Serving the students of U.S. News and World Report

I was actually quite surprised to see that no one blogged about this week's conference on higher education costs held in GW's Jack Morton Auditorium for a couple of reasons:

1. The conference was sponsored by the Public Agenda and the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and was televised on C-SPAN - I know that GW students are somewhat used to the university showing up on C-SPAN or CNN given the amount of televised events held here, but it's still pretty cool.

2. The conference featured University President Steven Knapp - again, cool to see something GW-related (in this case, our president) on TV.

3. One of Knapp's answers was simply crazy - I thought that given the fact that this issue directly affects students, as well as the fact that one of Knapp's answers was off the mark (which I talk about below), everyone would want to write about this. But I guess the more popular story wins in the end - it's understandable that when choosing what to write, SA Elections are a better draw that President Knapp speaking about tuition. In all honesty, if I hadn't waited until the last minute to post this week, I probably would've continued writing about the upcoming elections.

But I digress. Back to Knapp's answer...

According to The Hatchet, Knapp listed one of the reasons for the university's high spending as U.S. News and World Reports' annual college rankings:

"'Every one of the measures for which you get high marks in rankings in
(U.S. News and World Report) works against cost saving. Every single one of
them,' Knapp said, as he listed the various ways schools receive points, such as
high expenditures, technological capabilities, and a low student-faculty
ratio."

I understand that the university wants to stay competitive and look prestigious, but spending more money to comply with a magazine's ranking system that is fast being regarded as unfair and a poor indicator of a college's actual performance? If it's a choice between having a marginally better ranking or coming out of college without five or six figures worth of debt, I'm willing to drop a couple points to save a couple bucks.

So it hasn't been your day, your week, your month...

This week must've been a busy one for GW's PR department.

First came the news that after being named the most expensive undergraduate university in the country, GW is being used as an example by Sen. Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, to show how the cost of college has skyrocketed.

Then, news from the Hatchet that only after months of shocked parents and prospective students witnessing beer bottles and passed out coeds on their Thurston Hall tours is the dorm - arguably one of the most infamous in the country - no longer being used to show prospective students what college dorm life is like.

Also from this week's Hatchet is an opinion piece from senior editor David Ceaser on the downturn that J Street has taken over the past five years.

And if all that bad news wasn't enough, the men's basketball team is at the bottom of the Atlantic 10.

On the bright side, no one put up any anti-Muslim posters this week or drew swastikas on their door in a twisted attempt to elicit sympathy from the GW community. And, the women's basketball team is ranked 14th and 13th in the latest AP poll and ESPN women's basketball polls.

Okay, let's make college more affordable!

According to the GW Hatchet, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is proposing legislation that would require more endowment profits from Universities be put toward financial aid. Basically, Senator Grassley would like to mandate that Universities take profits and rather than build new residence halls or raise salaries, the universities put money toward financial aid. In the case of GWU, it would mean that out of their $46 million endowment profit, they would have to give $2.3 million (according to the Hatchet, GWU gave $2 million to financial aid).

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee, has requested endowment data from 136 colleges, including GW, as he prepares for possible legislation to mandate increased financial aid spending at private institutions. Representatives from Grassley's office said they are particularly concerned about into their large tax-free endowments and help make college more affordable for where endowment money is allocated each year for schools with a bankroll of more than $1 billion.

I'm glad that the Senator is trying to help students. The average BA costs $19,000, but there are many students who pay much less and much more.  There are also many students whose parents foot the bill (Senator Grassley is one such parent for his five children).  However, if Senator Grassley (or any other Senator for that matter) wanted to help students lower the cost of college, he would not require that Universities use their own internal profits to pay for financial aid. 

Part of the rising tuition at most universities is to cover the yearly operating costs of the university (everything from paying staff and faculty to making sure students have cable in the their rooms).  If the Senator requires that universities funnel more money into financial aid, that means less tuition income and less operating budget for the university, which ultimately means higher tuition for students not receiving full financial aid. 

I'm all for making college more affordable and giving every single young person in America the opportunity for college.  But if a senator is going to try to tackle the problem, then he should get serious about funding education, not just telling private universities what they must do with their private income.