Editorial: Colleges should vary tuition rates by program, not year

Many engineering students expect to out-earn liberal arts majors by two to three figures. But at… Many engineering students expect to out-earn liberal arts majors by two to three figures. But at numerous public universities, their career choice places them at a financial disadvantage.

According to a recently released Cornell survey, colleges are foregoing uniform tuition rates for a newer, more controversial financial model: differential tuition. Now, 29 percent of four-year public institutions, 11 percent of master’s institutions and 41 percent of doctoral institutions adjust their costs based on students’ years and majors.

Incidentally, many Pennsylvania colleges have embraced this practice — Pitt, for instance, charges undergraduates different amounts depending on their school (nursing and health and rehabilitation science majors pay $1,977 more per semester than arts and science majors), and Penn State, in addition to demanding higher prices for business, engineering and a variety of other fields, charges a higher tuition rate for juniors and seniors.

Difficult as it is to gauge which educational circumstances merit a larger price tag, we’re not opposed to varied tuition rates — not, at least, when they depend on major.

While a higher overall cost might dissuade aspiring engineers from enrolling in our school, charging different amounts per subject makes financial sense. Many programs, including nursing, do cost a great deal to support. And a degree in business, engineering or any medical field will probably yield higher lifetime earnings, making the increased tuition a sound investment.

Raising prices for juniors and seniors, however, seems less defensible — an undisguised attempt at collecting more money from students who can no longer transfer.

Administrators might argue that the more intimate education upperclassmen receive justifies the high price tag. But if the financial difference between large lectures and smaller capstone courses were considerable, most universities would account for it. And there’s no way of knowing when students will actually enroll in these courses — some high-achievers complete a majority of their major requirements by the end of sophomore year. If colleges really care about cost effectiveness, they should vary the fees of individual classes.

In short, boosting tuition rates after students earn a substantial number of credits seems more exploitative than economical. Although this policy’s effect on graduation rates has yet to be examined in detail, we wouldn’t be surprised if it pushed a significant number of cash-strapped juniors and seniors to insolvency just before they obtained their degrees.

Determining appropriate tuition rates is undoubtedly difficult and probably entails a fair amount of well-intentioned hard work on administrators’ parts. Nonetheless, yearly tuition fluctuations seem to indicate a troubling concern for maximizing financial gain. Universities should tailor tuition rates to students’ majors, but they shouldn’t saddle them with outsized financial obligations during their final four semesters.