Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Harvard Trickle-Down Effect

January 7, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Most of the reaction to Harvard University's announcement last month that it would provide more generous financial aid practices for students from families with incomes up to $180,000 has focused on the potential negative impact on the elite private colleges and public flagship universities that compete directly with Harvard for students. Harvard's gambit, the thinking goes, will put great pressure on them to dig into their own hefty endowments to match -- or at least mimic -- Harvard's approach.

Very few of the mostly small, private liberal arts colleges that belong to the Council of Independent Colleges go head to head with Harvard for students, at least to a significant degree. But as the group held its annual Presidents Institute in Marco Island, Fla., this weekend, participants at a hastily arranged session on the new financial aid programs adopted by elite colleges expressed a wide range of opinions, ideas and – yes – fears about how the approach taken by Harvard and others might reshape the financial aid and admissions landscape in higher education.

The assessment of the impact on small, independent colleges was not upbeat. And fans of Harvard’s approach were, it is safe to say, hard to find.

C. Brent DeVore, president of Otterbein College and the session’s moderator, briefly and cogently laid out the financial aid picture leading up to and including Harvard’s announcement. He described how many small private colleges turned to financial aid based on students’ academic or other merit (as opposed to purely financial need) to compete for students’ attention, both against the prestige advantage of the elite colleges and the price advantage of most public colleges. That trend was exacerbated as states, particularly in the South, embraced lottery-driven scholarships that in some places have made an education at a public university virtually free.

As parents’ have become increasingly accustomed to such tuition breaks, merit-based aid has often been replaced by “want-based” aid, “demand-based” aid, and “match the scholarship down the street” based aid, DeVore said, to knowing nods from the presidents in the room.

While Harvard's plan would make college free for needy students and those from families with income of up to $60,000, it would also take the awarding of merit-based aid to an entirely new level, DeVore said, by eliminating loans from all financial aid packages, dropping home equity from calculations of family wealth, and redefining the “middle class” by promising that families with incomes up to $180,000 will pay no more than 10 percent of their income a year to send their children to Harvard.

DeVore posited that Harvard’s approach would have the most impact on those colleges that “are within the magnetic draw of the students of some of the institutions that compete directly with Harvard -- other Ivy League institutions, other elite privates like Amherst and Stanford, and highly selective public universities like Michigan and Virginia. “But what affect will it have on our own institutions?” he asked the assembled.

Frank Lazarus, president of the University of Dallas, said he did not think Harvard’s move would have the kind of radical impact on the financial aid and admissions market because “only the super-rich endowment schools have the financial power … to play this game.” Because most small independent colleges have “relatively small cross-applications with huge endowment schools,” Lazarus said, I don’t see the paradigm changing for most of us.”

But other presidents, including Peggy Williams of Ithaca College and Jeanne S. Neff of the Sage Colleges, in New York, said they were concerned less about the impact Harvard’s decision would have on direct competition for individual students than on “the momentum it creates” in the minds of parents and students, as Williams put it.

“What will the general public begin to believe about whether or not they should be taking out loans to pay for college?” Neff asked. “If [middle income] families come to believe that it is no longer their obligation to take out loans or to marshal their resources” to send their kids to college, she said, public universities with lower tuitions and access to state-financed scholarships will say, “Hey, look here, we’re affordable.”

Ed Welch, president of the University of Charleston, in West Virginia, noted that his state’s Promise Scholarships essentially ensure free tuition at a public university to any student with a 3.0 high school average and an ACT score of 22. “That posits in parents’ minds that ‘I’m not going to have to pay for college,’" Welch said. “When we come along and say, you’ve got to pay for college, they say, ‘Why? We’ll just go to [West Virginia University].’"

Others envisioned threats from other quarters as well. John Maguire, chairman and founder of Maguire Associates and a longtime admissions and financial aid expert, predicted that Harvard’s financial aid approach would lead it and other elite colleges to raise their tuitions, ratcheting up the price competition in a way that could “snowball out of control” and allowing the wealthiest institutions to increase their existing advantage in the intensifying competition for top faculty members. “Each of us is likely to see the best faculty migrating to the billion-dollar club,” Maguire said.

And Williams of Ithaca said she saw increased competition not just from wealthier private four-year colleges and heavily subsidized public ones, but from two-year institutions engaging in “mission creep” by building dormitories (she didn’t mention those in some states that are beginning to award baccalaureate degrees).

Although the session threatened at times to devolve into an abyss of hand wringing, the assembled presidents, in addition to fretting about the problem, also kicked around some possible solutions. Some urged their colleagues to consider some “mission creep” of their own, perhaps shifting their focus to the ever-growing number of undereducated adults who never earned four-year degrees or need retraining to freshen their skills.

Others said the institutions needed to play up and frame for public consumption some of the things they already do that distinguish their institutions. Several noted that many small private colleges have larger proportions of students who come from low-income backgrounds than do many of the selective public and elite private institutions – a fact often unrecognized by those who hear “private college” and think Harvard or Yale.

Several presidents said they believed that the growing pressure on colleges to measure their success in educating students (which some private college officials have opposed when it has emanated from the federal government) as actually playing to the advantage of small institutions that by their nature pay close attention to the needs of their students.

Welch, the Charleston president, argued that many non-elite liberal arts college may fare better than more prestigious private institutions on measurements (like the Collegiate Learning Assessment) that can be used to show how much students have learned while in college – “value added,” in today’s jargon of student assessment. Because universities like Harvard take in students who have been well-educated and are often well-heeled, he said, the “value added” at Harvard tends to be measured in the connections students make while there and the extra wealth they’ll gain in the work place. “The value added at our institutions is in terms of improvement in skills and knowledge,” he said.

And vis-a-vis public universities, Welch argued, small independent colleges are typically much likelier to have their students earn degrees within four years, eating into the apparent price advantage of public institutions. Lazarus, of the University of Dallas, said the CIC institutions might seek to take advantage of that efficacy by creating more “through” programs in which students might earn an undergraduate degree and and M.B.A., say, in five years total.

“We have an opportunity to make some real statements on outcomes,” Welch said.

To punctuate that point, DeVore recalled a question he received not long ago from an alumnus of Otterbein’s big, better-known neighbor, Ohio State University. “What can a student get in four years at Otterbein that he can’t get at Ohio State?” DeVore said the man asked, with a bit of an attitude. “I said, ‘A degree,’" DeVore recounted, much to the delight, and cheers, of his peers.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Harvard Trickle-Down Effect

  • Houston....We have a problem
  • Posted by Alan Collinge , Founder at StudentLoanJustice.org on January 7, 2008 at 5:00am EST
  • Average undergraduate borrowers leaving school with $20,000 in student loans.

    Average Graduate borrower leaving school with $42,000 in loans.

    5 year default rate for 2002 graduates > 10%

    No Bankruptcy protections. Guarantors making their livelihoods from fees tacked onto these already unmanageable defaulted loans. Collection companies with shark tanks in their lobbies...Students going off the grid, leaving the country. Parents draining the equity out of their homes to bail their kids out.

    That's the American Dream? Sounds more like a nightmare to me.

  • Make up your mind
  • Posted by Abbott Katz on January 7, 2008 at 7:00am EST
  • How do we explain the (apparently) widespread disaffection in the higher-educational ambit with school rankings, in light of "the intensifying competition for top faculty members", and other strivings for acadmeic prowess? Do institutions desire to be superior - without wanting anyone to know about it?

  • Attention to Student Loans--A Proactive CIC
  • Posted by Jerry Pattengale , AVP for Scholarship & Grants at Indiana Wesleyan University on January 7, 2008 at 8:25am EST
  • Doug, Thank you for keeping us informed on this important issue. While it will take several years to know the full impact of the Harvard decision, what doesn't go unnoticed is the proactivity of the CIC. This group of nearly 600 member institutions seems to have the ability to muster discussion on a number of important topics on short notice--with presidents no less. There have been other schools besides Harvard attempting radical moves, e.g., St. Francis (IN) allowing students to attend the fifth year free if they didn't stop out. However, though they received much fanfare upfront, not much word on the end result. Also, the 21st Scholars Program, and others that followed, show very radical approaches. Again, thanks for the update. JP

  • Student loans
  • Posted by Rich on January 7, 2008 at 8:30am EST
  • $20k is not an inappropriate debt burden for an undergraduate education. The debate about college affordability has been hijacked by people who don't believe that any level of debt is acceptable--a position that would not be credible for any other large expenditure.

  • Worse ahead, Alan
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee , Dir., at Florida Higher Education Accountability Project on January 7, 2008 at 8:55am EST
  • Alan, It gets worse.

    The US DOE is predicting double-digit growth through 2015-2016:

    Associate degrees: 12%
    BA / BS degrees: 22%
    Masters degrees: 35%
    PhD degrees: 21%
    First Professional degrees: 25%

    Source: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/2006084.pdf

    With trend lines like these, baby boomers can forget about retirement because they will be paying for their kids student loans instead.

    When will HE policy folks wake up and have the courage to face this?

  • me too
  • Posted by Bob Shorb , Associate Dean at Skidmore College on January 7, 2008 at 8:55am EST
  • I already have families asking if they could get the "Harvard Plan" too? With the high tuitions that many private colleges charge, the general public does not understand that less endowed institutions can not duplicate Harvard's effort. For my institution to duplicate Harvard's plan, there would have to be an immediate 28% increase in the grant budget!

  • Posted by Diana on January 7, 2008 at 9:05am EST
  • $20,000 at the end of 4 yrs is a reasonable debt for educational expenses. However, this figure ignores the balance of the cost that is carried by the students' parents!

    An institution charging and out-of-state tuition of $27K/yr may result in the student carrying around $20K in debt but the parents carry the remaining $88K! This is a huge burden on families with more than one student who do not qualify for merit dollars.

  • Growth Rates
  • Posted by Mark on January 7, 2008 at 11:05am EST
  • Glen,
    You cite growth figures from the NCES projections document. Is that growth in enrollment, debt levels, default rates?

    I saw no sections of the Projections dealing with debt.

  • Creating Awareness of Rising Student Debt
  • Posted by M. Lopata at The Education Path on January 7, 2008 at 11:10am EST
  • The more publicity we get on this topic can only improve what is taking place now. Every effort should be made to reduce the debt that one is paying for college. Private student loans have increased 25-30% each year over the last few years. What about the rising credit card debt? Maryland's Higher Education secretary recently wrote that 52% of tuition was being paid with credit cards. I applaud the institutions that are making efforts to reduce student debt. Parents and students need to consider the financial implications of an education early and make sure the institution will fit their situation.

  • More Student Loans
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee , Dir., at FHEAP on January 7, 2008 at 12:35pm EST
  • The growth in FFELP student loans is exponential (fig one): http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05184.pdf

    This report is 10 years old, and needs to be updated, but all the basic components are here.
    GAO on student debt increases: http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/he98063.pdf

    We're heading into a meatgrinder, so hang on.

  • Tuition inflation
  • Posted by David , Prof emeritus at USC on January 7, 2008 at 1:40pm EST
  • When I entered Harvard in 1958, annual tuition was $800; it has increased some forty times in fifty years. That tuition was 6% of the annual wages of my father, a unionized factory machinist. Relatively, Harvard's limiting tuition to 10% of incomes up to $160,000 does not seem historically odd to me. What does seem odd is the fifty-year inflation of tuition and college expenditures.

    I retired after forty years at a major institution while making 10 (not forty)times the salary at which I began. Obviously most of tuition inflation has not gone to faculty salaries, even those of the coveted stars of the profession. I consider my salary to have been adequate, mind you. It's the other 3,000% tuition increase that I question. Remember that "nonprofit" means that an educational corporation cannot distribute profits to shareholders (or trustees), not that it cannot make profits, money that it can use to increase its attractiveness and reputation and not necessarily the quality of the education it offers.

  • Posted by JBM on January 7, 2008 at 1:50pm EST
  • "$20k is not an inappropriate debt burden for an undergraduate education."

    That would completely depend on the caliber of the undergraduate education. If the student is graduated illiterate and so intellectually unskilled that he cannot secure employment and repay the debt, taking tens of thousands of dollars for such "education" would be wholly inappropriate.

  • A Parent's view
  • Posted by Jennifer Lahlou on January 7, 2008 at 4:35pm EST
  • As a single parent of a freshman at an Ivy League institution (not Harvard) I immediately got on the phone to see if my daughter's college would match what is being done at Harvard. I was told they would check into it. In order for my bright and intelligent daughter to attend an Ivy League institution, I sold my car and think twice about every penny I spend so that this hard working, middle class, single mom is able to send her to a school she rightly deserves to attend. Yes, a break in my tuition burden would be immensely helpful! Kudos to Harvard for leading the pack to help the overworked middle class. JAL

  • Posted by Jack on January 7, 2008 at 11:00pm EST
  • How long before Harvard et al. completely forgo tuition revenue?

    What of today's news that Yale is increasing its endowment spending (up to a rate that most LAC likely already spend at)?

  • Posted by Stephen Downes on January 8, 2008 at 9:30am EST
  • The criticisms of Harvard's spending are pre-emptive, intended to draw attention from criticisms that Harvard and others spend much less of their endowment than other tax exempt non-profits, such as foundations.
    http://www.downes.ca/post/42893

  • Merits effect--not all bad
  • Posted by Rupert Wilkinson , Emeritus Prof at University of Sussex (UK) on January 9, 2008 at 10:05am EST
  • One of the better effects -- or less bad effects -- of the Harvard move may be to encourage colleges that do give merits to target them more at families just above the cusp of estimated 'financial need' -- that is, upper income families supposedly able to pay without grant aid who nonetheless feel the burden. Some colleges already do this informally and Oberlin pioneered an experiment with this in 1992, as I document in my book, AIDING STUDENTS, BUYING STUDENTS: Financial Aid in America (Vanderbilt UP, 2005) which discusses many pros and cons of merits.
    When Hamilton moved to give up merits last year, it produced an unusually intelligent set of blogs for and against the move on this website--including several from parents who anguishedly looked to merits to meet the burden of high tuition.
    Rupert Wilkinson

  • simple question
  • Posted by doctor jimi on January 9, 2008 at 3:05pm EST
  • Harvard was not entirely altruistic here. They were losing students they wanted to state schools, a recent grad at my sons high school is one. Plus it might give them an advantage in athletics. Plus it seems hard to me to justify calling up alumni and asking them for money when you have a massive endowment and incredibly high tuition. As a parent going through this process now I have simple question why is it that the schools with the largest endowments are the most expensive schools? The second question is should an endowment that has consistently performed in double digits limit itself to the 5% rule?

  • need-based scholarships
  • Posted by Nanette Rayman , writer on January 11, 2008 at 10:30am EST
  • I am just wondering why Harvard is doing this. PC-ness. I thought Harvard was supposed to be "difficult' to get into. If they are letting in people only because they are poor, how does Harvard keep up its standards of academic excellence? I am NOT saying you can't be poor and brilliant, but they are basing it ONLY on NEED. Whatever happened to scholarships for excellence? I was told by the New School University that I didn't NEED more added to my scholarship because there were people in the GHETTO who needed it more.

    That statement alone is racist against me. So "African-Americans and Hispanic are automatically POORER than I was? My rent alone was probably 5 times what theirs was.

    At the time I didn't know that you could become homeless, then marry someone to get a NYCHA apartment.

    Well, guess what? Those people in the GHETTO are living with family mostly and I was on my own struggling with temp jobs or no job. So sick of what is PERCEIVED to be the needy.

    I think it would be much smarter for CUNY and SUNY to do this. Maybe then I wouldn't have 50K in student loans. Oh yeah, but CUNY would have to upgrade their academics - i.e. Hunter College which is mostly second grade with a college banner on the front of the building.

    And how about dropping the $125 application fee for grad school in CUNY schools. Poor people can't afford to throw away money and then maybe not even get in.

  • Comparing apples to oranges
  • Posted by Susan on January 21, 2008 at 7:40pm EST
  • I'll bet Harvard admits a lower proportion of students with family incomes below $180K than any other university. I have a hunch that their acceptances are need-blind, and then those who apply for financial aid are discounted accordingly. I recall that less than half of their students apply for financial aid. Colleges that are categorized as low in selectivity tend to have lower income families (inc. higher Pell %'s), so nearly everyone applies for financial aid; financial aid budgets are stretched so thin because of the high collective need. Merit (i.e., "no-need") recipients are far from rich; paying in full for four years of private school would wipe out most families. Many merit award recipients have need, too, but merit is usually awarded before need, so the aid is classified as merit. Highly selective universities do not award merit because all of their students are considered worthy. BTW, I also have a child who was accepted to an Ivy League (not Harvard) who did not attend because of the cost and attended our state's flagship instead (She made out just fine). We agreed to help, instead, with the doctorate, if need be. Fortunately a stipend pulled through because she was a hard worker. I guess we can retire one day.

  • Private Elite Vs.
  • Posted by jay furman , Headmaster at University of Le Roche on May 29, 2008 at 2:40pm EDT
  • It is all about curriculum when the final analysis emerges. It matters not the Heraldry of Old except, on the field of Athleticism.
    Quantification, qualification and defragmentation of any school's subject burns throughout the midnight oil, wherever yonder window breaks.
    My path was forged in both Public and Private environments. While not Elite, walking the baccalaureate walk within a stone's throw of Lake Michigan on a hot May afternoon, ain't bad.
    By any measure I suffered a 3.62 GPA, better than my days at public University, by a Degree, more meaningful I trust than mere pedigree alone.
    Harvard and Yale are tremendous institutions. After all, did they not in piece or part, orchestrate or facilitate; Just in time, Six Sigma, and other dribble used by firms over time, to lubricate the exodus of over 4 million well paying jobs in America. Give me public, at least the pulse on the heart of America is real.
    jf