Promoting Economic Diversity in Higher Education

Patrick Sutton

February 28, 2007

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Promoting diversity in higher education is not limited to racial identifiers, and since Pell funding has garnered so much media attention lately, economic diversity in higher education has become a hot topic as well. In both regards—economic and racial diversity—many argue that changing college admissions procedures to address these situations is nothing more than a “band-aid” approach; the underlying problem being access to more competitive k-12 schools. If the student has access to a better quality education, he or she will have more of an opportunity to rank competitively on entrance exams, in addition to being able to secure academic scholarships.

“How am I ever going to pay that?”

Another problem in promoting economic diversity in higher education lies in the fact that many low income individuals actually avoid accumulating debt—in the form of student loans. A 2005 report entitled “debt dilemma” states:

“ Since the early 1980’s, student financial aid has quietly transformed from a system relying primarily on need-based grants to one dominated by loans. As grant programs fail to match tuition increases, more students are borrowing, and they are borrowing more. 56% more of today’s students have federal subsidized loans than students 10 years ago.(…) Students who fear borrowing may not seriously consider the benefits of higher education, relegating themselves to lower-paying jobs and fewer opportunities.”

At a certain point the “band-aid” argument become irrelevant, because the fact is that a college degree allows individuals to earn more—irregardless of how the student got into the school, or which school he or she attended.

To that end, recent initiatives that have been set in place in order to promote state-funded higher education, seem to be a plausible solution. If states like North Dakota, North Carolina, Arizona, etc. succeed in providing free or low-cost education to the poor, two things are accomplished: the individual student will enjoy greater earning power—and if the

SOURCE: Center For The Study of Education Policy, Illinois State U.

student stays in the state—will in turn provide more revenue for the state.

State funding of higher education has been on a rebound for well over a year now, and if initiatives like North Carolina’s Mike Easley and New York’s Eliot Spitzer continue, more states will enjoy generous funding, which in turn will provide the economically underprivileged with more access to higher education.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Sources-

Fischer, Karin; “State Spending on Colleges Bounces Back”; The Chronicle of Higher Education; 1-13-06

The Student Debt Dilema: Debt Aversion as a Barrier to College Access; The Project on Student Debt; September, 2005