Capital vs. education at UNC

Ruby, I didn't read much here that suggests anything to do with what you and I experienced as undergrads (1989-1995 between the two of us). This article focused almost entirely on the business school and hospital (not even the business school and the med school, for example). And serving as a prof in the med school is very different than being, say, an English professor, where your research may generate a book that sells a handful of copies and there's not the same pressure to bring in funding. I think this article reflects south campus happenings more than anything.

I do share his dismay at seeing the wealthiest people serving on boards. I am also concerned that UNC maintain its focus on serving the needs of NC citizens.

A few quibbles/questions:

The author says UNC is neglecting in-state students and NC priorities. But then he talks about the $30,000 for out-of-state students business school students. But if out-of-state tuition is high, but in-state tuition low, then it seems to me the focus is still on providing affordable tuition for North Carolinians. And I'm not seeing how tuition rates at the business school, which is a graduate program, have much to do with the undergraduate experience. All the professional schools set their own tuition. And there was recently an article in the Chronicle of Higher Ed that showed that raising tuition can raise applications and prestige of a school. Maybe this was Kenan's plan?

And using extra income to build a children's hospital and cancer hospital, and not using taxpayer money from NC, sounds like a very sensible thing.

He makes no mention of the Carolina Covenant, which was truly a remarkable program to implement and has been copied by several other large universities. This guarantees that the poorest of NC citizens who are accepted to UNC will be able to attend.

I also know that I attended UNC for four years at a cost much, much lower than I would have paid anywhere else in the country, for a great education. Yes, tuition has gone up a lot since then, but I still think it's a good deal. I have friends who went to prestigious private schools and graduated with huge piles of debt. I don't think they got that much more out of their education than I did mine, certainly not $75,000 more (or whatever their loans are).

Actually the $30,000 cost for an out-of-state student to attend the Kenan-Flagler MBA program is way too low. According to the school's own website, (http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/Programs/MBA/Tuition/index.cfm) that student would pay nearly $40,000 in tuition and fees each year. Add in living expenses and it is $60,000 a year.

A similar in-state student would pay just over $21,000 a year in tuition and fees. Add in the living expenses and it rises to over $41,000. Interestingly, Kenan-Flagler has the highest in-state tuition of any program at any university in the state: even higher than the UNC medical, law or dental schools.

While an in-state student pays far less, it isn't really what most North Carolinians would call "affordable" to attend their state university.

The real tragedy in my eyes is how few North Carolinians actually get to take advantage of that discount. When I attended the School, only about 10% of the students were from North Carolina. Apparently that hasn't changed much since then. Only one of the eleven current students they profile on the website is actually from NC (http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/Profiles/MBA/Students/index.cfm).

I know that my family moved here from out of state to go to that infernal university. From all of its press it sounded like the perfect place for less wealthy people to get an acclaimed education. Never mind the fact that the graduate program we chased halfway across the country was dissolved before my spouse could even finish. So yeah, I think that unc is sacrificing to much for the sake of the almighty dollar.

I also have a problem with any public university (and I know there are more than just this one) that makes a profit from medical research. Enlightened is the way academics see themselves. All I see are more greedy Americans. what I don't understand is why they get to feel superior to say, the average street drug dealer. If my guy had a phd he'd be able to charge more.

This article brings up many interesting points. It is a concise well written history with a strong point of view. I do however believe the issues need to be considered in a broader context.

UNC and the Hospital System has certainly moved to a for profit model. However you can argue that our elected leaders both state and federal have lead us down this path by providing less money for education and health care. In the case of the hospital system it has been clearly mandated that for profit is the way.

As for the rest of the UNC the "university system" has clearly put this campus under increasing pressure to raise corporate dollars and go to big donors to fund professorships and other vital education necessities in order for UNC to continue as a national " flagship university".

As to the med school/hospital system it would be difficult to tell the parents of a burned child or a cancer victim that the concentration of massive medical buildings and, yes, the highly paid doctors and researchers are not worth the money and the "eyesore" ,traffic hassle that is Manning Drive and environs. Our town's desire to to maintain a village, hip urban (very small U) ambiance is in direct conflict with what UNC Hospital System feels is its clear state and national mandate.

As to the administrators of the University it is sadly axiomatic that big bureaucracies take skilled X and O types. If UNC has been mandated to run like a business then, like corporate America, executives make too much money.

It would be worthwhile to consider a comparison of executives, professors and MD./PhDs salaries at UNC with national average. From memory I think we are at best on par to below average.

My belief and hope is that we will turn away as a state and nation from this "for profit" model or education and healthcare that this article describes. It does us little good to blame the University when we citizens through our elected officials have set up system. In the end we citizens will have to provide the financial and moral means to remove the corporate stamp from UNC .

I think the tuition talks this Thursday will prove just how far UNC has sunk when it comes to grubbing on the ground for money. Whether it's in the guise of fees for in-state students, tuition for out-of-state students, or graduate school hikes, the Board of Trustees has shown itself repeatedly willing to try to get more money out of students and parents -- even when they don't have any particular use for the extra cash.

Actually, I sent out this open letter to the BOT to most of the local media outlets, so I might as well copy it here, too.

To the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees-

Today you are about to take up the issue of the coming year's tuition for the best public university in the world. Last year, as the Opinion Editor at The Daily Tar Heel, you were kind enough to hear me plead the case of students and their families (though I was specifically refused by Trustee Mason to address the appropriate committee before the entirety of the board met for a discussion-free vote). This year you will doubtless hear from Student Body President James Allred on the issue.

I just wonder when UNC became about money. The board continues to push increases that are not entirely (what is the term?) needed. Last year an athletic fee increase was approved -- despite no ideas as to what the money would actually be used for beyond the one-time cost of a renovation. And this year it looks for all the world like tuition for both in-state and out-of-state students is going to soar even though we've seen the planets align to allow for a less painful plan endorsed by both the administration and student government. And no, don't pat yourself on the back for planning to keep the in-state increase to $250 -- that's the maximum amount UNC-system policy will allow you to raise it. And then we're all familiar with your logic of arbitrarily raising nonresident tuition until you just plain can't anymore.

But I sometimes wonder why each of you even bothers to volunteer your time on the BOT. I'd be willing to wager it originally had something to do with loving the University. But somewhere you have each and every single one of you lost sight of making UNC better so that you can keep your eyes on your new prize: rankings, rankings, rankings. And so we end up with you raising a pot of money just because you can -- no matter how much it hurts others.

If you need to raise money, fine. But when you have no idea what to use it for, maybe that means the hikes should slow down.

Sadly, that would assume trustees actually care. To make another wager, I would also bet not a single one of you knows how much a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread costs at the grocery store. When was the last time you had to live for two weeks on Ramen Noodles and rice? How many of you have had to be late with your rent when the tuition check is due? When was the last time you stopped and thought about what students or their families would have to give up for your arbitrary increases? I can give you a hint about that last one: you didn't. You're out of touch and someone needs to hit you over the head with that fact.

Just because students won't drop out due to prices doesn't mean your policies don't hurt quality of life. When times are tough, yes, we can all suck it up and deal with it. But these hardships are on your heads, not "the economy" or "the cost of education."

Go spend a day following around a poorer student. Maybe then you will all stop being so selfish.

Chris Cameron
Class of '06

Chris, I can understand your concerns about tuition. I don't agree with all the tuition hikes either. But I also do not believe tuition is the best determinate of a high quality education. What doors will be opened for you as a result of the UNC diploma? Who did you learn from--people who read about research or who conduct research? What non-course related opportunities did you have here that you might not have gotten at a school with cheaper tuition? Unfortunately, as you well know, none of those benefits can be offered without funding, whether for faculty salaries or administrative infrastructure.

As Steve Peck points out, what looks like a money-only focus to you is being masked by a change in the basic funding model for higher education. In earlier days, tuition was icing on the cake of state funding. With state funding being cut so drastically, tuition has become a main ingredient in the cake itself.

I've been following the changing school finance issue for several years now and still haven't seen a model that allows us to maintain cheap tuition and high quality education. Without the state and without tuition increase, the other option is to take more money from the corporate world and what would that do the integrity of the university?

A couple of good stories about the university. I don't think it's sold its soul just yet.
Best Education Values
UNC among elite in graduating blacks

Chris,

Why would you think that any of the Trustees would pay much attention to your letter that generalizes so grossly about them as individuals and their possible motives? At the end of the day, knowing the price of things still doesn't mean that you know the value of anything.

Terri-

As I pointed out, the problem is when a pot of money is being raised for the heck of it. The administration isn't asking for the extra money, so I have to wonder why it's being milked from students and their families. This was exactly the case last year. When the money is going to a demonstrated need, then it's -- as the word implies -- a need. That is not the approach of the BOT in recent years. Ask them how much money the market-based tuition strategy will yield and they'll scratch their heads and stare. The point is to get *more* -- as opposed to *enough*.

Fred-

It's an open letter. I know they won't pay attention either way. I stood before them in person to plead on behalf of students last year and was treated with nothing but thinly veiled disrespect. The letter is not really for them -- their decision is made before they enter the room (which does smell a bit like a violation of the open meetings laws to me).

Chris, the new fee for athletics really irked me too. I guess fees like this are common at schools with smaller programs, but at UNC it really seems the revenue sports should be subsidizing the "olympic" sports.

Many grad students get their tuition covered but not their fees, so tacking little fees on here and there makes a huge difference for folks getting paid so little. I know this is a big deal for many undergrads, too.

The Indy article, however, didn't really speak to these issues.