Flat rate fails to consider all students

As well-intentioned as the idea may be, a flat-rate tuition plan like the one Chancellor Michael Ferrari is pushing may do more harm than good.

According to a Jan. 24 Skiff article, the flat rate would reflect the price of taking 15 hours a semester. That means students will pay for 15 hours if they are taking between 12 and 18 hours. The idea is that students would have an extra incentive to take 18 hours a semester, thus graduating on time and improving the university’s poor four-year graduation rate.

The benefits end there.

Students who work full time, are involved in many organizations or have internships (or all of the above) may not be able to take advantage of a flat-rate tuition.

Students are told at Frog Camp to “Get involved, get involved and get involved.” Excellent advice. Campus clubs and organizations build friendships, character, leadership and memories. They are an essential part of the college experience. The drawback is that these activities are time consuming.

Many students who are involved in several extra-curricular activities don’t have time to take 18 hours a semester. Some don’t have time take 15. Encouraging a student to take 18 hours a semester is also asking to take time away from extra-curricular activities. Students can learn just as much, if not more, from such activities as they can in the classroom.

Surely the university doesn’t want to take away from that.

Certain students shouldn’t be encouraged to take 18 hours anyway. Incoming freshmen who are living on their own for the first time or are learning how to study shouldn’t take 18 hours. Many should only take 12. I have had a difficult time adjusting to college life taking 15 hours. I can’t imagine how hard it would be taking 18 hours.

Pushing students who have not learned good study habits is a recipe for disaster. It can cause burnout and stress, and some students could drop out.

Overcrowding could be another problem. The university boasts about its small class sizes. Asking students to take more hours would increase class size unless more classes become available. According to the article, if a large number of students take advantage of the flat rate, instructional costs could rise.

But the plan’s ultimate fault is that it is unfair.

Many students who work full time or have internships don’t even have time to take 15 hours. That means their tuition as a result would be increased by this plan. Non-traditional students who are work full time, support a family and try to make ends meet are not going to want to pay for the added cost. These students may be few in number, but they are a part of this campus just like everyone else. The university should not implement a rate that would price these students out.

We should not ask working students to subsidize the cost of a few students’ tuition so they can graduate in four years. It’s not right.

The reality is there are some students who will never be able to graduate in four years. Some students are heavily involved in extra-curricular activities, and others work 40 hours a week. The proposed flat-rate tuition plan does not address the needs of these students.

Ferrari should be commended for taking the initiative to try to improve the current four-year graduation rate. It will increase our ranking among other colleges, making our degrees sparkle a little bit more. But the university should look at better ways to get students to graduate on time.

The university should encourage students to take the conventional route to graduating in four years: summer school. This summer I will take my classes at Tarrant County College. I would love to take summer school here, but it wouldn’t make sense economically. I can easily go to TCC for much less.

By reducing summer tuition sharply, the university could create a major incentive for students to take summer classes. Not only that, they could make a buck off it. A lot of students do not go to summer school because they can’t afford it. Some students, like myself, will go to a junior college for summer classes. The money we are spending there could be coming into TCU.

Another route would be reduce the cost of tuition after so many hours. How about giving students a sizable discount after 15 hours?

The sales pitch could be, “Take 15 hours, get half off!”

While not as desirable as my first proposal, this would still have the university’s wanted result of getting students to take more hours, but without hurting those who cannot.

As a student, I urge the Board of Trustees to consider this while reconsidering a flat-rate tuition scheme. Although my proposals could mean less funding available to the university, sacrifices are going to have to be made if TCU wants to get serious about tackling this problem in a fair way.

Brandon Ortiz is a freshman news-editorial journalism major from Fort Worth.
He can be reached at (b.p.ortiz@student.tcu.edu).

Editorial policy: The content of the Opinion page does not necessarily represent the views of Texas Christian University. Unsigned editorials represent the view of the TCU Daily Skiff editorial board. Signed letters, columns and cartoons represent the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board.

Letters to the editor: The Skiff welcomes letters to the editor for publication. Letters must be typed, double-spaced, signed and limited to 250 words. To submit a letter, bring it to the Skiff, Moudy 291S; mail it to TCU Box 298050; e-mail it to skiffletters@tcu.edu or fax it to 257-7133. Letters must include the author’s classification, major and phone number. The Skiff reserves the right to edit or reject letters for style, taste and size restrictions.