The “California” in “University of California” is seemingly becoming less of a priority for university administrators.
After the recent hike in nonresident tuition, the University saw a hike in nonresident admissions by nearly 3,500 for the 2015-2016 academic year.
The UC has set an unsettling precedent. When it raised nonresident tuition and subsequently favored out-of-state students over California residents for acceptance, the University effectively said that this large system of California public universities values revenue over serving California taxpayers.
In order to increase its effectiveness as a truly public university system, the UC cannot allow this year’s trend to become a lasting paradigm. Funding is tight; that much is certain. But extra money is going to have to come from somewhere other than already-overpaying students’ pockets.
This is far from a simple task. Given the decrease in the state’s prioritization of education in its budget over the past few decades, public universities are running out of options to secure sustainable funding.
Absent any such change in state funding, the UC has and continues to put a good deal of the strain on the backs of students. This academic year, the weight on nonresident students’ shoulders is getting even heavier.
The state needs to help allay the problem and step in with heavier tuition subsidies. If it restructured its budget, cut spending on institutions like overcrowded state prisons or taxed the high-income residents more heavily to fund education, the University could possibly use the funds to subsidize student fees, although it’s not exactly a sure thing that it would use the money wisely. Otherwise, the UC will be able to continue to use students as pawns in the fight to remain financially stable.
But that doesn’t justify the University’s actions. Taking advantage of the tuition gap between resident and nonresident students makes the UC more like a private corporation whose goal is to increase revenue at the cost of students than a public institution of higher learning meant to improve the well-being of the population it serves.
Although it may not be completely fair to nonresident students, California should ensure its institutions are accessible to Californians first and foremost.
But the UC is quick to bring up the numbers it says show that nonresident tuition funds the education of about 7,000, or roughly 3.7 percent, of 188,300 undergraduate students, supposedly proving that the University is maintaining some level of accessibility for Californian students. It also claims that it accepted 1,000 more in-state freshmen in the fall of 2014 than it did in fall of 2013.
But there are other statistics we need to consider.
About 1,000 fewer California freshmen were admitted into UC schools in 2015 than in 2014. Since 2013, nonresident admissions have gone up by about 6,500, including a 12.8 percent increase from 2014.
Our campus has the lowest acceptance rate for in-state applicants and the highest for nonresident applicants in the UC. More than 40 percent of the admitted freshman class was made up of nonresident students while only 16.2 percent of in-state applicants received acceptance letters. Based on these numbers, it’s clear that residents are, however slowly, being phased out.
California residents applying to attend UCLA are being turned away and nonresidents are being economically exploited. In-state students simply don’t bring in the same kind of money as nonresident students, and their prospects of getting accepted are taking a beating for it. Nonresidents, on the other hand, are being robbed blind because the UC knows it can do so without any real regulations.
Having a large number of nonresident students in our system does wonders for diversity and builds our community, but this trend should concern members of the California community that are trying to attend a university in their home state.
To make up for scarce funding, our California schools are shutting out the population they are supposed to prioritize.
The reason public universities exist is to serve, not to economically exploit students or give up spots to the highest bidder, even in times of financial turmoil.
Putting more pressure on students is never the right way to go. Admitting more nonresident students to make up for budget deficits may be a short-term solution, but it only defers the problem.
A public school system that views its campuses as revenue centers rather than institutions meant to serve students at any cost is a failed one. The UC is quickly entering this dangerous territory and needs to get its priorities in order before it has no chance of turning back.