Federal Student Aid Funding Department Term Paper

Download this Term Paper in word format (.doc)

Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formatting

Excerpt from Term Paper:

Despite increased student fees, the UC still encountered a $500 million shortfall or $2,500 per student. It has been undergoing severe pressure from the impact of the cuts. The quality of education at the U.S. has remained high, but there have been disturbing signs of erosion, nevertheless. The widening gap between the UC and the best private university has been alarming because the UC competes for the top teachers and students with these private universities. This widening gap should be a critical concern to the state and the federal governments because even excellent private universities are too small to meet California's or the nation's needs for a well-educated workforce in the future, to come up with innovations needed to fuel the economy and to generate jobs, and to introduce medical advances for the use and care of the sick and disabled. In the past decade, California's private research universities, Stanford, University of South California and California Tech, had a combined enrollment of only 1,500. In comparison in the same period, UC had a 42,000 enrollment. The California population was projected to grow to 50 million in the year 2025 and California public universities will need to respond to a swelling population in pursuing and achieving more critical social educational, health and economic objectives (Darling). This is the challenge.

One area, which accounts for the widening gap between public and private universities, is that of faculty salaries (Darling 2005). UC faculty salaries have been falling behind those of competitive private universities. The gap at only 3% in 1980 is now 22% below these private institutions. UC is now driven to spend more of its already limited resources in maintaining its faculty by making salary counter-offers. Another consequence was a fall in its student-faculty ratio, which was also way behind that of competing universities. It is not difficult to conclude that this condition adversely affects the student's learning experience and the teacher's teaching experience. Moreover, fewer public universities land among the top 10 in national rankings than they used to two or three decades ago. The federal budget necessarily reflects the state's situation. Federal funding is critical to a public university like the UC. It is the primary source funding for faculty research, for Medicare and Medicaid to support UC's teaching hospitals, for student grants, work-study, and loans and for its three Department of Energy national laboratories. In 2004, the UC received more than $8 billion of federal funding. From this total, $4.1 was given to the three Department of Energy national laboratories, $4 billion to its educational programs, $2.6 billion for research, $1.4 billion for Medicare and Medicaid revenue, and $242 million for student grants and work-study. UC students and their families also obtained $714 worth of student loans. That spending trend expired on November 18, 2005. The President's Budget Request for the fiscal year sought funding for the programs, which fund the University. But the same budget did not include the funds for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or recovery efforts from the ravages of hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Emergency funding for these events took away from that of University programs. As a result, the Senate and the House signed spending reductions at $39 billion and %50 billion, respectively, in the next five years. These cuts translated into $8 to $15 billion worth of student loan programs, and close to $6 billion for Medicare, $4 o $9.5 billion for Medicaid. These acts of Congress represented the biggest net cuts to federal need-based student aid since the beginning of these programs.The cuts have not only entailed higher average loan costs to college students by several thousand dollars but also an across-the-board cut of up to 2% on all domestic discretionary federal spending in the past year. This across-the-board cut would further injure the University and its students (Darling).

Financial aid means radically different things to different institutions, according to William College economic Gordon Winston (Clinton 2002). It can mean price discounts to attract customers or improve student quality, or income redistribution policies. It is most difficult for the private and not-too-wealthy institution, which shades price to improve or maintain its quality in the face of other institutions' shading prices. Many institutions refuse to acknowledge the kind of financial aid they provide. The fact is that they are cutting prices and cutting deals with bright students as well as steal good ones from other schools. These acts ultimately hit people with the greatest need, ultimately, according to Macalester College President Michael McPherson. With a sudden drop in state funding, these schools resort to huge tuition increases in order to keep their programs going. Wealthy student who attend low-cost institutions can afford those increases, but those with high needs cannot. McPherson stressed that this law of life in our society makes people in extreme need and with low income to be the hardest hit rather than most helped. Institutional funds are important but state aid remains the most volatile source. States assert a greater impact on equalizing opportunity with the reduced purchasing power of federal grants. Private schools can adapt well to the circumstance as they have no problems raising tuitions to give for aid, as long as they maintain philanthropic support somewhere. But if public universities must raise tuition to provide more grants, they are really taxing one group of students by subsidizing another. They replace tax dollars with tuition and then use the tuition revenue to help the other group. It foments a social justice condition when these institutions raise tuition charges for student aid. In most states, aid significantly goes down with each increase in tuition and need. In some states, tuition continues to go up, while other states try to adjust to financial changes along with state policies. When the states do not provide the aid, schools try to compensate by discounting price in order to retain enrollments. They find that whether they make up for the lost money or not, their net revenue gets reduced. If they do not compensate for some of the money not provided by the state and keep their enrollments, they spend extra money. If not, they lose the enrollment. These institutions try to respond to individual circumstances in the hope that the family circumstances would improve. But reductions of state funding in the form of scholarships and grant programs or subsidies to public institutions may be entirely new and their returns still substantially un-tested (Clinton).

Bibliography

Clinton, P. (2002). The student aid conundrum. University Business: 4 pages.

Professional Media Group LLC

Darling, B.B. (2005). Hearing testimony. 5 pages. California Senate Subcommittee on Higher Education. Retrieved January 26, 2007 at http://www.ucop.edu/uersvp/speeches/Speier_Hearing_Nov_9_2005.pdf

Dervarics, C. (2006). Congress approves cuts to student loan programs. 1 page. Diverse Issues on Higher Education: Cox, Matthews and Associates

2003). Bush budget has controversy, but few gains. 5 pages. Black Issues on Higher Education: Cox, Matthews and Associates.

Guerard, E. (2005). How Pell changes will affect your students. 4 pages University

Business: Professional Media Group LLC

Hokkin, L. And Richter, a. (2006). Governor calls on Congress to reject cuts to critical programs. Oregon.gov. 5 pages. Retrieved January 26, 2007 at http://.governor.oregon/gov/Gov/p2006/press_02086.shtml

Longley, R. (2007). Federal student aid. Your Guide to U.S. Government Information. 8 pages. About, Inc. Retrieved…[continue]

Cite This Term Paper:

"Federal Student Aid Funding Department" (2007, January 26) Retrieved December 8, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/federal-student-aid-funding-department-40402

"Federal Student Aid Funding Department" 26 January 2007. Web.8 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/federal-student-aid-funding-department-40402>

"Federal Student Aid Funding Department", 26 January 2007, Accessed.8 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/federal-student-aid-funding-department-40402

Other Documents Pertaining To This Topic

  • Student Affairs One of the

    " Gabriel is an employee of a small business and agrees with the results of numerous reports that highlight that irrespective of the increase in the overall opportunities for work, the overall living expenditures, student loans, utilities etc. leaves most graduates in a dire state of (Franke-Ruta, 2003). Another Nellie Mae report conducted in 1998 showed that nearly 40% of the graduated lawyers and doctors and 25% of graduates of private

  • Government Subsidized Student Loans Have Economic Costs

    Government Subsidized Student Loans Have Economic Costs but Political Benefits Higher education has become increasingly important in the contemporary world scenario today where globalization has led to a higher need for a skilled labor force that is mobile and that is well-versed in the academic disciplines followed all over the world. In fact university education is starting to be seen as a hallmark for success, even though there are college drop

  • Funding Health Care Services

    Funding Health Care Services Scenario The writer of this work is a senior advisor of XYZ Health Care Organization and has been tasked with making a recommendation regarding how health care expenses associated with the following services should be funded within your state. The recommendations made will then be a part of a proposal that will be shared with state legislators. State of Alabama The State of Alabama has several programs funding healthcare. For

  • School Funding the Advantages Disadvantages

    Most states have provisions somewhat similar to that of the NCLB, where funding to districts and specific institutions is specifically allocated and comes with certain requirements (Galvin & Robins 2000; U.S. DOE 2009). Advantages of receiving funding at the state level are increased localization and attention to differences in districts (U.S. DOE 2009). Disadvantages, however, are that the state is subject to even more extreme budgetary and taxation fluctuations,

  • Homebound Instruction Federal Regulations in

    Still other states, such as Nevada and North Carolina, require four weeks or more for eligibility for home instruction (See Appendix C). In terms of providing instruction, the states vary greatly in their requirements. In some states, such as Alaska and Hawaii, the homebound or hospital instructors are not required to hold certified teaching certificates, but act as tutors alone. They obtain regular classroom materials from the student's regular instructor,

  • Improving Affordability in Higher Education

    ("House Passes Bill to," 2006, p. A06) Another general false conception is that "colleges are increasing need-based scholarships as opposed to merit-based scholarships... (however,) the College Board's annual report shows that at the state level, the percentage of merit-based grant aid increased from 10% of all aid during the 1993-1994 academic year to 26% of all aid in 2003-2004." These and other misperceptions, perhaps contribute to the fact most Americans

  • Sizes Are Faced With Many

    42). In the context of higher education, then, redefining mission statements to reflect this wide range of influences requires a balancing act between the interests of all of the stakeholders involved. This not a static, one-time analysis, either, but requires constant reevaluation to ensure that the educational institution is delivering the type of graduates with the skill set needed in the 21st century workplace. For instance, Berg et al. (2008)


Read Full Term Paper
Copyright 2016 . All Rights Reserved