Opinion: Letter

Biddy’s initiative not worth it

Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.

Related stories:

• Student input can shape debate (April 16, 2009)
• Itty Biddy more (April 1, 2009)
• UW tuition initiative good investment for all students (April 9, 2009)
• Biddy's initiative helps grads too (April 15, 2009)
• Biddy's initiative ignores ideological objections (April 7, 2009)

Also by Letters to the Editor:

• Clegg absurd, biased on CFACT (May 5, 2009)
• Fund peer tutors (April 28, 2009)
• UW policy consistent with nation (April 23, 2009)
• Biddy's initiative not worth it (April 20, 2009)
• A plan for better advising (April 20, 2009)

Sharing tools:

E-mail this article:

Your e-mail address:

Recipient e-mail address:

Optional message:

Share on:

• Facebook
• Digg
• Newsvine
• reddit
• StumbleUpon
• delicious
• Google
• Yahoo! My Web
• BlogMarks
• Linkroll
• Simpy

• Spurl
• Connotea
• Fark
• Feed Me Links

• Magnolia
• BlinkList
• Sphere
• LinkedIn

• Furl
• Technorati
• AddToAny
• Permalink

As a graduating senior, I have not paid as much attention to the Initiative for Undergraduates as I perhaps should have. However, Chancellor Martin’s last e-mail compelled me to look more closely at the plan that is being proposed, and I was somewhat surprised by the similarity to the Growth and Access Agenda proposed by UW-La Crosse in 2007. The agenda proposed a differential tuition scheme, part of which would be used to provide financial aid to students from low-income families with the hope of increasing diversity on campus. Similar to the Madison plan, there were extreme efforts made to educate the student population and gain their input on the plan. A campuswide survey showed a 65 percent approval from students for the plan, and the student senate voted nearly unanimously to approve it as well. Even with the wide student support and enthusiasm, legislators would not approve the plan, saying they were uncomfortable with using student tuition to fund others’ financial aid

Before coming to Madison, I was a student on the UW-La Crosse campus for three years, and I understand firsthand the drastic differences between a small campus and a larger campus of Madison’s size. While I have enjoyed being a student at Madison and am thankful for all the opportunities it has afforded me, I believe the sense of community fostered by UW-La Crosse is far more developed than that of UW-Madison. I was a strong supporter of La Crosse’s Growth and Access Agenda and still believe all La Crosse students would benefit from the increased campus diversity that would have accompanied it. However, I do not believe that students on the Madison campus will benefit from the proposed Madison Initiative financial aid plan. Rather than enhancing the student experience, the Madison plan merely reallocates the burden of university funding to students with parents above a certain income level. There is a budget shortfall that needs to be met, and students’ tuitions should play a role in that, but it is a responsibility that should be distributed equally among all students of Madison. Unless it can be demonstrated students paying higher tuition rates are receiving benefits from the initiative beyond simply meeting the university’s funding requirements, I cannot support this plan. It is my hope that all those involved in making this decision think critically about the proposal and reconsider the differential tuition and financial aid sections of the plan.

Sarah Witmer

Senior, mechanical engineering

switmer@wisc.edu

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Anonymous | April 21, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply

Excellent summary of the major problem of the Madison Initiative. Tuition reallocation between groups of students based on income level should be considered at the state legislative level; this is a major tuition structural change far above the domain of the UW-Madison chancellor or the Board of Regents to solely decide.

The high profile PR campaign and arm twisting initiated by Chancellor Martin aimed at the student government (elected by 8% of the students) and people reporting to the chancellor has so far excluded a huge segment of those who will actually be paying for these future tuition increases – the parents and grandparents of future UW-Madison students. There may be just a few moderates in the state legislature who will not favor families making over $80,000 a year subsidizing those under $80,000. Has this kind of program even be implemented at another Big Ten university or any other public university in the U. S.?

I’m sure the tuition increase is justified for all of the reasons provided by the administration. But instead of promoting this wealth shifting payment program, Chancellor Martin and her deans should be more aggressive in contacting potential private and corporate donors for student aid funding. The three previous UW-Madison chancellors were all quite successful at raising huge amounts of money for various buildings, projects, and financial aid.

Anonymous | April 21, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply

Good point. Just under half of the proposed tuition surcharge would be allocated to need-based student scholarships. In other words, an in-state student whose family makes more than $80,000 will see $122 of their $250 first-year surcharge go toward financial aid for students other than themselves. The amount stays proportionate to the increase in surcharge ($500, $750, $1000).

Community Comment | May 26, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply

” Has this kind of program even be implemented at another Big Ten university or any other public university in the U. S.?”

Actually most publics already use part of their tuition money to fund student aid. UW is among the last to do this.

Leave a comment

To comment anonymously or if signed in, leave name and e-mail blank.

Name

E-mail

Website

Remember personal info?

Comments