When state funding for education is dropping, it is reasonable for Ohio University to declare that it needs to change something to plug holes in its budget.
For the past few years, that change has come in the form of tuition increases. The most recent increase was approved in April and provoked a large amount of backlash and protest from students concerned about accruing debt.
The university finds itself in the same situation now. At yesterday’s Board of Trustees joint Academics and Resources committees meeting, Vice President for Finance and Administration Stephen Golding said tuition couldn’t support the costs of running the university.
Therefore, he said, “We need to think differently about tuition and think about the future.”
At Wednesday’s Student Senate meeting, Golding and Executive Vice President and Provost Pam Benoit presented two alternate tuition models for discussion. The first, differential tuition, would charge students differently based on major, program, college or class standing.
Though we do not support the idea of differential tuition because it might discourage students from studying more expensive subjects, we support the discussion of new ideas among university administrators.
Additionally, we encourage further investigation of the other model Benoit presented: guaranteed tuition. The model would allow students to pay the same rate for their full four years.
Though Golding said the guaranteed tuition model has failed at other universities because of cost underestimations, perhaps the discussion should not end there. If the university needs to “think differently” to stay affordable, all options should be open to discussion, not prefaced with “these ideas don’t work.”
We are pleased that Golding and Benoit discussed new ideas because college affordability should be a top priority of the university. But we urge them to avoid suffocating outside-the-box thinking during this discussion and keep exploring fresh options.
Editorials represent the majority opinion of The Post’s executive editors.
