Tuition Pays for What?
One of the most talked about issues these days of staggering inflation is the high cost of college tuition. According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor, a college education that cost $20,000 in 1980, costs $262,210.10 in 2024. These numbers are especially disturbing considering that the cost of a college education rose at nearly double the rate of inflation during the same period. As a result, more and more students graduate with enormous levels of debt.
Cue the “cavalry to the rescue” of some politicians who have generously offered to forgive student loans using, of course, taxpayer dollars. Nevermind that those taxpayers had no say in whether those loans should have been taken in the first place. Or that they chose to learn a trade, join the military, or start a business of their own instead of attending college. Or maybe they adopted the novel approach to taking out a loan which is, to limit the amount borrowed to what they could afford and then pay it back as soon as possible.
Putting the issue of student loans aside, the factors driving the enormous cost of a college education is a chronic problem that must be addressed. For years, analysts have observed that the administration of many universities has grown exponentially through added staff and programs unrelated to the academic mission. Manhattan Institute Fellow Heather Mac Donald, one of the foremost experts on the current state of academia has pointed out that the creation of DEI programs has added tremendously to the cost of university administrations.
One glaring example of the cost of DEI to universities is UCLA’s Vice Chancellor for DEI, whose starting salary in 2015 was $354,000, which grew to $444,000 by 2019. Other universities have similar hires. UC San Diego hired a Vice Chancellor for DEI in 2012 with a base salary of $250,000 along with other goodies such as a relocation allowance of $60,000, a $13,500 temporary housing allowance and numerous other incentives. In 2010, UC San Francisco hired a Vice Chancellor of Diversity and Outreach with a base salary of $270,000. Collectively, UC Berkeley supports its Division of Equity and Inclusion to the tune of $20 million per annum to pay for a staff of 150.
Locally, Rutgers University spends $9 million annually on DEI programs. This, at a time when New Jersey taxpayers are spending close to $500 million on Rutgers alone, with another $600 million going to fund the rest of New Jersey’s state universities. Mind you, these programs produce nothing and serve no tangible academic purpose. They oversee no quality control to ensure academic standards or even analyze the viability of the degree programs of the university relative to the job market for its students.
If universities are truly concerned with reining in the high cost of a college education, they can follow the lead of a growing number of private corporations and reduce or eliminate their costly and unnecessary DEI programs. Companies including John Deere, Ford Motors, Tractor Supply, Harley-Davidson, Lowe’s, Coors and Brown Forman Beverage have announced the scaling back or elimination of their discriminatory DEI programs and the costs that come with them. No one will miss them, in fact, existing HR departments are very effective in ensuring fairness in all facets of an organization’s operation. Protecting against discrimination and safeguarding opportunity for everybody is not just good policy, it is the right thing to do for everyone.
Universities in particular, should be bastions of opportunity for all. Right-sizing administrations with an emphasis on fulfilling the core mission of academic instruction will safeguard objectivity and reward merit at every level of higher education.
