UVa President Sullivan got this one right.
The University of Virginia Board of Visitors voted earlier this week to restructure AccessUVa, its student aid program. This fall students from the poorest families will have to take out loans as part of their financial-aid packages just like other students.
The University still will continue its “needs blind” admissions policy, which meets 100% of a student’s demonstrated financial need, but it will “standardize” aid packages to include federal student loans for all undergraduates. Previously, students from families with incomes below 200% of federal poverty guidelines, or about $46,100 for a family of four, had been getting a full ride without loans.
The move is expected to save about $6 million a year, helping to offset the increasing need for aid. In 2004-05, 24% of UVa undergrads qualified for need-based aid. Today, 33% do.
The administration justified the change, notes the Times-Dispatch, by arguing that Wahoo grads, regardless of family income, will earn similar salaries upon entering the workforce — averaging about $50,000 a year.
While President Teresa Sullivan endorsed the change, Rector Helen Dragas and one other board member opposed it. Said Dragas: “This action raises the cost of a U.Va. degree substantially for students from low-income families, hurting our diversity and coming at a time when we are already seen as elitist and unwelcoming.”
Bacon’s bottom line: There’s another spin to put on the board’s move, and it’s very different from Dragas’. The new policy creates a level playing field for all UVa students. Most people accept the principle that poor students require more student aid than students from families of greater means. But I find it extraordinary that poor students were getting a full ride while middle-class students were saddled with loans. Talk about social engineering! It is ridiculous to assert that the new policy “hurts” Virginia’s diversity just because poor kids have to take out loans like middle-class kids.
Dragas may worry about UVa’s image as an elitist institution, but if I were her, I’d be a lot more concerned about its image as an institution that favors the affluent and the poor, and screws the middle class…. which is the perception that a lot of middle-class people have.
The administration’s reasoning is exactly right. Wahoos may not enter as socio-economic equals, but they graduate as equals when it comes to their ability to find a job and pay off their student loans. This change corrects an injustice. I’m not sure that the administration necessarily saw the policy as an injustice — it certainly didn’t portray it as such — but all’s well that ends well. Kudos to Sullivan and raspberries to Dragas!
