Nick Palmer
ENGLISH 2367: Critical Research Project
Gavin Johnson
11 December 2017
Access to Higher Education Across the Big Ten
The ability for families to send their children to institutions of higher learning has never been equal, for a variety of reasons, such as disparity in income levels. However, an overlooked aspect of this inequality is states’ legislation that provides different amounts of funding to their institutions of higher education. An analysis of statistics relating to tuition prices compared to average income levels in states with large flagship universities can help explain why states’ rates of high school students attending college vary. The Big Ten Conference, an intercollegiate athletic conference consisting of schools in the Midwest and East Coast, is a group of schools that can be compared in these aspects due to their similar geographic areas, emphasis on research, and presence as their states’ flagship universities.
Public institutions of higher education are meant to, first and foremost, educate the students of their state. When public colleges first became an American concept, “public officials promoted higher education because it mattered for the broader public” (Mettler). In essence, the goal of public universities is to provide an accessible education to their state’s residents to stimulate economic growth in their local and state economies. The schools of the Big Ten Conference fit this ideal, as 13 of the 14 schools are public institutions, with Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois being the lone private university.
Taking a look at in-state tuition rates is perhaps more useful for a comparison of how well states provide accessible education to citizens, as these schools do receive funding from taxes paid by residents. Looking at the Big Ten, the most affordable tuition & fees for in-state residents is at the University of Nebraska, who for 2017-2018 had a cost of $8,978 (University of Nebraska- Lincoln). On the high end of the Big Ten is Northwestern University, with a tuition & fees rate of $52,239 (“Student Financial Services”). However, Northwestern is a private institution that does not receive state funding. The highest tuition of any public Big Ten Conference institution for in-state residents is at the University of Illinois, with an average tuition & fees rate of $18,370 (“Tuition”). A complete list of both in-state and out-of-state tuition rates across the Big Ten can be found in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively under the Big Ten Tuition Rates tab.
While a comparison of tuition rates can offer a glimpse into how well states are providing accessible education to their students, other data sources can offer different perspectives on what these different tuition rates mean in terms of how accessible it is. For example, the University of Maryland has the fourth lowest tuition in the Big Ten at $10,810 (“Costs.”), which is in the top third of the Big Ten Conference. However, the University of Maryland looks more impressive in its accessibility to in-state residents when looking at how states’ average household income compares to in-state tuition at Big Ten universities. In this regard, the University of Maryland is best in the Big Ten with tuition costing only 27.79% of the average household income in Maryland (Guzman). However, the state of Maryland only has 63.9% of their high school students attending college (“College Participation Rates”), which is fifth in the Big Ten. Essentially, there is no easy way to quantify how well states are encouraging high school students to attend post-secondary institutions, as states such as Maryland appear to make it very accessible but are fairly average in percentage of students attending compared to other states with Big Ten institutions.
One would think that the more affordable college is, the more likely potential students are to go. However, looking at Big Ten data does not necessarily show this in an overwhelming way. The top half of Big Ten schools in terms of tuition as a percentage of household income are, from lowest to highest percentage, Maryland, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Rutgers (New Jersey), and Indiana (which has both Indiana University and Purdue University). Yet, the top half of states’ college attendance rate, from highest to lowest, is Minnesota, New Jersey, Iowa, Michigan, Maryland, Ohio, and Nebraska. While 5 of the 7 states with the lowest tuition rates compared to household income also appear in the top half of the Big Ten in terms of attendance percentage, this does not appear to completely prove that lower tuition necessarily means higher attendance. For example, Wisconsin has the second lowest tuition as a percentage of average household income in the Big Ten, but is tied for the lowest percentage of high school students that choose to attend college (61.3%). Indiana, with Purdue University and Indiana University being at 7th and 8th place respectively in the Big Ten in terms of tuition as a percentage of household income, is the state tied with Wisconsin for the lowest percentage of students attending college after high school despite being average in terms of financial accessibility for the average household.
It would be ignorant to ignore that there are a variety of factors outside of these Big Ten schools that dictate how many of their state’s students are attending college. With the exception of Northwestern, all of the institutions in the Big Ten are their state’s flagship universities, and as such convey a general idea of how much the states prioritize educating their citizens as opposed to other expenses this money could be budgeted towards. However, there are other public universities in these states that perhaps offer different levels of accessibility than the flagship institutions, and therefore might skew the numbers of students attending college in general. Also, while Big Ten schools are fairly similar geographically, with the addition of schools such as Rutgers and Maryland to the conference there could be an argument made that the culture of attending college across various geographical areas from the East Coast to the western part of the Midwest varies, and as such decision making is not exclusively made based on the metrics analyzed in this research.
When looking at how well states provide accessible education for their own residents, it is interesting to consider a recent trend of public institutions being forced to look to out-of-state and international students for financial reasons. In 2013, Ohio State received more applications from out-of-state applicants than in-state applicants for the first time ever (Knox). From Autumn 2015 to Autumn 2016 alone, out-of-state students on Ohio State’s Columbus campus increased 6.2%, from 10,905 students to 11,586 students (Knox). In 2010, out-of-state students totaled just 7,632, and so there has been a substantial increase. It is reasonable to assume this is in part due to the financial incentive for the University to accept out-of-state students. While in-state undergraduates have had a tuition freeze since 2012, out-of-state students pay over $18,000 more a year than in-state residents (Knox).
The Ohio State University is not the only institution that has focused less on in-state residents and more on revenue. Looking outside of the Big Ten Conference, the University of California system, which includes schools across the state in various areas such as Davis, Los Angeles, and Berkeley, has been forced to change how they approach the admissions process for in-state and out-of-state students. A state audit in March 2016 showed that admissions at California’s public institutions had been favoring out-of-state applicants (Saul). This certainly appears to be financially motivated, as from 2002 to 2016 the University of California’s budget from state funds decreased from 25 percent to 9 percent (Saul). This prioritization of students that generate higher revenue goes against the ideas that public institutions were founded on. Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said during her campaign in the 2016 election that “We have got to get back to using public colleges and universities for what they were intended. If it is in California, for the children in California. If it is in New York, for the children in New York” (Saul). However, such an attitude could be considered an idealistic one. After the March 2016 audit, the University of California system president stated that every state in the country had been required to make similar decisions regarding out-of-state students in order to even be able to stay open for in-state students (Saul).
In conclusion, the Big Ten Conference is a good case study for how states provide accessible education to their residents as it contains the flagship state universities for the states within it. Looking at statistics relating to tuition rates, how these tuition rates compare to average household income in these states, and how many students attend college in these states can provide insight into how well states are providing access to education, as well as how the country in general is doing in its access to education. There are a variety of factors that influence how well states are able to provide accessible education, as well as many opinions on how states should prioritize in-state students that do not bring in nearly as much revenue as out-of-state students. The Big Ten Conference appears to represent many trends seen across the country at institutions of higher education, with rising costs and increased focus on out-of-state students changing how the public feels about public education.