The Same Old Story at UVA

Instead of substantive change, the Board of Visitors voted to give students one of the highest tuition increases in the country: 23% over two years. UVA is among the nation’s finest public institutions. But instead of pursuing the innovation and thoughtful prioritizing that should be the hallmark of a premier university, its leaders seem content to take the path of least resistance: just keep raising tuition.

It’s true, the state contributes a smaller percentage of the overall budget than it used to; but real leadership involves more than passing costs on to students—especially when those 2013 graduates who borrowed already have an average debt of $21,815.

Helen Dragas, the former rector and current member of the board, penned a persuasive op-ed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch that highlights these concerns.

Dragas said that it’s important for UVA to refocus on its core mission and on keeping costs under control. She also cited an interesting statistic: almost three in five UVA students favor controlling costs to aid low income students, whereas only about a quarter backed the board.

Said Dragas: “Solutions aren’t easy. But that’s exactly why we need more minds working to find them. It’s time for a 21st century approach to seeking public input and engaging in a collaborative dialogue that leads to better decisions—made with students, parents, legislators and taxpayers, and not just on their behalf.”

That sounds a lot like the recent report from Chairman of the CUNY Board and former Yale University President Benno Schmidt, “Governance for a New Era.” The report is a roadmap for college trustees who are looking for ways to keep their institutions agile and innovative in facing 21st century challenges. The report highlights key areas where governing boards can improve.

It certainly could be valuable to the UVA trustees, following their decision to pass the buck to students. Frankly, reflexively imposing higher costs on families with more income isn’t the way to increase access. Dividing students into the “haves” and “have-nots” while turning a blind eye to the real problem of overall affordability at U.Va. is an affront to those who made the institution great. 

The board’s new policy means middle class families may well find themselves locked out of student aid and loaded with more debt. And even the supposed low-income beneficiaries should have pause, since past promises of sustainable financial aid have proven rather hollow. It was only two years ago that students were taken by surprise when the Board abandoned its no-loan policy for low-income students as too expensive. 

Mr. Jefferson’s university needs to remember the broad, democratic principles of access to education he championed.