If there's one thing I've learned as the president of the College Board, it's this: every person is born with the fundamental capacity to learn. The only question is whether that capacity is neglected or nurtured.
Unfortunately, even at the outset of the 21st century, lower income students remain underrepresented in higher education because of socioeconomic barriers like cost and unequal access to high quality schools. Five decades after the Supreme Court struck down "separate but equal," higher education remains a privilege -- one that often depends on a family's financial means. The sad irony, of course, is that the people who might benefit most from a good education are usually the people who face the greatest barriers to attaining a degree.
The College Board Advocacy & Policy Center recently published its annual Trends in College Pricing and Trends in Student Aid reports to investigate and assess the scope this problem. The reports found that during the past decade, average tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and universities rose almost twice as fast as those at private colleges. Over the same period, average household incomes have remained stagnant. Making matters worse was the disturbing drop in state spending on higher education -- a decline of 9 percent in 2008-09 and 1.3 percent in 2009-10.
The clear first step in alleviating this educational crisis is opening an honest discussion about college affordability. Truth be told, we've been having this discussion at the College Board for quite a while. The College Board has been a leading advocate for need-based financial aid for more than a decade, and not just because we recognize the financial and emotional benefits of nurturing a student's talent. We recognize that their contributions are essential to ensuring that America remains competitive globally.
We know that being more competitive means improving our college completion rate. America was once a leader in the number of citizens with college degrees, but recently we've slipped to 12th place among industrialized nations. If the path to global competitiveness is in fact paved with diplomas, we should all be focused on eliminating one of the greatest barriers to a college education: the cost.
Thankfully, the federal government has responded with record student aid in the form of Pell Grants and tax credits. In fact, last year saw the largest increase in the history of the Pell Grant program and resulted in $28.2 billion in federal Pell Grant aid for approximately 7.7 million students. This money has kept the net cost of a college degree (including tuition, fees, room and board) from rising as quickly as the sticker price, and I encourage students to pursue all available financial aid options.
The injection of federal dollars has been a big help, but there is much more to be done. We must make college more affordable by restraining growth in costs and prices, ensuring that available aid is used wisely and insisting that state governments commit to fully funding higher education.
Expanding access to college is a critical priority because barriers to higher education don't just stop individuals from reaching their full potential -- ultimately, they hold back the entire country.
In the past we could afford to neglect some of our diamonds in the rough because the United States was a superpower with unmatched resources. But the playing field has been leveled and our competitors are racing by. If we want America to reclaim its position at the head of the international class, it's time to fully commit ourselves to nurturing all of our talent, no matter where it might be hidden.
Mark G. Yudof: Brown's Budget Marks a Sad Day for California
Jeff Conlon: Setting the Record Straight on Kaplan University's Courtesy Registration Policy
Other countries don't understand why we don't do anything every time they raise tuition .
Smeg students riot parents get involved in other countries but not here we just take it and go farther in debt or leave the schools and government holding the bag , We could do something but that would be un american .
An alternative solution may lie in better preparation for college being provided universally by public schools. This would allow for a shift to merit basing while those currently getting aid based on need would be better able to compete on merit.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/38567197.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:U0ckkD:aEyKUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
let us assume for a moment that college education is made FREE for all those can get it. Means universities need not evaluate incoming students to offer Fin Aid. To fill in the seats they will have to go strictly by incoming merit or do their own written evaluation or entrance exams.
Also the college going crowd is so big that people will automatically enroll in college whether they "need" and "appreciate" education or not.
Result: American college standard will become equal to american public school standard.
DONOT DO IT Please.
In other words, this is all for naught unless you either decrease demand (not happening with population growth and an ever-increasing demand for higher education) or increase supply.
Ergo, you need a plan to increase the supply of college slots. Throwing more and more dollars will do nothing - colleges will simply gobble them up as they have for the past five decades. Where is your plan to increase overall capacity?
Tough on crime!
Has it occurred to the author that it is the infusion of federal money that is driving up the cost of an education? Supply and demand--when the federal government increases the supply of money available, the universities will demand more. I figured this was somewhat obvious.
It is also obvious that America has not invested enough in education as evidenced by our global rankings.
I'm not so sure. In many cases, government aid simply masks the price signals so University administrators are free to raise tuition more. There are a lot of unhealthy incentives here.
Not to oversimplify, but my parents received very little assistance for college in the early 70s and they paid it off in full with part-time(!) wages. Their classes were taught by professors to boot. Now with TAs lecturing to 300+ students at a time, why is college getting expensive instead of getting cheaper?
The only real variable that changed is the aid structure. What was designed for the underclass is now mandatory for everyone. Compare and contrast with how we fund health care at your leisure.
University of California Chancellor Robert J Birgeneau’s eight-year fiscal track record is dismal indeed. He would like to blame the politicians, since they stopped giving him every dollar he has asked for, and the state legislators do share some responsibility for the financial crisis. But not in the sense he means.
A competent chancellor would have been on top of identifying inefficiencies in the system and then crafting a plan to fix them. Competent oversight by the Board of Regents and the legislature would have required him to provide data on problems and on what steps he was taking to solve them. Instead, every year Birgeneau would request a budget increase, the regents would agree to it, and the legislature would provide. The hard questions were avoided by all concerned, and the problems just piled up to $150 million of inefficiencies….until there was no money left.
It is in the interest of those who have the most to keep those who have the least uneducated so that they are permanently "unqualified" to work in economics, finance, etc.