Hello, everyone.
Week five is finished. If yours was anything like ours, it was a long struggle to reach the semester’s one-third mark. And, unfortunately, we let it show.
We had a number of mistakes and errors make it into the newspaper this week. The one I will discuss is an article that examined how the university will compare itself to other universities once the guaranteed tuition plan takes effect. Vice Provost for Enrollment Management Craig Cornell raised several concerns about the article.
The premise, I think, is an interesting and valid one. The university has long compared itself to other universities to determine how well we stack up against everyone else. Administrators call those universities “peer institutions,” each one chosen because that peer is similar to Ohio University in some way. So, there are peers in Ohio, peers across the nation and peers that match up in specific categories (e.g., research, institutional size etc.). Administrators then use these groups to determine how well things are going.
So, I think it’s an important topic because Ohio University will be the only university in the state to have a guaranteed tuition model, and that model will distort tuition rates when compared to the schools against which we’ve measured ourselves.
Problem is, the article dropped the ball along the way. Firstly, it stated that the university has differential tuition, which means students’ tuition would be based on the specific college they attend. Ohio University doesn’t have that. Administrators debated the idea along with the guaranteed tuition plan, but the latter won out. Tuition is the same for everybody, though technology fees do differ from college to college.
Second, the article presented a series of facts and quotes that were true, but it did not offer a clear and logical defense for its central premise. No true conclusion was reached. For that reason, as well as the significant error, we decided to retract the article completely.
Like most vital university decisions, the guaranteed tuition plan is complex and confusing. And, truth be told, the explanations and PowerPoint presentations can be difficult to understand. But that’s why we, as journalists, do what we do: break down the complex into manageable and easy-to-comprehend pieces.
We’ll by no means stop investigating, but we will be sure to get the facts correct in the future.
Ryan Clark is a senior studying journalism and the editor-in-chief of The Post. Tell Ryan about your week five at rc348710@ohiou.edu.
