Yale Daily News

As long as we're thinking outside the box here, why shouldn't Yale auction off 5-10% of its admission slots to the highest bidder and use those monies to subsidize free tuition for everyone else. There are surely enough oil sheiks, drug barons, Russian oligarchs out there willing to pay whatever it takes for the quality and "brand" of a Yale education.

There's a lot of padding here, but one thing I had to keep reminding myself is that Yale's financial aid policies are a lot more generous than they were even a couple years ago. Had they grandfathered in another class or two, I'd have $65,000 less debt to pay off.

The headline is misleading, because there doesn't seem to be any question that Yale could easily be tuition-free, and the perennial protestations of administrators ("Remember the seventies! We have to hoard every penny!") are pretty lame. Ditto the old "The endowment's in a MILLION little pieces and we can't use it for ANYTHING!" story, which I'm glad to see Kaplan (sort of) refute here.

Slightly less ridiculous than the argument that free tuition might somehow hurt Yalies is the argument that it might accidentally help too many. That defense ("Well, why SHOULDN'T you pay, Richie Rich?") also misses the point: Many qualified low-income students (and their families) have no idea of the changes made to Yale's financial aid in the last few years, because the University has done a spectacularly poor job of marketing those changes. Doing something radical like declaring tuition "free" would get people's attention in a way that Yale's recent policy (quietly following Harvard) does not. It would do more to bridge the class gap at Yale than a thousand "student ambassadors."

If Yale is really so concerned about the move coming off as a subsidy for the wealthy, it's not hard to fine-print in a graduated-fee structure without significantly undermining the good PR this move generates. This doesn't eliminate all the other barriers to entry for low-income students (who don't have access to private tutors or SAT training, for example), but it remains a big step forward that costs Yale next to nothing.

Yale shouldn't be free for all students; I can agree on that. But how about doing away with the idea "allowing" students to take out college loans is a form of University financial aid? That is not aid, it's a loan. This is not giving the wealthiest families in America a break, this is giving middle class students the proper amounts of financial AID that is required.

What no one in this article mentioned in that "free tuition" would likely reduce the socioeconomic diversity at Yale.

We would see what could only be called the "suburbanization" of Yale (as if it needed it ...)

With free tuition, Yale's admissions process would be flooded by applications from everyone and everyone's friend, as they sought to take advantage of the free tuition, regardless of whether Yale was already their top choice. But this flood would probably come primarily from upper-middle/middle class students: white, suburban, who perhaps can't afford Yale today, but would come if it were free. It would do absolutely nothing to increase applications from low-income areas: to do that, outreach and college prep are the other ways.

If anything, by making the applications process even more selective, it would disadvantage those lower-income students who can't but themselves 100 bumps on the SATs, can't afford to or don't have access to 12 APs, and don't have coaches to write their application essays (or at least edit them).

Yale: invest in research, actively go after the top professors in math and science, continue to build and redesign the social sciences and humanities, and reward students who go into public service or other low-paying careers.

Luckily, it's obvious the administration feels this way already, but, let me agree:

DO NOT MAKE TUITION FREE!

Give some more money to the Drama School so that Actors, Directors, and Playwrights don't leave with the debts as large as those of Lawyers, Doctors, and Business Executives.

Why not just offer more financial aid/scholarships? So the hard-working academics are rewarded. After all, most of the legacies at Yale knew they didn't have to work as hard to get here. You could also take salary into account? Why weren't these questions raised?

ditto school of art

I'm amused. This is basically like the Bush tax cuts - it would be a defacto "subsidy for the wealthy". Those who pay full tuition would benefit a lot more from this policy than would any of the low-income students who benefit from Yale's generous financial aid policy.

/full disclosure - I support the Bush tax cuts.

Yale should raise tuition in order to continue to improve education (already best undergrad program in the world, hands-down, but other schools are constantly trying to play catch up). Extra $$ should be used to improve financial aid and recruiting among disadvantaged groups.

Any school that offers a tuition-free education will have the greatest chance of attracting the top students regardless of their ability to pay. Yale, Harvard, Stanford, and Princeton can compete head to head for the strongest students, and rewards for merit will be available to every student. Under this system, those who have worked hard and achieved (and whose families can pay) would benefit just as those who have overcome financial/social barriers.

While I think that it is difficult to refute the idea that making Yale free is equivalent to a gift to the wealthiest students, some students at Yale still end up with overwhelming debt, and it's painful to watch. This is a phenomenon especially prevalent in the graduate and professional schools where parents have already paid $180,000 for undergrad and balk at up to $255,000 more for 2-4 more years. As a result, the only option is to borrow enormous and unsubsidized, non-Stafford loans at high interest rates, something that causes a lot of stress. This all at a time that Congress keeps eroding the safety valves of deferments and forbearances. We're all afraid of what huge interest rates can do to our tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, quite frankly. It scares many of us so much that we just won't consider low-paying or volatile careers.

While Yale should not be free, I would propose that Yale offer all of its loans interest free with generous, simple and flexible repayment arrangements. If it would only cost Yale a few hundred million more to completely pay for our tuition, and if Yale can clearly afford to do so, then paying our interest over time would be so insignificant as to be irrelevant. Please consider it Yale.

Paying some tuition is fine. Increasing university fees across the board at far greater than inflation is not.

Why isn't there any discussion of Yale's skyrocketing costs in this story?

Sounds like 'luxury problem(s)' to me...a.k.a. --a good problem to have--

Recent Alum said: "Many qualified low-income students (and their families) have no idea of the changes made to Yale's financial aid in the last few years, because the University has done a spectacularly poor job of marketing those changes."

I disagree. Any high school student who is sufficiently qualified to attend Yale, regardless of background, should have been in a position to do the minimal amount of basic Internet research to know that financial considerations today should no longer be an obstacle for anyone to attend Yale. I would say that any prospective applicant who did not take the initiative to find out about these basic considerations is not the kind of student whom Yale should be trying to attract.

I agree that Yale should not be tuition free, but not for the reasons mentioned by Spherical Cow above. To me, the sort of students that Yale want are those who realize how great Yale is and are willing to pay any price to be there (as I would have when I was in that position). Making Yale tuition free will make the college somewhat more selective on paper, but the sort of student who would chose to attend only for financial considerations is not the sort of student that Yale should be attempting to recruit.

What's wrong with student loans anyway? They're basically the cheapest form of debt you can get. Personal leverage baby!

I have to say, I am a little surprised by the "soak the rich" tone of the previous comments. Consider the following: for a family in New York (where I am from) earning $200,000, Yale tuition amounts to half of disposable income. My family's income is well within the top 1% in the country, and I very strongly considered attending a state university. If I lived in California, with access to UCLA and Berkeley, I would not have thought twice. The fact that some people can afford to pay full sticker price does mean that they should. I cannot help but recall a certain philosopher, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Fans of that particular thinker may get their wish; tuition has nearly tripled over the last twenty years.

At any rate, I have no doubt that one day, tuition at Yale will be free for all. Eventually, Harvard, Princeton or Stanford will decide to make tuition free to all. Yale will be forced to follow suit or lose many of its best students.

The thing wrong with federal student loans is how you can't ever declare bankruptcy on them, how there is no statute of limitations on them, how they take away your professional license, ban you from federal employment, etc, etc if you ever default. Why not just throw people in debtor's prison altogether?

But that aside, it was a little stupid for people to be saying Yale is too conservative with its endowment spending as late as October. Let's hope at least 80% of the money that was there early this year will remain part of the endowment by the time the recession bottoms...

It is amusing that a challenge to the tax status of an eendowment can be thwarted by a diversionary discussion whether tuition should be free. The issue is whether taxpayers should in effect subsidize the accumulation of wealth beyond need by an educational institution. What is the purrpose of the endowment - to get bigger ? Let the univeristy decide how the disbursements should be spent, but spend 5% a year or it gets taxed. Simple. On the minor point of tuition, a free tuition and equitable entrace requirements means no rich and no poor at Yale. Just too many smart middle class kids, and perhaps too big a reach for an institution with legacy concerns.