Globalization, access, and tuition – creating a worldwide two-class economic system? by Will Coucheron-Aamot

Much has been reported recently about trends in globalization.  Higher education is no different.  But the trend toward globalization in higher education has long term implications for economic potential of the world’s citizens.  For example, Fareed Zakaria (2012) recently wrote a piece on the immigration policies of Japan, the EU, and Canada, with commentary on what the US could learn from these countries.  He highlighted Canada as the country with the best policy toward immigration.

Canada uses a point system to issue immigration visas, and the system is skewed toward skills.  Applicants earn points based on education, languages, and job experience; almost two-thirds of all visas were granted on economic factors.

My concern with this policy is that it favors wealthy individuals who are able to pursue an education.  Once I read this, I envisioned a globally mobile upper class of well-educated citizens, moving around the world to pursue job opportunities while less educated, poorer citizens were left trapped in areas with underperforming economies and limited opportunities.

The issue becomes more critical as we examine trends in higher education.  In the UK, tuition recently increased from GBP 3,200 ($5,300) to GBP 9,000 ($14,600) – tripling tuition costs in a country that only introduced tuition charges in 1998 (Labi, 2010).  In the US, universities are cutting programs, reducing faculty and class offerings, lowering enrollments, and admitting more out-of-state and international students (Kelderman, 2011).  The reductions in overall class size combined with the increase in out-of-state students may force less affluent students to make difficult choices: become an out-of-state student as well, paying higher tuition; or begin the college journey at a community college. 

Community colleges are facing the same challenges as four year institutions, and are uses similar tactics to deal with them: reduced class offerings and class sizes (Kelderman, 2011).  As more and more middle-income students enter community colleges, lower income students may increasingly become locked out of affordable classes they otherwise cannot afford (Pielke Jr, 2011). 

Universities are focusing their enrollment strategies on out-of-state students, especially international students, due to the fees these students pay.  At the University of South Florida, Florida residents paid $5,100 in tuition in 2009-2010 academic year; out-of-state students paid $15,900 (Fischer, 2010).  International students are not eligible for federal educational loans, and frequently pay in cash for their education. 

Critics are worried the reduced overall enrollments and increased non-resident enrollments will reduce diversity on college campuses (Keller, 2009).  Bringing international students may counterbalance this reduction in diversity, but serious concerns exist about this trade off.  Fewer African-American, Latino, and lower socio-economic level students will be admitted, reducing the diversity of American students on campus due to the increased tuition costs and smaller class size (Keller, 2009).  But adding international students to American classrooms will increase intercultural competency and understanding, a concept increasingly important in the world’s intertwined economy (Altbach, 2006).

So what, then, becomes the priority?  Exposing American students to a diverse group of fellow Americans with different racial backgrounds and varying economic levels of success, or to a diverse group of economically successful international students with a variety of cultural backgrounds and experiences?

I would argue that admitting both types of students is the ideal method of providing a dynamic learning environment for our students.  Focusing too narrowly on American students will reduce American students’ exposure to other cultures and other ways of thinking.  Focusing too narrowly on international students will create an educational system benefitting the wealthy class and reinforcing ideas about wealth and productivity.  Bringing both groups together creates an environment in which everyone, including international students, can learn from each other and the wealth of ideas brought forth.

One step toward creating this environment while maintaining college funding is to equalize tuition charges regardless of residency status.  Roger Pielke Jr (2011) advocates a flat tuition rate for students in the University of Colorado (CU) system.  Similar to the University of South Florida, the CU system charges different rates based on residency.  In-state students pay $7,700 per year while out-of-state students pay $29,000 – almost four times as much (Pielke Jr, 2011).  Pielke (2011) advocates moving to a flat tuition rate of $14,000 - a doubling of tuition for in-state students but a halving of rates for non-residents. 

A flat rate tuition system removes the impetus for universities to admit more non-resident students to resolve budget issues, and allows the institution to focus on the students’ academic and extracurricular qualifications.  A flat-rate tuition system will create a more challenging environment for students in the lowest economic ranges, but will also allow universities more room to focus on a student’s academic qualifications and not the dollars the student will bring to the campus.  Flat-rate tuition will not solve all the problems of access in higher education, but it will move us to a more equitable system based on academic ability and not financial ability.

References

Altbach, P.G., & Forest, J.J.F. (2006). International Handbook of Higher Education. New York: Springer.

Fischer, K. (May 2010).  “American Colleges Look to Private Sector for Global Recruiting.” Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com.

Kelderman, E. (February, 2011). “As State Funds Dry Up, Many Community Colleges Rely More on Tuition Than on Taxes to Get By.” Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com.

Keller, J. (January, 2011).  “California’s Public Colleges Face $1.4 Billion in New Budget Cuts.” Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com.

Labi, A. (December 2010). “British Lawmakers Approve Sharp Increase in Tuition in English Universities.” Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com.

Pielke Jr., R. (2011).  “The Problem With In-State Tuition.” Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com.

Zakaria, F. (2012). “Immigration Lessons for the U.S. from around the World.” CNN. Retrieved from www.cnn.com.