full time, to make steady progress toward their degrees and to seek our help in planning for their enrollment,” said Diana S. Natalicio, president of Texas-El Paso, located alongside the Mexican border.

In addition, students must complete financial aid documentation, with the universities standing ready to fill in the gap not covered by federal Pell Grants with state and university scholarship sources. At the Tyler campus, for example, Dale Lunsford, vice president for student affairs and external relations, said there’s about a $1,000 gap in funding between the maximum yearly Pell Grant, frozen at $4,050 for several years now, and annual tuition and fees, valued at around $5,000.

The commitments will require a reallocation of resources and a financial investment on the part of each participating institution. To take two examples, Tyler has budgeted $350,000 for the first year, and San Antonio expects it will take $600,000 to $800,000 in state and institutional funds to launch UTSAccess. But many administrators stressed that the cost, which largely will be funded through revenue from tuition increases that must be set aside for aid under the state’s tuition deregulation legislation, will be manageable. In many ways, they say, the institutions are simply repackaging and marketing financial aid polices that are already tacitly in place.   

“This is not a vast departure from what we’ve been doing for a very long time,” said Dana Dunn, provost at UT-Arlington, which expects to reach at least 2,000 students with its tuition initiative, announced Wednesday afternoon. “The reality is that students of this income level generally have received this benefit. But what we’ve come to understand increasingly as tuition has become a hot-button issue is that a large percentage of the public doesn’t understand what the real cost of education is after the aid received.”

Henry Cantu, director of student enrollment services for UT-San Antonio, where 42 percent of students receive Pell Grants, said these types of tuition promises fit well within the missions of institutions that pride themselves on their legacies of access. “We’ve got a plan that’s in place to really push our institution to Tier I status as far as research, while at the same time keeping our original mission of access for students in this community in Central and South Texas. This program was designed to try to continue to really encourage students who are finding it difficult to afford a college education to attend UTSA," said Cantu.

“The first thing that’s really powerful is that there are several institutions within the Texas system that are sending the same message,” said Shirley Ort, associate provost and director of scholarships and student aid at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where she oversees the “Carolina Covenant” program, which covers costs for the neediest of UNC’s students. Just three of the 16 institutions in North Carolina’s system – including Appalachian State University, which just this week announced a new, privately funded program to cover tuition, fees, room, board and books, plus a $1,000 stipend, for students at up to 100 percent of the poverty level -- offer similar initiatives.

“In our circumstance here, we can talk about the Carolina Covenant, but if they don’t make it into Carolina in terms of admissions, they don’t get that benefit,” said Ort. In Texas, “there’s going to be a mutually reinforcing message. There are going to be students and parents who are going to hear it from more than one school.”

But several other experts on student aid said the new UT programs, with their low income thresholds, are, while positive actions, likely to do little to solve what is a systemic problem. Robert Shireman, founder and president of the Institute for College Access and Success, said the cost of tuition, already covered by grant aid for more than two-thirds of dependent Texas public four-year university students, is not the barrier. “When costs beyond tuition are considered, the students are an average of $9,000 short,” Shireman said via e-mail.

“The reality is that while families worry about tuition, it is actually the other costs that undermine success for low-income families. In particular, the financial cost of not working -- or, alternatively, the academic cost of working too much -- undermines their goal of a college degree.” The requirement that students take a full credit load to qualify for these programs, Shireman added, while a laudable goal, will probably pose a particular challenge to the low-income students who hold down jobs.

“There’s just a staggering political paralysis at the federal and state levels on these problems. The institutions that are on the front line and see these problems are trying to do something about it,” said Tom Mortenson, editor and publisher of Postsecondary Education Opportunity and senior scholar for The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.

“These schools ought to be applauded but it’s a drop in the bucket if just a few institutions do it. The problem is that federal and state policy makers have to wake up and address this affordability issue, and it will not be easy and it will not be cheap.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Beyond the Flagships

  • Posted by Edwin Duncan , Professor at Towson University on December 22, 2006 at 8:45am EST
  • It's a fine thing to offer scholarships to students whose parents earn less than $25,000. What I'd like to know is when state universities start offering relief to students whose parents earn $25k-$100k. Like many other parents, I currently have more than one child going to college (three daughters), and it is wiping out my savings plus putting them in heavy student loan debt. When will some kind of relief be offered to the middle class? Should we have a system in which the only students to graduate from college debt-free are the poor and the rich?

  • Beyond the Flagships-Free Tuition for Low Income Students
  • Posted by Lynn Byrne , Educational Consultant\Author at Hill Country ECS on December 22, 2006 at 9:50am EST
  • Parents who have the ability to save for the future educational needs of their children must do so. Grants and work-study programs are designed to help those with a true inability to pay for educational costs. Scholarships may have a need requirement, but typically have an academic requirement that must be met first. Loans exist to help cover educationally related expenses beyond direct educational costs (tuition and fees), to offset the family contribution, and to fill in the gap for those students and or families that did not plan for college well ahead of time (either they waited until the last minute to apply for other aid or the family did not adequately save for college).

    Yes, grants and work-study absolutely should go to those students with the greatest need. Scholarships to those who meet the academic and other requirements. And educational loans should be used to cover the remaining students.

    I am middle class. I started saving prior to the birth of my children. However, I also expect my children to contribute to their own educational costs--either by excelling academically and earning scholarships or by working.

    The U.S. is a cost-share system and final costs are based on ability to plan and pay.

  • Edwin's Lament
  • Posted by William Harris , Professor at Univ. of Texas at Brownsville on December 22, 2006 at 10:25am EST
  • Doesn't anyone want to know where the money is going to come from for these programs? Edwin's comment hits this right on the button. Tuition will need to be further tweaked in this grand income redistribution scheme designed, albeit with worthwhile goals, to once again fleece the middle class.
    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH.

  • Middle class tax credits
  • Posted by Maricela Oliva , Faculty at University of Texas at San Antonio on December 22, 2006 at 11:20am EST
  • It is not the case that the middle class is neglected by policy-makers in terms of college costs. The middle class has been benefitting for years from tax credits for their children's college attendance that have not been available for the lowest income families targeted by this new institutional (and system) policy. Yes, some of us who are middle income or higher will have to pay our fair share to send children to college, but that doesn't mean that others should not have college opportunity.

    No one who is middle class has said here that their children won't go to college because of college costs, just that they're going to have to help pay for it. In the case of these families, it truly is about whether or not their children go to college, and we must have more lower income families send their kids (usually among the most underrepresented) to college. It is in everyone's interest, even that of middle and upper income families.

    If we really want to make a difference in this arena ourselves, we should tell policy-makers to start funding higher education at the levels that are needed so that institutions don't have to turn to other measures--such as tuition hikes and fee structures--to make up for revenues that are systemically decreasing rather than increasing from state and federal coffers. Institutional costs have been rising because voters have been convinced by some policymakers that for individual personal benefit, we should cut back on taxes (i.e., revenues). This is a good example about how that is jut a shell game; costs may be cut in taxes, but that means revenues must increase elsewhere because nobody wants to actually lose important services.

    In my view, there already is too much self-interest about not wanting to adequately support this collective benefit. I am proud to be at an institution and system that is stepping up in this arena to help make college affordable for more families and their children.

  • Beyond the Flagships
  • Posted by Lynn Byrne , Educational Consultant/Author at Hill Country ECS on December 22, 2006 at 12:01pm EST
  • William: If you have questions about how a program will be funded on your campus--ask. They'll tell you.

    No student, regardless of income, at a public institution pays the full cost for their education. Everyone is subsidized by the state to some extent through taxpayer contributions.

    The great thing about U.S. education is you have the ability to enroll elsewhere if you don't like the tuition/fee rate you're being charged; or the scholarships/other aid you're receiving. Its a market like any other.

  • Try understanding
  • Posted by L.L. on December 22, 2006 at 3:45pm EST
  • " .. Institutional costs have been rising because voters have been convinced by some policymakers that for individual personal benefit, we should cut back on taxes .."

    George W. Bush is accused by "National Review" of being a "liberal" on spending, and this is the thanks he gets? Hey -- taxes are being cut just to *slow* spending, not reduce it.

    Spend, spend, spend is a monolithic mantra in higher ed -- woe be anyone who tries to advocate restraint and discipline.

    If higher-ed is such a great income generator -- why should anyone be afraid to "invest" (borrow) in its true cost? And unburden that 35+ % who have decided not to go? Perhaps because higher-ed is not the great solution that it claims to be?

  • Subsidized education
  • Posted by William Harris , Professor on December 22, 2006 at 4:50pm EST
  • Lynn and Maricela both make valid points, and I largely agree with them. However, since I live in one of the poorest counties in the United States, where a desperately small middle class struggles to support a huge population of those less fortunate through our heavily subsidized educational system, I am assuming that both of them will be OK with sending the necessary funding from portions of the state where a relatively affluent middle class will cheerfully step up to the plate and send some proportion of their bounty our way. If the behavior of our disgraceful state legislature is any example, I think not. Local tuition and fee hikes are not going away in this state any time soon, and for those us who were poorly funded in the first place, this is a particularly vexing issue. If this scheme to provide free education is to work, the burden must be shared systematically, statewide, and therein lies the rub. We need to return to regulated tuition and fee structures and then fund education as lavishly as we do, oh, highways or prisons, for example. The middle class, in this as in so many other cases, is in the position of the goose that lays the golden egg; however, the goose is in need of some serious nurturing if the eggs are going to continue coming. We must not simply shift burdens to the middle class without adequate thought and public debate, however benign our intentions appear. Happy Holidays to all.

  • tuition help at the "lesser UC's"
  • Posted by Stephanie Hammer , professor at uc riverside on December 22, 2006 at 7:15pm EST
  • I applaud this aspiration, while remaining, with William Harris, somewhat sceptical about how the redistribution of wealth that he indirectly alludes to is actually going to work so that poorer areas can benefit. Certainly, in California, it's a dog eat dog situation with anything having to do with public funding, and we at what a colleague of mine from UCLA grandly called the "lesser UC's" have kids who are in sore need of financial assistance. Whether folks from Pacific Palisades and Palo Alto want to see their monies funneled to Riverside and Merced remains an open question, though. What the answer is I don't know, but I agree that there needs to be transparency in where the money will come from.

  • Understanding, Pt. II
  • Posted by L.L. on December 22, 2006 at 7:15pm EST
  • " .. fund education as lavishly as we do, oh, highways .."

    Yo -- those are funded by federal and state user taxes, paid at the pump.

    Read very much? Keep trying. Merry Christmas.

  • Alternatives
  • Posted by Jacob Werblow , Doc. Student at Oregon on December 27, 2006 at 9:50am EST
  • I'd be interested in how more socialist countries do it, where university is free or is attainable at little cost. Although these countries are typically smaller that the US, they also have far smaller economies. The U.S. spends 43% of the total military spending in the world, followed by China (6%), and Russia (5%), most countries spend around 1%. Why raise taxes on the middle class when the richest individuals can hide their money in oversees accounts, while corporations pay the minimum? I'm sure the U.S. has the money, but we spend it (arguably) on the wrong things.

  • The Australian Approach
  • Posted by Conor King , Institutional Strategist at Victoria University on January 2, 2007 at 4:35am EST
  • Australia is not a socialist country although we did have from 1974 to about 1989 free higher education (no tuition) and means tested living allowances.

    Australian students now are subject to a 'contribution' which they repay in future years depending on their future annual income. If you earn more than about $39,000 you will pay 4% of your income via the taxation system; higher % for higher incomes until you pay off the contribution (adjusted each year for inflation).

    You can pay some or all upfront for a small discount (under 20% do) although economically you are better off not to do so.

    This means every one can pay, and whether you do depends on your future income success.

    The main problem is that the annual rates are increasing (by 25% from 2005 in most universities) pushing the point where the future debt becomes a real deterrent. It already appears to have some effect on older applicants but not yet school leavers.

  • Flagships
  • Posted by Patricia Vasquez , student at UTSA on April 23, 2007 at 2:20pm EDT
  • Speaking from experience, I have one degree for which I had to borrow close to $50,000. I did not qualify for free money, according to FASFA my mother made too much. I came from a middle class family and even though my mother made good money she could not afford to send me to college. So I had to do what I had to do to obtain my degree. I had to carry on a full time job and attend school full time. It is hard to do but I believe it makes you into a better and stronger person. Growing up my mother was #5 of seven children, they grew up extremely poor. A house with two rooms and they had to share, but that did not stop four of them from going to college and getting a degree. I believe two of them have masters degrees. So I believe if ANY child rich, poor, middle class, african american, hispanic, anglo, asian, whoever wants to have a college education bad enough they themselves can make it happen. I have been told that if you work towards something instead of having it given to you, you learn to appreciate it more.