House Education and Workforce Committee Holds Hearing on Accountability in Postsecondary Education
Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives Higher Education and Workforce Development
Subcommittee held a hearing titled “Lowering Costs and Increasing Value for
Students, Institutions, and Taxpayers”. The hearing examined various ways universities
and colleges—both nonprofits and profits—can be held more accountable for
not only their cost of attendance, but also for the value or “return on investment” that they provide their students.
During the hearing, most of the discussion centered on the
pros and cons of market-based approaches to accountability. Members suggested
everything from implementing policies requiring that colleges share in the risk
when student borrowers don’t repay what they take out in loans to further increasing
transparency around costs, graduation rates and gainful employment rates.
U.S. Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) asserted that the elimination of Diversity, Equity,
and Inclusion (DEI) staff would be a cost-saver. DEI staff were deemed to be diverting
financial resources away from other operational costs, such as hiring additional
faculty and providing for the general upkeep of universities. As a result, there
was a concern that the hiring of DEI staff helps contribute to increased tuition costs.
The second suggestion came from U.S. Rep. Erin Houchin (R-Ind.)
who suggested that Grad PLUS loans should be eliminated. Not only would the elimination
of the program save the federal government money, but also would remove the incentive
for universities to increase tuition because students borrowing would be limited.
Houchin did, however, leave open the possibility of exempting certain professions
or degrees, such as medical doctors, from the borrowing cap and allowing them
to borrow more money. The exempted professions would be those that require a longer
time to complete their degrees and training, but more importantly, they would
also be more likely to repay their student loans. Thus, the exemptions were a
good return on the American taxpayer’s investment.
While the Democrats agreed that tuition costs were problematic
and must be addressed, they disagreed with many of the Republicans’ saving suggestions.
Rather, they focused on the lack of state higher education funding and accused
states of not doing their fair share to support higher education. |
