IBJNews

Indiana universities face questions over tuition increases

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana's top higher education official warned Monday that legislators may demand explanations from public colleges and universities if the schools approve tuition hikes in excess of caps recently suggested by a state panel.

Earlier this month, the state's higher education commission asked Indiana's seven public colleges and universities to raise tuition for in-state students by no more than 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent.

If schools approve sharper tuition increases, top lawmakers may have some tough questions, said Teresa Lubbers, the state's higher education commissioner.

"The first time we did this, in 2009, legislative leaders on the budget committee did call the institutions to have them explain why they did what they did," Lubbers said. "I wouldn't be surprised if they did that again."

Although the universities aren't required to follow the commission's tuition recommendations, Lubbers has warned that higher increases threaten to "price people out of their opportunity for a middle-class life in Indiana."

Indiana University has proposed a 3.5-percent tuition increase for in-state students, but when a new rehabilitation and repair fee is factored in, IU's overall cost increase will be 5.5 percent in 2011-12 and 5.4 percent in 2012-13. Those increases will need to be approved by the university's board of trustees, which will meet to consider the proposals on May 31.

IU President Michael A. McRobbie said in a statement that the university has successfully reduced some of its costs by making its administrative "processes leaner and more efficient" in response to significant drops in state revenues in the recent years.

But he said IU cannot cover all of its anticipated needs by continuing to reduce its administrative costs.

"To maintain our academic quality and fully serve the needs of our growing student population, these recommended tuition increases also are needed," McRobbie said.

Ball State University has announced a proposal to increase tuition and fees by 3.9 percent next year and by an additional 4.9 percent in 2012-13. That and other tuition proposals will be discussed at a May 31 public hearing, and then presented to the school's trustees at their June meeting.

Ball State said the increases are necessary to fund its operating budget.

"I believe this is the right decision for our students and the university," said Randy Howard, vice president for business affairs and treasurer. "Our mission is to provide an education that prepares them to succeed in a rapidly changing economy."

Purdue University has proposed raising the cost of attending the West Lafayette campus by 4.5 percent for in-state students — an amount that includes a 1-percent increase for a fitness and wellness fee approved by state lawmakers. That fee will be phased in over three years, beginning with a $91 charge for the 2011-12 academic year.

Lubbers said she was heartened that Ivy Tech Community College and Purdue's three regional campuses have "clearly abided" by the commission's tuition suggestions by proposing increases of just 2.5 percent.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, said recently that he hoped college officials have been getting the message that families just can't take another big increase.

Lubbers said holding down tuition increases is important because higher costs mean college will out of the reach for more young people in the state. He also said many young people cannot afford college at all, while others never complete a degree because they can't pay for several years of classes.

"We understand that all enterprises have legitimate expenses and costs but we believe Hoosier families and students are especially stressed right now," she said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Change of Trajectory on Capital Expenditures?
    Government lacks a willingness to confront the university/building cartel.

    Indiana colleges want $700 million for new buildings

    http://www.ibj.com/indiana-colleges-want-700-million-for-new-buildings/PARAMS/article/25037

  • Indiana Reform Plan
    The Indiana Commission on Higher Education is toothless and should be replace with a Indiana Board of Regents who have the power to demand accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education in return for the billions of dollars in state and federal funds that they receive each year.
  • College Dropout Factories
    Below are the Washington Monthly's 2010 rankings of the 4-year public and private not-for-profit colleges in America with the worst graduation rates.

    This list does not include 2 year colleges like Ivy Tech which also have terrible graduation rates.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings_2010/dropout_factories.php
  • Higher Education Reform
    U. S. Secretary of Education demands accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education.

    Listen this this!

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6146394
  • Its Time For Action
    Higher education has financially been put out of reach for many Hoosiers after universities have increase tuition by over 100% just in my kids life times.

    Our state government funds some of the lowest performing "higher education" institutions in the nation.

    The state legislature should completely cut off funding to these low performing state colleges and force IU and Purdue to spin off or close there redundant and failing campuses outside of Bloomington, Lafayette, and Indianapolis.

    These organizations need to get a dose of the new reality we all are facing.
  • make them teach
    Look at most of the tenured professors at the big state schools. Many of them make over $100k/yr and only teach a class or 2. They spend more time consulting than they do teaching. Maybe if they actually did 40+ hours of work for the university, it wouldn't be so expensive.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT