With the recent addition of a provision in the state budget that will allow out-of-state students to pay in-state tuition,the state legislature seems to be breaking the already broken university funding model.
Under the new provision, out-of-state students could register to vote in Ohio and then be eligible for in-state tuition after only 30 days. As it currently stands, in order to be eligible for in-state tuition, a student must either graduate from an Ohio high school or have a parent that lives in-state.
If the budget moves forward as is, state universities could lose up to $272 million in annual operating funds. For a school such as the University of Cincinnati, the potential loss is to the tune of $41.7 million, or more than four percent of it's annual operating budget.
Universities can avoid this provision if they choose not to provide documentation to students looking to register to vote in Ohio. But don't universities exist so that students can further their education? Participating in the electoral process is a method of education. Voting is a privilege that students should unequivocally have access to. And universities, as drivers to education, should be able to encourage that learning process without any penalties. But that is the political side of things. In my mind, the more important issue is the willingness of the legislature to cut funding sources from public institutions of higher education.
Over the past few decades the state share of funding for public universities in Ohio has drastically declined. State public schools now receive less than 15% of their operational budget from the State of Ohio. How have schools made up for this reduction in funding? Well, they have raised tuition, levied program or department fees, and relied more on other modes of funding including research grants and private donors.
The bigger question here though, is how will this reduction in revenue affect the quality of the education that students receive at state schools. With less funding will state schools be able to offer the same quality of a classroom education to all students? Will state schools be able to offer, at a high level, all of the services that students currently have access to?
The quick answer to both of those questions is no. Anytime there is a cut in funding, the student experience is hurt in some way or another. Classroom sizes might grow. Attention to individuals might fade. Programs may be cut. Additional fees may be levied. Tuition may rise. Students will suffer.
If the State of Ohio wants its' college students to stay in Ohio and continue to advance the state, then they won't pass the budget as it currently stands. These changes could negatively impact the student experience to a point where students don't want to live in Ohio any longer. Why, someday down the road, should I send my children to a state school that offers an inferior product when I can live in a different state and send my kids to a school that has more resources and a better student experience because it is funded better?
The bottom line is this: allowing out-of-state students to pay in-state tuition, while beneficial to those students, hurts universities at-large. Reducing the amount of funding that schools can bring in will negatively affect the quality of education available to students.
The funding model is already broken, so why break it even more?
No comments:
Post a Comment