Recently, the College Board released a report evaluating the cost of attending college. Unfortunately, the results were rather grim. On average, tuition and other costs at four-year private universities rose 6.3 percent. Even more concerning, this increase is more than double the rate of inflation.

But while we’re certainly discouraged by yet another year where the cost of attending college substantially increases, the data on financial aid for disadvantaged students has genuinely disturbed us.

According to the Project on Student Debt, average undergraduate debt rose by 8% during the 2005-2006 school year, an increase that outstripped even the rise in college costs. Robert Shireman, executive director for Project on Student Debt, commented on the implications of this increase in student debt thusly: “College officials always tell us not to worry [about rising costs] because there’s plenty of financial aid, but that aid is clearly not going where it’s needed.”

Obviously there are serious concerns about how students will manage the rising costs of attending college. These concerns are so widespread, in fact, that the United States Senate Finance Committee has proposed legislation mandating that colleges and universities send a greater percentage of their endowment to providing financial aid. Schools that refuse to do so would lose their tax exempt status. For Washington University, which recently saw its endowment grow from $4.75 billion to $5.66 billion, news of this possible measure shouldn’t raise too many eyebrows. After all, the school’s financial success has left it well equipped to pour more of its endowment into programs designed to ease students’ financial burdens.

Yet despite this good fortune, Washington University is one of the schools that is actively opposing the finance committee’s measure.

Why is this the case? Barbara Feiner, the vice chancellor for finance at Washington University, has explained that the University opposes the measure because mandating the school’s spending of its endowment could go against the wishes of the donors. According to Feiner, “spending from the individual endowments is for the stated purpose of the respective endowment as determined by the donor.”

While we understand that donor wishes limit how much of the school’s endowment can be used, we do not believe that this justifies the administration’s decision to oppose the measure. For starters, not all of the University’s endowment is restricted. A quick survey of the Campaign for Washington University, a recent multi-year fundraiser that secured $1.55 billion in endowed gifts from more than 95,000 individuals, reveals that while many of the donations were designated for specific purposes, many were not. Approximately $558 million was marked for academic programs, $230 million for faculty support and research, $180 million for facilities, $120 million for the Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center and $216 million for “unrestricted and other endowment purposes.” At least in theory, it is possible to redesignate endowment funds for student financial aid.

To be sure, it is possible that these unrestricted endowment funds might already be tied up in other projects, yet this still does not mean the administration should oppose the Senate Finance Committee’s measure. Instead, the University could begin a new fundraising campaign devoted exclusively to raising money for student financial aid programs. The success of the Campaign for Washington University has shown us that a sufficient donor base exists within the campus community for such a campaign to be a success. And more to the point, even a mildly successful fundraising effort would do much to ease the costs of attending Washington University.

In the past, the administration has coped with the rising costs of energy and employee health insurance by passing the extra costs onto the students. The result has been an annual series of tuition increases that have raised tuition from $25,700 during the 2001-2002 school year to $34,500 this year. Even more concerning, the University has failed to provide any indication as to when these tuition hikes will cease. The hikes have unfortunately become the status quo, and this needs to end. Should we expect another tuition increase this year after news that the Washington University endowment grew by nearly a billion dollars? Students should hope not, but unfortunately experience has shown everyone that it is not wise to assume there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

At the end of the Campaign for Washington University, David Blasingame, executive director of the campaign, stated that the success of the campaign will ultimately be measured by, “what we do in service both to our students and to the wider world.” We would hope that this was not empty rhetoric, and we expect the administration to keep its pledge toward helping students in need. A university’s worth can be measured by the good it does for its students.

But Washington University is not doing any good by forcing qualified prospective students to look elsewhere due to financial circumstances. For these reasons, we ask that the administration seriously reconsider its opposition to the Senate Finance Committee’s measure.

Popularity: unranked [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, October 26th, 2007 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.