Spring Break
EDITORIAL: A beacon of financial Aid
Editorial | 1/29/08
Posted online at 1:36 AM EST on 1/29/08
For millions of families whose children have a chance at gaining acceptance to top tier American universities, Harvard's decision last month to reduce the financial burden on middle- and upper-middle-class students came as a welcome respite. The institution announced it would require families earning between $120,000 and $180,000 per year to pay tuition equivalent to only 10 percent of their income.
As with all things Harvard, the move yielded a wave of imitation across the spectrum of private higher education, with Yale following in close pursuit and other institutions weighing their options.
We support any initiative aimed at lowering the cost of a college education for those struggling to afford it. But as Brandeis researches its own response to this sea change in financial aid distribution, it must take care to avoid following Harvard's footsteps at a cost to the low-income students who truly require assistance. Brandeis should produce a response that is proportional to our resources and appropriate for our needs.
Unlike its Ivy League counterparts, Brandeis' financial aid is much more of a zero-sum game. Harvard and Yale draw from endowments that outweigh ours many times over. While it may seem unconscionable for anyone of moderate means to scrape the barrel in order to pay a school sitting on $35 billion, Brandeis faces murky questions about who gets a free ride. With an endowment of less than $700 million, should we come to the aid of middle-class students, many of whom are struggling with rising debt? Or should we prioritize aid to the lower classes, who attend college at shockingly disproportionate rates?
In coming to terms with these quandaries, the University must consider the stark growing education disparity in America. A 2004 study revealed that roughly 75 percent of students at selective colleges come from the top economic quartile, while the bottom two quartiles make up 9 percent. What's worse, liberal arts colleges have seen the trend increase in recent years. Between 2004 and 2006, the number of students eligible for Pell Grants diminished at 26 of the top 30 liberal arts schools. Brandeis can ignore these numbers only at a cost to its socioeconomic diversity.
To be sure, the University acts admirably in doling out millions of dollars in assistance and numerous merit-based scholarships each year. And administrators, such as Senior Vice President for Students and Enrollment Jean Eddy, are undoubtedly aware of the limitations of our financial circumstances when compared with peer institutions.
Now, in responding to these wealthy brethren, Brandeis must look inward, taking stock of what it can afford and re-evaluating its dedication to those most deeply entrenched in economic hardship.
As with all things Harvard, the move yielded a wave of imitation across the spectrum of private higher education, with Yale following in close pursuit and other institutions weighing their options.
We support any initiative aimed at lowering the cost of a college education for those struggling to afford it. But as Brandeis researches its own response to this sea change in financial aid distribution, it must take care to avoid following Harvard's footsteps at a cost to the low-income students who truly require assistance. Brandeis should produce a response that is proportional to our resources and appropriate for our needs.
Unlike its Ivy League counterparts, Brandeis' financial aid is much more of a zero-sum game. Harvard and Yale draw from endowments that outweigh ours many times over. While it may seem unconscionable for anyone of moderate means to scrape the barrel in order to pay a school sitting on $35 billion, Brandeis faces murky questions about who gets a free ride. With an endowment of less than $700 million, should we come to the aid of middle-class students, many of whom are struggling with rising debt? Or should we prioritize aid to the lower classes, who attend college at shockingly disproportionate rates?
In coming to terms with these quandaries, the University must consider the stark growing education disparity in America. A 2004 study revealed that roughly 75 percent of students at selective colleges come from the top economic quartile, while the bottom two quartiles make up 9 percent. What's worse, liberal arts colleges have seen the trend increase in recent years. Between 2004 and 2006, the number of students eligible for Pell Grants diminished at 26 of the top 30 liberal arts schools. Brandeis can ignore these numbers only at a cost to its socioeconomic diversity.
To be sure, the University acts admirably in doling out millions of dollars in assistance and numerous merit-based scholarships each year. And administrators, such as Senior Vice President for Students and Enrollment Jean Eddy, are undoubtedly aware of the limitations of our financial circumstances when compared with peer institutions.
Now, in responding to these wealthy brethren, Brandeis must look inward, taking stock of what it can afford and re-evaluating its dedication to those most deeply entrenched in economic hardship.
Be the first to comment on this story