Stopping the Tuition Inflation System

The American higher education system is increasingly characterized by rapidly mounting tuition and student debt. According to The New York Times, Americans owe more in student loans than they do on credit cards. In the face of this broken system, institutions should be reexamining their costs to determine where they can cut tuition, instead of recklessly raising tuition as their expenses increase and their endowments dip.

Unfortunately, Cooper Union, which does not charge tuition, is unique among elite colleges in America — and its days as a tuition-free institution may be numbered. According to several recent New York Times articles, Cooper Union, which was founded as a way to provide higher education to the working class, might have to change its business model because of the current economic climate. This announcement comes at a time when more students are expected to attend college, many families find themselves in financial trouble and the price of a college education has skyrocketed.

In the midst of today's web of mounting student debt and decreasing job opportunities, institutions should be reducing their tuition, not increasing it. Cooper Union should be an example for other universities, instead of a lone and endangered affordable institution. Universities may face lower endowments, but they must consider that families' funds have also decreased.

Because students are able to take out immense amounts of loans (which then crush them after graduation), this system of raising tuition has endured. Colleges should be examining their budgets, cutting the fat in every department — particularly in non-academic areas like student life — and decreasing tuition and student cost.

A college education is, first and foremost, valuable because of the academic instruction. Universities' first priorities should be the quality of the classroom experience, hiring excellent faculty members and maintaining important elements of the university, like the library. Students' tuition should directly fund their education and contribute to covering costs like paying professors' salaries, buying new books for the library or maintaining classroom facilities.

The purpose of an education is education. That fact is often obscured by a flurry of guest speakers, special programming, ever-increasing sports funding and other activities that help universities brand themselves and gain name recognition. Perhaps universities should consider cutting these programs, reducing students' tuition (and debt) burden and simplifying in order to deliver the best education possible for the fairest price.

It is ironic that Fordham, a university that promotes social justice, is part of the system that perpetuates student debt. Fordham and other well-regarded, extremely expensive universities would do well to begin soul-searching. Clearly, it costs money to maintain a campus like Fordham's. It costs money to recruit new students, to keep current students safe and to operate offices that represent the University's core values and goals, like the Dorothy Day Center for Service and Justice, Campus Ministry and Career Services. There must be areas of student life or facilities management that could be trimmed down or made more cost efficient.

Furthermore, if the overwhelming opinion is that people must possess a college degree to perform many jobs (even those that do not necessarily require four years of a liberal arts education), then there must be another option for educating a workforce cheaply and efficiently.

Certainly, a liberal arts education is nice (as most members of the Fordham community might contend), but not everyone wants or needs to learn about classical philosophy in order to work and lead a full, happy life. One of the problems in America is that there is a sense that attending a four-year university is the right choice for everyone, and that it guarantees graduates a job.

As America faces the worst recession since the Great Depression, it has become clear that not every college graduate is handed a job alongside his or her diploma. All bets are off in this new economic climate, and it seems that people have very slowly begun to realize that the system must be reformed.

In an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Shai Reshef describes his experience creating the non-profit University of the People, an online learning community that charges minimal processing fees and offers courses in business and computer programming. Uopeople.org details their methods, expenses and admission, and explains that their method is that "within the online study communities, students will share resources, exchange ideas, discuss weekly topics, submit assignments and take exams."

Reshef writes that he does not intend for the University of the People to replace traditional college campuses, especially elite institutions.

"Top research universities lead society and should probably continue to serve only a limited number of students," he wrote in the article. "But other colleges and universities, the vast majority of them, can provide other options."

Clearly, online learning delivers a product that is different from what a residential university like Fordham can produce. In today's world, more institutions might do well to follow University of the People's lead, because while some people want a traditional residential college experience, it is not for everyone. Part of the current problem is that many people are encouraged to attend a pricey four-year university even though their desired career paths might not require that type of education.