Proposed Tuition Increases Explained

You’ll be digging into your couch to pay for this one.

By John Chandler (2L)
 
The U of A has a $60 million deficit. $20 million is to be paid off by students. Dean Bryden and the Students’ Union have different approaches to how to pay down the deficit. This is an issue that has not been definitively settled. What follows is just an outline.

Dean Bryden’s Approach

Dean Bryden proposes to increase tuition for 2010 first years by 32% and for upper years by 15%. Of this increase, he hopes to keep 60% of these funds within the Faculty of Law. The other 40% will go to the university’s Central Administration (CA). Of the funds going to CA, some will be allocated to help pay down the $20 million allocated to students. Dean Bryden’s proposal is only part of a program of “market modifiers” to be used by a number of professional programs at the U of A. CA does not plan to only implement market modifiers. It may ask for a student user fee as well. The user fee rate is not settled, but will probably be lower than the user fee proposed by the Students’ Union’s, as explained below.

A law degree costs more to administer than what students pay. Therefore, when Dean Bryden needs additional funds, he needs to ask for money from CA. He simply doesn’t have it. The increase in the funds will help facilitate funding for services that law students need, like support staff. The university will not cut back recruiting professors, however. Dean Bryden is most concerned about trying to prevent deterioration and strengthen the program. He is trying to make a proposal that gives the law school flexibility to get over problems not just in the 2010-2011 budget year but over several years.

With regards to the 60% to stay within the Faculty, Dean Bryden could use it as a buffer to prevent CA from requiring him to make cutbacks to our program. He could use it to hire more professors for required courses, provide more funding to students, or even have a day where we eat nothing but pie for free. Yay pie! Dean Bryden asked law students at a recent town hall meeting what they would like to see happen to this law school, so you as a student could have significant influence on how this 60% is allocated.

You may wonder where Dean Bryden came up with his figures. He took the top ten common law school tuition rates across Canada and calculated an average. The U of A fell below it. The proposed increase would raise U of A law school tuition rates to the national average. One expects the provincial government would approve this increase.

According to the Post Secondary Learning Act Regulations, there is a mandated 1.5% increase in tuition per year. The university has been told by the provincial government that its is willing to contemplate adjustments to the base tuition for professional programs that are justified by market conditions in those programs. CA has to get Board of Governors approval to present the proposal to the government, and then the government has to approve it. The tuition regulation which mandates that increases be kept at 1.5% would then be applied to that new base.

Students’ Union Perspective

The Students’ Union, according to Chris Henderson, director of Research and Political Affairs, proposes to implement a one time $300 per student “User Fee” with a $200 to $250 differential fee. This would help pay off the $20 million deficit that CA has requested from students. If there was still a debt next year, then the Students’ Union would be willing to start implementing programs like Dean Bryden’s to help pay off the remainder. One reason that the SU is asking that the university not be hasty in implementing tuition hikes is because if natural gas prices spike again, the deficit may disappear. If there still is a deficit next year, it is not expected to affect the quality of programming at the U of A in any way.

The SU’s biggest fear is that the mandated 1.5% tuition increase per year that was hard fought for by students in an era since passed will amount to naught. By setting a precedent to bypass the Post Secondary Learning Act Regulations, the university will have the ability to jump tuition up at will. The SU is concerned that there has not been enough consultation with students in this process. It is not rejecting “market modifiers” outright. However, the SU does not want market modifiers right now. The SU wants to take a guarded approach to the tuition problem. It wishes to see more of a consultation process used to protect student interests.

Increasing tuition will make it harder for students to manage, says the SU. Student loans are currently capped. Additional funding for those with maxed out student loans will be harder to find. Also, international students who moved here to attend law school will face a great deal of difficulty. Many came on a budget with the impression that potential tuition increases were governed by law.

If there is a need to pay off a deficit this year, then the SU thinks it does not make sense to pay off a deficit using student cash, and to increase tuition at the same time. The SU is concerned that if Dean Bryden’s proposal goes through, a system will be in place that will give the Dean of the law school a significant amount of funding to allocate however he or she chooses. Although Dean Bryden might listen to students on how to spend this money, his successors may not. This would not be a good position for the Law School to be in, especially if the tuition increase was accepted with the understanding that a certain amount of funding was to go back to students.

Author’s Note: It is important for you as a student to think about these perspectives and act accordingly. Get informed, ask questions, and demand accountability.