Out-of-state students shouldn't pay more than undocumented

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by chrisjm18, Apr 13, 2022.

Loading...
  1. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    -deleted because someone else said it-
     
  2. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I apologize for misunderstanding the intent of your post.

    Let's take undocumented out for a second.

    The problem I have with the out of state tuition model is that the school in California is most decidedly receiving appropriations from the state of California. However, it is also receiving many, many federal dollars which the good people of Oklahoma also paid.

    As it relates to typical college age students (18-22) most of them haven't contributed, well, anything of any significance to their state in terms of finances. A few part time job taxes, for sure. But who gets screwed in this transaction? Students from lower income families. Those individuals didn't pay in top dollar even to their home state. And now the idea of going out-of-state prices them out to such an insane degree that it isn't funny. And on the one hand, I view the notion of "needing" to go away for school to be a luxury of the rich that embedded itself in our collective consciousness as a needed rite of passage from teenager to adult and that it's a silly luxury most of us simply cannot afford.

    But these are public universities. Those who can afford (and many who absolutely cannot) choose private. Public universities should be there for the public benefit.

    The out of state model made more sense when schools derived most of their funding from the state. However, as they all race to build bigger and better facilities and hire more and more highly paid senior administrators, the amount of state appropriation they receive is dwindling. For some state schools they are receiving less than 20% of their overall budget from the state. Back when that number was 80% or higher, charging out of state rates made more sense. It became a state funded benefit for state residents. Now? Kind of just comes off as greedy.

    Schools with billion dollar endowments, presidents riding around in private jets and athletics teams drawing in millions per year and spending every penny on coaches, top tier facilities all while throwing young athletes into a meat grinder that destroys their bodies in exchange for no pay turning around and deciding that the kid from Oklahoma needs to pay six times the tuition as the kid from Fresno feels horribly disconnected.

    Again, it made sense at one time. And there is my frugal nature saying you shouldn't over extend yourself. Go to CC. Transfer in. Get that degree as cheap as possible. At the same time, what are you supposed to do if you live in Nebraska and decide you want to study marine biology? I'm sure somewhere in the state there's a program. But I'd have to imagine it isn't a top ranked one. Just a short flight away the program that will transform your life, at a school funded by the federal tax dollars your parents have paid for years and that you will pay until you die, but is unreachable to you financially because of a dated tuition model.

    In my humble opinion, public universities should be there to serve the public interest of educating our population. But they're too busy pretending to be Harvard and creating artificial walls of exclusivity. That's really what this is about. Not the fairness of who benefits from my state taxes.
     
    JoshD, Maniac Craniac and Rachel83az like this.
  3. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Well-Known Member

    Chronicle of Higher Ed and McKinsey both have write ups that poignantly graph the rise in public university tuition rates with the decrease in state funding that has occurred over the years. Universities, particularly research universities, are still powerful economic engines. While Federal student loans, student Pell grants, and institutional grants are critical for operations and greatly exceed state subsidies… the state subsidy model is of utmost criticality for operational planning. Keep in mind that in many states, faculty and staff of public universities are effectively public/state employees. In many cases, state legislators are also approving and primarily funding buildings, facilities, and even new program startup costs.

    With all of that in consideration, we’re seeing legislators pushing back against some of the powerhouse R1 schools that are highly successful at recruiting out of state and foreign students. They’re advocating for their constituents, that the state pubic universities should be primarily for their constituents. Which has in turn led to many major R1 universities, particularly at the undergrad level, starting to restrict based on residency.
     
  4. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I get it.

    I really do.

    California education for Californians.

    The thing is, that to do that they are using a not insignificant amount of my NY money. And that's a big problem. It's less of an issue for me because I'm surrounded by some great SUNY schools offering an excelsior scholarship (provided my kids are willing to commit to remaining in NY for a while). My point, though, is that this isn't a study abroad situation. We are, at least in theory, the same country. There are kids growing up in the border areas of PA where SUNY New Paltz is much closer to home than a state school in PA.

    And those could absolutely be economic contributors to NY once they graduate. And, at the end of the day, I want the smart kid who wants to be a doctor to become a doctor even if they had the audacity to be born three states over.

    I totally get why legislators are finding political traction in this "me first" mentality. I'm just saying that it's a stupid, short sighted battle that relies on state exceptionalism above all. For some schools, I kind of get it. Rich parents from NY might absolutely flood UCLA if they were paying in-state tuition and it gave their kids a chance to learn near a beach. Fine, I get it. But there will be no out of state invasion of the California University of Pennsylvania.

    I recognize that we must strike a balance to ensure that the UCLAs of the country don't become exotic destination colleges while locals cannot get a seat but that doesn't mean we should charge through the nose and put a public university's price tag anywhere near a private school.
     
    Maniac Craniac and Rachel83az like this.
  5. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    "Stupid" and "short-sighted" politicians? Really? Who knew?:rolleyes:
     
    Maniac Craniac likes this.
  6. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    Texas has wasted so many tax dollars on cases like this.

    The one good thing about Rick Perry is that he defended offering in-state tuition rates to dreamers who are Texas residents.

    After Texas deregulated public college tuition because of budget cuts, tuition rates skyrocketed. We dropped from first place in funding higher education.
     
    Neuhaus and Maniac Craniac like this.

Share This Page