Ourview

By:

Shandra Jordan

Colleen Buhrer

Willow Welter

The newest Band-Aid plan for the budget is to create an optional

fixed tuition rate. Under this plan a university could choose to

enter into contracts with its students in which the students would

pay one set tuition rate for their four years there, regardless of

how much incoming students might be paying.

The main problem with this plan is it creates a loser no matter

who wins. Let’s look at two scenarios: First, say “Jane” comes to

CSU her freshman year and chooses to enter into this fixed tuition

rate at $3,000 when the regular tuition rate for an entering

student not joining the fixed tuition plan is $2,500. Best case

scenario for the university is that tuition doesn’t increase, or

increases slowly, never reaching $3,000, or at least not until Jane

is a senior. That way, the university gets more money from her to

offer more classes and better programs. But that’s not so good for

Jane. The second scenario, using Jane again, is that Jane enters

into the aforementioned fixed rate contract and next year tuition

skyrockets to $3,500. Great for Jane, who’s paying $500 less than

cohorts below her, but not so good for the university, which gets

less than it otherwise would from Jane.

If the legislation makes the program totally optional for

everyone including the universities (which is not clear), we’re not

opposed to the legislation per se. But we just don’t see how it’s

the best choice for CSU or CSU’s students.