CHRISTINA SOSA/YH

Yale's endowment: is bigger better?

Unfortunately, students have no reason to share in the jubilation of the portfolio managers. During this expansion, Yale's tuition has risen by 13 percent, drastically outpacing inflation. The result is that college expenses consume a larger portion of family and student assets than ever before.

This trend flies in the face of the gradual democratization of higher education since the end of the World War II. During the boom of the '50s, college enrollments swelled and student demographics began to shift, especially at elite institutions like Yale. College ceased to be the exclusive province of the privileged, of white men for whom four years of brick, ivy, and the Western Canon were the next step from prep school to a life of guaranteed wealth. A new avenue of advancement opened to the lower and middle classes.

Today this avenue is closing to many. More people have a college degree, but many of those degrees confer little more benefit than a high school diploma did 50 years ago. Success now seems to require a brand-name college and a stint in graduate school. The cost of advancement has risen drastically, and educational institutions are to blame.

No matter what Yale says about renovation and the need to compensate for the ill-advised "deferred maintenance" policy of the '80s, its tuition increases are unnecessary. Certainly the long- neglected science departments need better facilities, and the colleges and other buildings are overdue for improvement. The University has no choice but to pay its professors their market value. However, none of these costs require imposing burdens on students. Yale's purpose—education—should dictate that students bear as little of the brunt for these expenses as possible.

Yale's tuition policy, like that of many universities, stems from losing sight of its real reason for being. Yale does not exist to make a profit—it exists to further knowledge. The budget surplus is evidence of irresponsibility on the Administration's part. Nearly three-quarters of a million dollars that could have gone to capital improvement, professor salaries, or financial aid fattened the endowment instead. Isn't $7.18 billion enough money to sustain a university?

Considering that the endowment doubled during a period when buildings needed renovation and research facilities needed upgrading, $7.18 billion seems more than enough. Searching for logic to explain this reveals this expansion, I can find no explanation but a misalignment of priorities. Our burgeoning endowment suggests that the University is just trying to keep up with the academic Joneses. A wad of cash growing through lucrative investments, donations, and tuition hikes looks good in U.S. News and World Report. It looks good next to Harvard's even deeper till. It does not, however, do a thing for Yale's students and professors. What does it matter if our endowment is $7 billion or $10 billion? Are we stockpiling to rebuild Old Campus after an earthquake?

So here's my outlandish proposal to Yale: leave the endowment where it is. Invest only enough money to keep it at its current size, adjusted for inflation. Put the funds that would have gone to the endowment into improving the quality of education, research, and life. Freeze tuition for a few years, increase financial aid, build some top-notch science facilities, and even put new bleachers in the Yale Bowl. In short, spend it all.

The already stellar quality of education at Yale would increase and a more socioeconomically diverse group of students could afford to attend. A method of advancement closing to many would open wider than ever. Perhaps our statement, along with Williams' tuition freeze, would inspire other universities. Maybe a new, more diverse generation of educated leaders would finally break into the government and business elites, which are still as white and male as Yale was in 1940. Is U.S. News and World Report really that important?

Nathan Littlefield is a freshman in Ezra Stiles.

Back to Opinion...