Earlier this month, the Pac-12 athletic conference, which has been around for a hundred years, was dealt a devastating blow. In just a few hours, five member universities decided to leave for rival conferences that offered them huge financial rewards through TV-sports contracts. Jemele Hill, writing for The Atlantic, described this move as a clash between the long-term interests of schools and conferences and their insatiable desire for money. It is common for sports teams to prioritize money over the desires of their fans, but it is important to remember that this is not a story about professional-sports franchises. Surprisingly, all five of the universities that left are public institutions: Washington, Oregon, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State. This money grab in college football is just one indication of a larger issue plaguing American public higher education. It turns out that many of our public universities do not act like public institutions at all.
One would expect public institutions of higher education to be more egalitarian compared to their private counterparts. In K-12 education, public schools are free while private schools cost money. However, at the college level, the line between serving the public interest and pursuing private profit is not as clear-cut. Recent research conducted by a team of economists from Harvard’s Opportunity Insights project sheds light on this issue. While most media attention has focused on their analysis of elite universities and their favoritism towards wealthy students during admissions, the researchers also examined a sample of 139 institutions, including 50 public universities. Their findings reveal a complex situation where not all private schools show bias towards the rich, and some public universities actually cater more to the wealthy.
The character of your local university greatly depends on where you live, just like many other aspects of life in our divided nation. States like New York and California have highly regarded university systems with no wealth bias in admissions. If anything, these universities show a bias against the ultra-rich. The University of California system and the State University of New York campuses do not have concentrated power and money in a single flagship university. This allows them to keep tuition low and discourages them from prioritizing wealthy applicants. In contrast, other states, particularly in the South, have public universities that resemble the Ivy Plus schools in their approach to wealth and admissions. While these schools may not be highly selective, there are mechanisms in place that favor the wealthy, creating class divisions. Some public universities in the South function as private colleges for the children of political leaders and wealthy businessmen, perpetuating a system of privilege and preventing social mobility. This is evident in factors such as the low representation of Black students and the prevalence of out-of-state students who can afford the high tuition fees.
It is worth noting that universities like the University of Arkansas and the University of Alabama claim to work hard to recruit and provide financial aid to low-income students. However, their admission processes are biased towards out-of-state students who pay full tuition fees, thus favoring the wealthy. These policies are justified by arguing that wealthy students subsidize their less fortunate peers. However, studies have shown that this two-tier approach negatively impacts first-generation and low-income students, leaving them burdened with student loans, uncertain job prospects, and no degrees.
For low-income students, the dream of attending a flagship public university can quickly turn sour. Despite the influx of out-of-state dollars, families earning less than $75,000 still face significant financial burdens when attending schools like Alabama and Auburn. These universities are increasingly resembling private institutions, catering primarily to those who can afford the high costs. This trend is also reflected in the dominance of three mega-conferences in college football: the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12. These conferences, which include schools like Michigan State, University of Florida, Purdue, University of Kentucky, and Texas A&M, are known for their emphasis on sports and their high out-of-state tuition fees. This further widens the gap between public universities that prioritize profit and those that prioritize accessibility and affordability.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
