In these times of skyrocketing tuition rates, it might surprise some to learn that a group of students on campus does, in fact, have a say in the tuition-setting process.
Four UT students, along with five administrators, currently sit on the Tuition Policy Advisory Committee, a panel that meets each fall to analyze higher-education costs and present recommendations to UT President William Powers, who then presents recommendations of his own to the UT System Board of Regents. The regents set tuition rates every two years. The four voting student members are Student Government President Liam O’Rourke; Lauren Ratliff, Senate of College Councils President; Daniel Spikes, president of the Graduate Student Assembly; and government senior Cecilia Lopez.
The committee — which was formed after the Texas Legislature deregulated tuition in 2003, allowing public universities to set their own rates — also presents recommendations to the student body in open forums. Committee meetings leading up to the release of recommendations, however, are closed to the public.
“[Opening meetings] will inhibit discussion, and having these meetings are all about encouraging honest dialogue,” said Kevin Hegarty, UT’s vice president and chief financial officer and an administrator on the committee. “Having a reporter there or having people in a gallery watching naturally will cause people to, I think, not say things that they might otherwise express.”
Hegarty’s concerns are understandable. The presence of The Daily Texan — which was denied access to a committee meeting Thursday night — at discussions might cause members to hesitate before speaking frankly on financial matters that could draw controversy.
But the committee was formed in the interest of students. And the interest of students, who are accustomed to news of rising costs, is served by open discussion — both good and bad news — concerning tuition rates. UT’s involved student body, for which The Daily Texan is just one voice, should be involved in this deliberation.
“We need, as an institution, to do a better job of communicating our institutional priorities, how we generate them and how we meet them,” said Liam O’Rourke, president of Student Government and a committee member.
Although we appreciate O’Rourke’s argument for better communication, the tone of his comments is troubling.
O’Rourke notably groups himself into the institutional “we.” He should not forget that he was elected to represent the concerns of students to the administration, not those of the administration to the students. It is thus his responsibility to inform the student body of his influential committee’s activities, and unless The Daily Texan is allowed access, he and other committee members are the sole representatives able to inform students and solicit their input.
O’Rourke has also stressed the importance of the committee’s Web site, which he said is in need of a redesign, and has pointed to measures underway to increase overall student representation on student budget committees.
We applaud the move to increase student voice on such powerful committees, but focusing on a Web site overhaul seems like an easy way out for elected student representatives who could better serve the student body by challenging administrators looking to control broad discussion on one of the most important issues affecting students.
“We really do a good job,” O’Rourke told the Texan. “But we need to do a better job.”
Opening these meetings — and airing the deliberations of a committee whose four student representatives are speaking for 50,000 — would be one step toward that.
2 comments