|
Here is a
summary of my queries relating to a major tuition increase and parallel use
of financial aid.
All at Once or Spread Out? The responses from colleagues around
the world were evenly split on this issue. Some said that spreading out the
increase over, say, three years, was more predictable and palatable to
parents, giving them time to plan. This approach should be taken, one said, unless
there is an emergency requiring the big one-time increase. Another comment in
support of this approach was that a very high one-year increase would focus
unhealthy attention on the school's operations (i.e., "why is this
needed now?"). About the same number of respondents favored taking the
step in one year. Their reasoning included the idea that it was wisest to get
the pain over with in one year, rather than listening to three years of
complaints. Others said that spreading out the increase tied the hands of
future boards. Indeed, some had grave doubts that the future boards would be
able to maintain the nerve to continue the three-year plan.
Any Parallel Experience? Many schools, of course, had
increases of tuition over the years in various ranges. But I did come across
a few schools that had taken the one-off plunge recently. Quito was raising their tuition by 16-18%,
to deal with currency devaluation and operating deficits. Atlanta International
School had increased
tuition by 20%, to allow programs to be maintained and teacher salaries to be
more competitive. And the International School of Stavanger increased tuition
32%, to be able to maintain quality when enrollment dropped. All said that
they had no regrets and that the actions had put the schools on much sounder
financial footing.
Selling It: Most of you queried whether my life
insurance was paid up, contract was solid, etc. Apart from those humorous (?)
remarks, there were some bits of wisdom:
- Give parents as much advance
notice as possible
- Reduce the reasons for the
increase to a few, simple statements and repeat them over and over
- This must be seen as the board's
(not just the director's) recommendation, if parents are to get behind
it
- Hold public forums to explain the
need for the increase
- Identify the most likely sources
of resistance and focus on educating and convincing these groups
- Get the backing of embassies and
businesses, so that they have sufficient time to build the increase into
their budgets
- The best time to go for such an
increase is when student enrollment is strong; be sure to check the
competition's capacity and space as well
Financial
Aid: No one had any
foolproof means of assessing need and administering financial assistance.
Still, there were some suggestions worthy of consideration:
- Most would say that the assistance
should be need-based only (not academic scholarships).
- The exception would be a special
full scholarship for one or two talented local students as public
relations and integration with the host country; but some would
recommend that this scholarship be funded by a donation or endowment,
not out of operations, unless we wanted to make a moral commitment to
assist the endowment for one such scholarship.
- Before restricting aid by
nationality or employer, a school should be careful that this is not in
conflict with the school's ethos. In other words, the financial aid
program ought to flow from the school's mission statement.
- One major decision to make is
whether the financial aid is meant to be short-term or long-term. That
is, is the aid to help students who would attend the school all of their
lives, or is it meant to help students with unforeseen or sudden
financial emergencies. One corollary of this was the policy of some
schools not to grant aid in the first year of enrollment. Or, some
schools gave no more than a maximum of 50% reduction to foreign
students, regardless of employment.
- Another philosophical question is
whether the aid program is designed to increase diversity of
socio-economic status or nationality or ethnicity.
- Several colleagues recommended
that the aid be very generous in the first year of the big tuition
increase, as good public relations. However, most suggested that the
level of aid might then be reduced over the subsequent years, as new
families would be expected to know the cost upon entering and thus not
"qualify." I am inclined to believe in this particular
approach. There will be questions to determine about whether any such
"grandfathering" is one-time or permanent and whether it
applies to future children, etc.
- In line with this was the idea of
simply granting a one-time reduction of 10-15%, during the year of the
tuition increase
- One school has a maximum of 60%
reduction for host country students. Others had similar maximums for
different groups.
- The range seemed to be something
like 15-50% reductions for those who got financial aid, with the
underlying assumption being that less than 15% need might indicate that
real need wasn't present, while more than 50% probably meant too few
students would get the assistance. Of course there could be exceptional
circumstances.
- Some schools had taken to
contracting out the need evaluation process, using local agencies or
individuals who conducted home visits, photographed houses and
automobiles, etc. to help corroborate the financial aid forms.
Back
|