The cap conundrum: Board of Governors should focus on out-of-state enrollment cap

At last week’s meetings, the UNC-system Board of Governors contemplated changing the cycle of its enrollment review process from a period of two years to a period of three.

Under the current system, a university’s out-of-state enrollment is reviewed every two years, and schools can be penalized for something that is largely out of their control.

As they begin to prepare for their next meeting in April, board members should keep this proposal in mind.

Increasing the cycle to three years will give universities in the UNC system a much-needed margin for error in the imperfect process of admissions and matriculation.

Some argue that this leeway will allow schools to maximize incoming tuition while still avoiding costly fines for exceeding the 18 percent out-of-state enrollment cap.

But these concerns are tenuous at best and pale in comparison to the very real effects of UNC having to pay a fine for exceeding its out-of-state cap.

UNC was the only system school to go over the limit last year, by about 24 students.

The three-year average will also create a better picture of which schools are chronically over-enrolled.

The average over a longer period of time will show which admissions offices underestimated enrollment for one year and which are actively trying to bend the rules to gain some revenue, if this is happening at all.

And as it considers issues of out-of-state enrollment, the board should also begin considering the persistent question of whether to raise the 18 percent out-of-state cap.

It seems as though the cap will likely have to be raised sooner rather than later. At the very least, some adjustment is needed. Either way, changes must be made in a way that does not disrupt student cohesion.

Lifting the archaic cap is feasible. While the board must enforce an 18 percent rule for the entire system, how they choose to achieve this proportionally is theirs to decide.

To prevent students from paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in needless fines to the Board of Governors, to provide for a truly world-class education, to ensure the diversity of thought and to ensure short-term financial stability, UNC-CH should be allowed to enroll more out-of-state students.

While many are pointing to the financial incentive of bringing in more out-of-state students in a period of economic decline, this should not be the focus. Out-of-state students should not become commodities.

Instead, administrators must understand the value diverse perspectives bring to the quality of the classroom experience. And, perhaps most importantly, they must not isolate UNC-CH from its peers like the University of Virginia and the University of Michigan.

The board clearly has a lot on its plate for its next meeting, but this issue should be on its agenda.