University President Dave Frohnmayer is on an island. Following a presentation by the Oregon University System’s fee committee to the State Board of Higher Education earlier this month, Frohnmayer is the lone dissenter among seven OUS presidents regarding two proposals to amend the schools’ fee structures.
The first proposal would charge separate tuitions for individual students. These rates would be contingent on each student’s major, and the costs associated with each department. The second would combine student fees with tuition, creating a flat rate for all students.
This point Frohnmayer was particularly opposed to.
“Institutions must have autonomy to set tuition and fee policies that are consistent with their unique missions and program offerings and are responsive to the needs of students enrolled on their campus,” Frohnmayer said in a five-point memo outlining his opposition to the OUS proposal.
He has long petitioned for greater control in setting the University’s fee and tuition policies. But now he finds himself alone against the entire OUS system. This has to make one wonder: What does Frohnmayer know that the rest of the OUS doesn’t? The more likely situation is that the fee committee’s recommendations run counter to his desire for more internal control in these respects.
The questions one must ask then are what course of action will save University students across the state the largest amount of money, and where the money will go. This is what fee transparency is about at its most basic level.
As it currently stands, students at OUS institutions are paying a variety of resource fees. These include, but are not limited to, building fees, technology and health services. They are in addition to the cost of tuition, and are charged separately to a student’s account. Their cost can run up into the hundreds of dollars, and they aren’t covered by financial aid.
Under the new system, students would have greater access to their accounts, and a better idea of where their fees are coming from. If student fees and tuition were combined, the sum of these figures would potentially create the illusion that the price of enrollment at the University has risen. But the added costs would come from money students are already paying, so in reality there would be no change to students’ costs.
But Mr. Frohnmayer appears to have his own ideas. The five-point memo to the OUS outlines his concerns over any change in the fee structure. He believes these proposals run counter to the idea of transparency. Stressing his desire for greater individual control over financial matters at the University, he concluded his memo by stating “… the pressure to adopt a system-wide approach to every issue impedes all of our institutions’ ability to meet these challenges with truly effective strategies that recognize the diversity in program and mission among Oregon’s universities.”
And yet, everyone except for Frohnmayer believes ‘effective strategies’ are already on the table. Making the University’s fee structure more transparent starts through the resolution of the system’s ambiguities. For students here in Eugene, one ambiguity is why President Frohnmayer isn’t on board.