Budget Prioritization Issues and Budget Cuts in Higher Education - Essay Example

28 May Budget Prioritization Issues, Budget Cuts, and Tuition Hikes in Higher Education A pays tuition to extend their learning potential. Institutions of higher education are designed for tuition to help pay for the necessities a campus needs to ensure the students are getting just that with sufficient staff and faculty, updated facilities, high technology, and everything a student needs for proper learning. However, there seems to be a continuous cause and effect relationship because institutions of higher learning cannot depend on student tuition alone. Therefore, there have been responses made to budget prioritization issues, budget cuts, and the increase in tuition expenses. It can be problematic for a university that does not have the financial means to meet all needs of the students. However, students simply cannot be the sole income resource to help an institute of higher learning to completely operate and maintain the overhead. There may be an issue at some higher educational institutions and universities where the monetary resources are not there to completely provide to a student. This could result in a student not receiving the type of education they anticipate due to budget cuts and priorities made by universities. There then can be a digression at these learning institutions because universities often turn to increasing tuition to help accommodate for the losses. However, if no changes are being made to the university, are students really getting what they are paying for per credit hour in tuition? If students start to compare schools and determine they can receive the same credentials from universities which have more to offer because they have more income to create better learning environments but yet the tuition is higher, it is likely the student will choose a different institution. Therefore, a university finds itself in even more of an economic and budget stretch because of decreased enrollment due to higher tuition rates. Students then cannot afford the university and the university cannot then afford to offer the best technologies, smaller class sizes, more faculty, a variety of class options and also a larger variety of degree programs or certifications. When this happens, what exactly is the draw for a student to attend that college because no matter where a student chooses to go for higher educational needs, tuition is typically not cheap. Before looking at budget cuts and prioritization issues, one might just want to take a look at the common cost of a college class per credit hour to get an idea of how much a student might spend on their higher education. According to a website, SavingforCollege.com, there is an estimation of various higher learning tuitions that are paid out on average, depending on the type of school. According to the site, an Ivy League university has a tuition of $40,000 per year for a full-time student on average. If a student were to enroll in a private college in 2015, they could expect to pay $136,400 in tuition and fees for four years. A public college or university where the student is from the same state, a four-year tuition and fee projection would be approximately $39,400. It would be even more expensive for students from out of state because they pay out-of-state tuition costs. Now, if a student attended two years of community college and then attended two years of private college, they could anticipate shelling out $77,400 over four years. Keep in mind many students do not always make it out of their program in four years. Now, according to The College Board, which gathered data for the SavingforCollege.com website, tuition is projected to continue to increase based on inflation of the economy and the cost of operating overhead. Their projection fees for 2033, which is in 18 years is three times those initial figures so anticipate $323,900 for a private college for four years and $94,800 for four years at a public institution or university. This does not even include other expenses such as transportation, textbooks, supplies, equipment and room and board (SavingforCollege.com 2015). These are just the expenses of tuition on average. Universities must consider what will happen to their enrollment when they continue to raise tuition. Though 20 years ago student aid exceeded well over $1 billion annually. Back then, tuition was $2,000 per year on average. However, not everyone qualifies for student aid and enrollment does often depend on the price of tuition (Brinkman and Leslie 182-184). While those figures seem to be staggeringly expensive, one might need to consider the cost of what it would even take to operate the overhead of a higher education institution. Depending on the state which it is in, the focus of the curriculum, the size of the campus and enrollment, and several other factors significantly contribute to the budgetary needs of a place of higher learning. The operating expenses and fiscal budgets likely change from year to year based on the needs of the university, any updates to the accommodations which are needed for students, and even the cost of these materials in order to do so continue to inflate. From an outsider’s viewpoint without being on a board of directors for a higher education institution, knowing just how much a place needs to operate and provide for its students and faculty on a fiscal budget is hardly fathomable. To look at some budget information that extends relations between higher education and the government, it is beneficial to know that some states do have some government support to help tackle their budgetary expenses. When the state government makes higher education a priority, it can typically be very beneficial for the institution. However, this assistance generally only covers public universities and two-year colleges. In 2013, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities released a report acknowledging that the economy was hindering the ability to continue for students to obtain a higher education and that universities were also struggling. The report stated that there is becoming a shortage of qualified workers to take on new jobs in the workforce. Also, the global ranking in attaining a higher education has also significantly decreased to years prior (American Association of State Colleges and Universities 1). The answer the AASCU offered encourages a stronger relationship between states and public higher education institutes in order to get students on the right path so there would be opportunity and job availability in the United States as a whole. The goal of the AASCU is to acknowledge some strategies which might help to secure the state government and public higher education relationship because that support has been eroding in the past few decades. Their suggestion is to have state policymakers to encourage support for public higher education and consider it a priority to invest in. There also would be plans to make higher education more affordable to all members in the status quo who now see higher education as out-of-reach due to the cost of tuition. In essence, the organization wants to see the state try to help learning institutions or otherwise the economy will slump even more and the workforce will have jobs that no one is qualified to fill in the United States which will result in having to send them overseas (AASCU 3). It simply is not a relationship the state can back out on for the future of the country. However, this is not an issue that the state can cover alone. The public higher education system must make priorities. The prioritization process is significantly different on various campuses depending on the needs. Some schools may be well known for their engineering programs, one for their business college, one for their medical department, and so on, which means that it is likely that whatever the college is known for and holds high status for its outstanding programs, it is likely they will not touch those areas when looking to make cuts. If the university excels in a particular area, they will want to keep that as a degree program or certification focus to continue to draw that demographic of students in. It is not just a marketing tactic but it is about offering the best programs possible which seems to make some of these areas untouchable. That means that many of these universities will look at other areas to make prioritizations and budget cuts. Workshops have been conducted to help higher education institutions tackle their issues and prioritize their programs. It helps to hear from other colleges and universities in order to get ideas about where to start. In a workshop conducted in 2009-2010, a group of researchers who were trying to help determine how universities and colleges were tackling prioritization issues, the first question to ask group members representing their institution was what the driving force was for prioritization. The key reason was simply overall financial stress for the desire to program prioritize. Some could not just make cuts in all areas but had to pick and choose specific areas. It was often a part of the institution’s strategic planning. Many saw it as a planning, resource allocation and even an assessment process. Others were being pushed by a governing board that required set priorities and many others were being pushed to achieve overall academic excellence (Dickeson 2). Some issues that were addressed was an overall decline in the institution’s financial resources but also many wished to identify the potential for saving. They agreed that their top programs were the ones that needed the additional resources but that there were also too many programs which were under-resourced. Many felt they needed to have a change within their institution and that they often had to undergo the prioritization process in order to increase the salaries of faculty members. However, prioritization also was met with its own issues based on campus dynamics to ensure that setting priorities was not done incorrectly and they were not tackling big problems only to make a tough situation harder. Many also identified that they were met with resistance from the faculty because they wanted to ensure job security (Dickeson 2-4). In order to create a prioritization list, it is essential to look at criteria. One thing was to look at the core educational experience of faculty and students. There was a need to collect data about the success of different programs throughout the history of the institution of higher learning. Some of these data sources had to align with each university’s or college’s mission statement. It also had to focus on state requirements and goals, data of the labor market, and even national research. There needed to be an external demand for certain programs and much of that was based on employer feedback, placement reports based on whether or not students had found jobs after graduation, whether or not nearby rival institutions had added or cancelled programs, and even consider projections made by the United States Department of Labor. Then there was to be an internal demand for a program and whether or not students were enrolling in certain programs and that there was a list of majors and minors that students wanted. There also would be some curriculums that would correlate with other programs and there would be a cross-listing of these courses so people in similar degree and certification focuses could take similar courses. Other sources of criteria included the quality of the programs offered as well as the outcomes, the sizes and productivity of each programs and whether classes were filling and if there was an appropriate student to faculty ratio, what costs and expenses were associated with programs, what other types of revenue was coming in along with tuition such as grants, state or federal funding, or even gifts and donations to the universities (Dickeson 4-9). So there is a large picture to look at when considering prioritization for higher learning and it is not an issue that can be solved overnight but over a period of time but for many, time is of essence (Lederman). It is absolutely necessary to program prioritization for practitioners to see the overall dynamics which are impacting higher education and that many of these principles have to be maintained to fit various institutions (Dickeson 10). However, while colleges should cut programs in order to prioritize, many instead are creating them which then results in resources becoming much scarcer. This then results in a conundrum with potential budget cuts and the lack of resources available to students (Lederman). When institutions consider cutting resources and reallocating them in other places, it may cause a program to downsize and restructure. This could cause for the loss of student enrollment. However, it is necessary for institutions to realize that reallocation of existing resources is the way to go rather than counting on financial resources resulting on state and federal funding, alumni donations, or even tuition increases. Academic institutions must reconsider which programs are most critical to their market position and their mission statement or they otherwise start to limit and drain their current resources rather than generate more revenue (Fusch 11). State funding is shrinking for higher educational institutions because their focus is on public school education and there seems to be a significant amount of budget cuts in all types of government programs across America. Ever since the World Wars, higher education has increased which puts society in the place that it is now. People want to obtain better paying jobs and are reliant on higher education academics. Managing a university or college has even changed due to the demand to meet the needs of so many potential students. Prioritization is a huge undertaking and budgeting seems to be a form of micromanaging but support from the state is completely unpredictable at this time (Zusman 6). In the current time, educational institutions need to look at their spending patterns over history and try to find ways to obtain money to accommodate for deficits. Raising tuition does not seem a feasible solution because it does not solve all of the problems at hand and could result in lower enrollment though there is a huge demand for a college diploma. Higher education is becoming more important to obtain careers in today’s job market and the best way a university can determine what works best for them is an array of factors based on what the job demand is and what programs are their most popular and even most marketable. It is a tough job to examine the priorities within a budget to determine where monies could be allotted while still looking for ways to offer an education worth investing in. When the institutions find this balance, it becomes a win-win situation for the student and the institution. However, it is going to be an ongoing issue that will constantly need to be revisited because it is detrimental to the success of the university and in turn, the success of its students. Works Cited Brinkman, Paul T., and Leslie, Larry L. “Student Price Response in Higher Education: The Student Demand Studies.” Journal of Higher Education 58.2 (1987): 181-205. Ohio State University Press. Web. 22 May 2015. http://content.lib.utah.edu/utils/getfile/ collection/uspace/id/3047/filename/3533.pdf “Creating a New Compact Between States and Public Higher Education.” American Association of State Colleges and Universities. June 2013. Web. 26 May 2015. Dickeson, Robert C. “Higher Education Tackles Program Prioritization: Practitioners Raise Questions, Provide Answers.” Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Josey Bass Publishers, 2010. Web. 23 May 2015. Fusch, Daniel. “Securing New Resources in a Difficult Financial Climate.” Academic Impressions Higher Ed Impact. 2010 October. Web. 24 May 2015. Lederman, Doug. “The Pressure to Prioritize.” Inside Higher Ed. 11 Nov. 2010. Web. 25 May 2015. “The Real Cost of Higher Education.” SavingforCollege.com. Saving for College, LLC, 2015. Web. 24 May 2015. Zusman, Ami. “Challenges Facing Higher Education in the Twenty First Century.” American Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Social, Political and Economic Challenges 2 (2005): 115-160. Web. 22 May 2015. http://www.educationanddemocracy.org/Resources/Zusman.pdf Read More