Higher education means higher bills

Wildcat File Photo Arizona Daily Wildcat Dan Cassino

It is the interpretation of this dictum that leads to the present conflict and will cause more conflicts in the future. The Legislature interprets this phrase literally, taking it to mean that the public universities should be as cheap as can be managed. The Regents take it in an entirely different manner, pursuing a university system that is the highest quality for the least amount of money.

In general, students seem to be in favor of the Legislature's approach. If nothing else it means keeping tuition increases at about the rate of inflation, and regardless, we've never really liked the Regents. But as much as everyone loves the Board of Regents, they've got the right idea this time.

The interpretation of the Board of Regents is closer to what our goal should be. If we really wanted to make the public universities as cheap as possible, we should adopt something close to the community college model. Close down the research branches and any colleges too technical to have a high enrollment, reduce the campus down to a few buildings for administration, and hold most classes in local high schools or office buildings. Somehow, I don't think that this is quite what the Legislature has in mind. We need somewhat affordable universities, certainly, but we also need universities we can be proud of.

The strategy of the Regents: Slowly increase tuition in order to increase the prestige of the university. It makes sense both economically and in terms of the goal of any university.

Much of the money that the university makes from tuition comes from out-of-state students. Between tuition, registration and the multitude of little fees tacked onto the bill, a non-resident student paid about four times as much as a resident this year. As far more than one-quarter of our students are from out of state, it is possible that most of the money made from tuition comes from non-residents. These students come to our university because of the greater opportunities and better education that they will receive here. If they wanted to go to a community college, they could have done that at home. They are willing to pay for the privileges of attending a well-known, well-respected university outside of their state, and do so. The amount added to tuition if the Regents have their way is not so much that it will dissuade many of these out-of-state students from coming here. When these students do come to reap the benefits of the higher tuition, we charge them through the nose.

This is a sound strategy. The amount being added to tuition is an investment, and a good one at that.

But putting economics aside, there is an important political issue here. The Legislature is working under the assumption that the most desirable university system would be inclusive. It would have some degree of quality, but would be affordable enough that everyone would be able to attend. Ideally, it would be free to all Arizonans.

This would be a bad, bad idea.

What then, is the difference between a university and a high school? Traditionally, a high school has offered a broad, shallow education that provides graduates with enough knowledge to make them competent in a low-skill position. A university, traditionally, has taken the smartest and the wealthiest of those in the high school system, and given them specialized training. The goal is not to produce workers, but to produce the leaders.

The traditional university system is based on a simple premise: not everyone can be a leader. We need to move back towards this ideal. We have already seen the beginnings of the Legislature's model for the university. We now have remedial English and math classes, because we've found that many of our students can't write a paragraph, or do algebra. We find that students have no conception of the basic principles of science, or any culture outside its borders, so we have to mandate general education.

If the Legislature continues to have its way, the university will be cheaper and cheaper, more and more accessible. But we will lose something more than grants and professors, we will lose the spirit of quality, pride, and yes, elitism, that defines what a university is. I've already been to high school. I don't need to be there again.