Tuition hikes revisited
Rice is not a backup school. We do not compete for the masses of “Ivy rejects;” rather, applicants compete for Rice. Why? Our academic assets are of course one reason, and they should never be overlooked or undervalued — but three beloved traits have made Rice unique throughout its history: residential colleges, small size and low tuition.
At 50 years old, the college system is thriving. Granted, critiques and concerns abound, but precious few would contest its premise, and the college system certainly will remain for the foreseeable future.
Rice’s size is about to change. The planned 30-percent increase is unlikely to alter Rice’s feel, but some classes will get bigger, and so will the colleges. Sometime in the next decade, our enrollment figure will more closely resemble that of other universities than liberal arts colleges. Rice will still be small, but less distinctly so.
Rice’s third historic gem, however, is nearly gone. The Board of Trustees’ approval of a 7.1 percent tuition hike for incoming students marks the third consecutive year of substantial tuition and room and board jumps. In 2003-‘04, Rice’s annual tuition and fees were nearly $10,000 less than the priciest Ivies — that’s not including room and board, which added additional savings. Next year, with new students paying $39,150 in total costs, Rice will close in on about $5,000 less than those same peer universities.
Rice has a different demographic than our peer institutions. At many top, private universities, the social scene is polarized; the difference between students who pay full price and students who are on financial is all too clear. But at Rice, few students seem to care whether their friends are wearing Kate Spade or Keds, or whether their NOD costumes are from Victoria’s Secret or Value Village.
We think it has something to do with being in Texas, away from the Eastern Seaboard — but it also has something to do with the fact that every year, Rice attracts smart, talented students, whose families do not qualify for financial aid, but who choose not to stretch their budgets to pay for those other, often higher-ranked institutions to which they were admitted.
We have no economic gap, and this has contributed to Rice’s unique sense of community. Our economic continuity has given Rice its Riceness. We pay two-thirds the tuition and only get two-thirds the pretentiousness in return.
We recognize Rice’s policies of need-blind admission and meeting the demonstrated financial need of every student. And we recognize the good that more funds can do for the university. But when future students see that benefit, will they really be at Rice?
This is not a new idea. We warned about the repercussions of a higher tuition on Rice culture in previous editorials (“National reputation depends on low tuition,” Feb. 18, 2005; “Tuition effects should be monitored,” Mar. 24, 2006). And we urge the administration to keep a wary eye on how they play with the mainstays of the Rice experience. Next year, why not make like Princeton and just keep tuition right where it is.
Other opinion stories
- Letters to the Editor
- SA needs its own Vision
- SA-student exchange needs mending
- Smoker lifestyle scorned, other vices tolerated
- Student mourns the loss of Comp Sci luminary
News
- Candidates debate SA goals, mission
- Columbia prof Marable: Blacks in higher ed face significant barriers
- Panels commemorate 40th anniversary
- Tuition to increase by 7.1 percent
Sports
- Baseball takes series from Long Beach State
- Focus on: Lauren Neaves
- Harknett continues dominance over ranked opponents
- Men’s basketball drops to fourth in Conference USA
- Swimming finishes second at Conference USA championships
- Women's basketball splits two games