Can't afford UW? Better go to Stanford
Stanford University has announced, in keeping up with the Harvards, that parents earning less than $100,000 will no longer pay tuition. Families earning below $60,000 don't have to pay for room and board. (Total for a year at Stanford, including meals and lodging, is now $47,200.) Pretty sweet deal for the next generation of the elite.
The story, lovingly treated by the major national papers, recalls to me a conversation I had with the distinguished American historian Richard White, who was at the time just announcing his departing from U.W. to go teach at Stanford. One reason, he told me, was the greater student diversity, and lower median family income, at Stanford.
The paradox is this: "Private" institutions like the very best universities are now more "public" than the publics, in the sense that they are cheaper for those of modest means (if you can get in), and more progressive in the way they transfer wealth downward.
Looked at another way, of course, the story reflects the extraordinary upward flow of wealth. Stanford's endowment is now $17.1 billion, and last year it led all universities in fundraising: $832.4 million. (Harvard has the top endowment, an astounding $35 billion, up there in the Gates league.) The Ivies and a few other elite schools are now accelerating away from the publics, paying their professors much more, and creating the research environments that attract the top talent and top students.
Can the University of Washington keep up? It has partially done so by being the top public university in terms of research grants, which skews the mission toward grant-grabbing professors, and has kept a place in the top 20 in terms of contributions. It also saves money by letting its humanities programs decline, shifting money to the sciences. And it's just winding up an ambitious, $2.5 billion, seven-year campaign to build the endowment, endowed professorships, and more.
It may also have dodged a bullet, known as the UW/North campus, which could seriously divert money from the UW/Montlake megaversity.
Some reformers have even thought that the UW needs to "privatize" more, gaining more autonomy from the Legislature in setting tuition and deciding on areas of specialization, in exchange for capping the state's level of support. Ironically, such privatization would enable a leading public research university to offer free admission to many.
Ain't gonna happen!
Comments:
Posted Fri, Feb 22, 1:28 p.m. inappropriate
Reciprocal Agreements would help: I believe one way in which public universities could help increase diversity and lower costs would be to establish a reciprocity program. A group of universities or states would create a program in which students from that group would be given the right to pay in-state tuition at the school of their choice from the group. For Example say Washington and Florida had an agreement where Florida undergrads could apply to Washington schools and if accepted could pay in-state tuition at any Washington public university and vice-versa.
If there were a large enough group, you could potentially increase diversity by lowering the costs of providing that diversity. This in a fairly substantive way would allow public universities a more even footing with private institutions. Of course it would also give cause for the legislature to eventually pull support for a public school that no longer educates a majority of their constituents' children. But this may likely have positive benefits for a school of UW's caliber by no longer being as constricted by the state. Just a thought.
Posted Sat, Feb 23, 8:54 a.m. inappropriate
Perspective on college costs and diversity: There are lots of ways to measure diversity. I took a quick look at the Stanford web site. This page:
www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/financing/5_2_faqs.html#seven
states: "More than half of our students are on need-based financial aid, and the average aid award exceeds $23,000 per year."
So, that would mean "less than half" of the student body can afford to pay the $48,938 per year for tuition, room and board, books and supplies and personal expenses, as listed on this web site.
www.stanford.edu/dept/uga/applying/extras/1_2b5_budget.html
At Stanford, there are roughly 6800 undergrads. At the UW, there are roughly 25,000. (source: http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/profile/quickfacts.html , though this may include UW Tacoma and Bothell too) So if Professor White's assertion holds about percentage of diversity, that would mean there are roughly 12,000 students at the UW who could afford to pay nearly $50,000 a year for four years for college.
By the way, the tuition at the UW is Resident: $5,710 / Nonresident: $19,908
This compares to $34,800 just for tuition at Stanford. In other words, a Washington resident pays $29K less in tuition per year, or for four years gets a BA for nearly $120K less.
I have no doubt there are lots of amazing people at both schools who come from very diverse backgrounds. I don't think Professor White's assertion is literally true however. Again though it depends on how one defines diversity.