Skip to Content

Go low and legal on tuition:Chancellor Thorp should favor proposal that treats students equally regardless of residency status

1 comments
November 13, 2009
Editorial Board

Of the two proposals the tuition and fee advisory task force recommended to Chancellor Holden Thorp, there is only one clear (and legal) choice: an across-the-board 5.2 percent increase for undergraduate students and 3.7 percent increase for graduate students — regardless of residency.

We commend Student Body President Jasmin Jones and Student Body Vice President David Bevevino for accurately and fairly representing UNC students’ voices during the process of creating a tuition recommendation.

These two were the lone voices in favor of the 5.2 percent proposal.

But the rest of the task force doesn’t get off scot-free.

Supported by the remainder of the task force, the second proposal includes a 6.5 percent increase across the board for undergraduate students.

That recommendation is illegal according to current state law.

The 6.5 percent increase for in-state students would amount to $251.

But during its last session, the N.C. General Assembly mandated that tuition for residents could not be increased more than $200 — which amounts to a 5.2 percent hike. That revenue will go directly to the state.

And nonresidents will have to pay the unfair $200 tuition tax as well. But there is no guarantee that their tuition will be kept low.

An effort to get the General Assembly to allow a 6.5 percent increase would take a major lobbying initiative when the legislature convenes in May 2010 — after students have already left for the summer.

And keep in mind, a desperate General Assembly is unlikely to return the funds from the tuition tax, but no one knows if state representatives would vote to allow another $51 increase.

If the measure fails, nonresidents would suffer a higher percentage increase, and as the Editorial Board has previously opined, they would bear more than their fair share of the budget crisis burden. This is unacceptable.

A 5.2 percent increase for all is the only fair and reasonable suggestion. And Chancellor Holden Thorp agrees; he has indicated support for the lower proposal.

Let’s hope he sticks to his word this time.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Please remember that "UNC

Submitted by EDanforth on November 13, 2009 - 08:31.

Please remember that "UNC students' voices" are not only the voices of in- and out-of-state undergraduates, but also graduate and professional students.

I realize that my opinion is one as a graduate (not professional) student from the school of Arts & Sciences. Although most of us do not directly pay for our tuition at UNC, we are not completely insulated from the effects of tuition increases. The tuition increases are relevant for graduate TAs and RAs because the design of these increases may affect how many TAs and RAs can be supported. In particular, each department receives a finite amount of money to cover the difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition costs for their TAs and RAs (this is called tuition remission). Therefore, if out-of-state tuition increases by a larger absolute amount than in-state tuition for graduate students, the cost of tuition remission for each department increases. Assuming that departments do not receive additional funds to offset this increased cost--which has been stated to be a very plausible scenario at this point--then the existing number of TAs and RAs cannot continue to be supported. At the most recent GPSF senate meeting we went over the numbers and the worst-case scenario indicated that UNC-CH would be projected lose something like 44 TA positions as a result of the increase in tuition.

Besides forcing the University to reduce the number of existing TAs and RAs, higher tuition remission costs are also likely to discourage departments from admitting out-of-state and international students as future graduate students. This is particularly unsettling as international students make up approximately 10% of the 13,000 (or so) graduate and professional students at UNC-CH. International students never qualify for in-state residency, and so then require more expense for departments. The international students who are admitted and attend school here do not qualify for work visas and so cannot work if they lose their teaching position, or if they do not make enough money. They also have a hard time qualifying for external funding sources as they are not citizens. They are a very vulnerable population when it comes to tuition increases and funding. The Chancellor has said at his open house, that this "wouldn't happen"--that departments would not seek to lower costs by accepting fewer international students or out-of-state students, but I have not yet heard why the University is so certain of this. What sort of mechanisms are in place to help this vulnerable population?

Last week, the GPSF voted to call on the University to lobby for a $600 increase for both in-state and out-of-state graduate tuition as this will have a neutral effect on tuition remission costs and thus TA/RA support. This request conflicts with the current $200 cap on in-state tuition increases imposed by the NC legislature, but the body may be convinced to revisit this cap.

In the future, I hope the DTH will consider graduate student issues such as the ones mentioned above.