<p>In a time when many state schools are enduring severe cuts, the UW is seizing the moment to improve undergrad life--at a price.</p>
<p>Statement</a> on the passage of the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates (May 8, 2009)</p>
<p>I’m jumping for joy. :</p>
<p>That ‘price’ is an extra $2,500 and $7,500 over 4 years for in-state and OOS students, respectively. Will there be tuition increases throughout those 4 years, as well? I would have rather seen them ramp up private fundraising efforts instead of hitting up the already scrambling for cost of attendance students and their families for even more money. :</p>
<p>I’m not so sure they’re going to be able to do all that they’ve promised with the Initiative ‘surcharges.’ Wisconsin’s Governor has already proposed cancelling contractual raises and requiring unpaid leave of UW faculty and staff.
[Statement</a> from UW System President Kevin P. Reilly on state budget situation (May 7, 2009)](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/16701]Statement”>Statement from UW System President Kevin P. Reilly on state budget situation)</p>
<p>I think most UW workers will take the furloughs and pay situation as part of the overall budget sacrifice many are having to make these days. It “saves” money without really requiring much real cutting. So far the new state admin has been very decent to UW. Yes, there is a bit of two steps forward, one step back to the whole thing but they will be much better off than they would have been without the new program. Business and Engineering already have tuition differentials kicking in so they have already begun hiring more faculty.</p>
<p>Yes, expect normal tuition increases in the 5-7% range annually. UW has been far too cheap compared to its peers. The extra funding will go a long way to improve some areas that have had lean times. It’s a very good time to be hiring new faculty. They should be able to get some great people with average money.</p>
<p>One more thing. UW is a research machine and Obama is funding research to beat the band. UW will get its fair share of this windfall and a nice chunk–around 35-45% of the grant money goes into the general fund of the UW to spend pretty much as it wishes. This is a good time to have many pots going–one goes down and another fills up.</p>
<p>It’s not just UW faculty and staff who are having to deal with undesired unpaid time off and stagnant salaries. Students’ families are facing the same issues. I realize you probably disagree, but to families like ours… UW is doing exactly the wrong thing by sticking students and their families with thousands of $$$ of Initiative surcharges in addition to ever-increasing tuition at the worst possible time, given the current economic climate.</p>
<p>Frequently, other universities more than offset their slightly higher COA’s with much more plentiful and generous merit scholarships. UW falls short in that regard, particularly for freshmen.</p>
<p>About Obama’s research funding… Where does he plan on getting the money? Tax revenues have plummeted. I guess today’s college kids and future generations will have to embrace indentured servitude as a way of life.
[Soaring</a> U.S. Budget Deficit Will Mean Billions in Bond Sales - Bloomberg.com](<a href=“Politics - Bloomberg”>Politics - Bloomberg)</p>
<p>UW is not a big believer in merit aid. Nor are most highly ranked privates. But aid to needy students is being increased both by this program and others in Wisconsin. Instate kids from poor families will have better access than they did. You want merit aid you can go to some second tier state school in the south but you get what you pay for.
Yes the deficits will be there. But they will be there whether or not UW gets its fair share of the new money. I prefer they get the $$$ over U Texas or U Washington, etc.</p>
<p>Are you sure you want to claim that only second tier state schools in the south award merit scholarships?</p>
<p>As tax revenues continue to decrease and social service needs continue to increase, research funding is going to move further down the federal spending priority list and may not materialize as promised or expected.</p>
<p>The initiative fees only kick in after an income of greater than $80,000, therefore not hurting the lower income people; unlike tuition increases. UW has not needed to award merit money to attract top students.</p>
<p>^Yeah, but it hurts us who’s families make more than that, but we’re struggling as is. I almost didn’t even get to come to college this year because I couldn’t get enough financial aid, and I couldn’t get loans because my parent’s credit was so bad (for co-signers). I have no clue how I’m paying for next year, and no, a part time job is not covering it. I might not even go.</p>
<p>I’d love for anyone to take a look at my parent’s financial history and status, and tell me they have a dime to give me. But, because they “made a lot”, they do. Ignore everything else. I mean, according to the FAFSA, my family has 19K to give me. Yeah. Lemme go dig that out of the closet, next to our $100 bill toilet paper. :|</p>
<p>Maybe you can see why I’m so opposed to this, regardless of the “benefits”. Just because someone’s parents make more than a certain amount doesn’t mean they’re magically not struggling. Granted, my issues are more with the financial aid process itself than specifically this, but this doesn’t help.</p>
<p>This is a lesson for living within one’s means and saving for college if one’s credit history is so bad they can’t get college loans with an income so high. You can’t do anything about your parents’ finances, but I’ll bet you grew up with a lot of amenities many didn’t. I could tell tales about things my family never had when I was young. The worst case scenario would be to work and take longer to graduate. I presume you are instate, or you could transfer to pay your cheaper instate college fees. Use this as a lesson for your future kids- set up a college savings plan for them instead of spending all of your money (and more) on other things.</p>
<p>The $80,000 or above income-level Initiative surcharge is arbitrary in that it doesn’t consider the very wide differences in the cost of living in various parts of the country (or even within Wisconsin), OR the fact that many students pay for college on their own without help from their families. Even if a student’s family does contribute, the surcharge is much more of a burden on families with an $85,000 income than those who earn $250,000+. It also fails to take into consideration the number of college student children a family is simultaneously or sequentially supporting.</p>
<p>For all the talk of attracting top students, it’s surprising that UW does not rank in the top 20 publics for the 4-year, 5-year, or 6-year graduation rates (scroll down to see the publics lists):
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062545753-post50.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062545753-post50.html</a></p>
<p>Commentary to consider on the Initiative surcharge:
[The</a> Badger Herald: Opinion: Tuition increase simple robbery](<a href=“http://badgerherald.com/oped/2009/03/30/tuition_increase_sim.php]The”>http://badgerherald.com/oped/2009/03/30/tuition_increase_sim.php)</p>
<p>I booked marked this a month or so ago. Decent story on the topic. UW is a bargain but it will be interesting to see the reaction if they force us to give them our financial vitals if we are not requesting aid.</p>
<p>Also, I believe somewhere in the story is a comparison of the amount of need based aid vs. merit based aid given by UW. I don’t remember the numbers. My daughter, currently at UW, received $8000 over 4 years in merit aid and $0 in need based aid.</p>
<p>[News:</a> New Strategy at Wisconsin - Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/04/01/madison]News:”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/04/01/madison)</p>
<p>The impact of the surcharge on current students is no different than the similar cases where students funded the student unions and recreation facilities. Many who voted to fund these with their own fees would not be around to enjoy the fruits of these. But all new students benefit from the sacrificies of past students. Without student funding nearly 100 years ago there would not be a Memorial Union. And all alumni will benefit from maintaining and improving the reputation of the UW. Farrell is just a rightwing crank.</p>
<p>I didn’t know there were other times when tuition increases were coupled with additional surcharges. When, how much were the tuition increases, how much were the surcharges - and for how long of a time period, and what were they for?</p>
<p>Well, I am not thrilled to be paying extra as it is already a stretch. However, son decided “yes” to UW just days before the announcement. We are happy with his choice so we will “suck it up and pay.” BUT, I really hope (and will be disappointed and frustrated if not) that we see the BENEFITS of this initiative in real, substantive and practical ways. My expectation has been raised… so, we look forward to seeing and experiencing the extra classes, sections, tutoring, advising, etc… 
Assuming the students get a real increase in services/educational experience for the cost, it will be money well spent. If not, well…</p>
<p>The most recent surcharge is the extra fees approved to rebuild Union South and renovate Memorial Union. </p>
<p>[Students</a> hope to add Union improvement referendum to ballot (Feb. 14, 2006)](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/12166]Students”>Students hope to add Union improvement referendum to ballot)</p>
<p>Others have been the fees for the SERF</p>
<p>[SSFC</a> gives final approval to SERF expansion project - The Daily Cardinal](<a href=“http://www.dailycardinal.com/article/13369]SSFC”>http://www.dailycardinal.com/article/13369)</p>
<p>In the last couple years the business and engineering schools added surcharges above standard tuition increases with student support</p>
<p>[Differential</a> Tuition FAQ (Undergraduate Business Blog)](<a href=“http://www.bus.wisc.edu/undergrad/ubb/2007/01/differential_tuition_faq.htm]Differential”>http://www.bus.wisc.edu/undergrad/ubb/2007/01/differential_tuition_faq.htm)</p>
<p>[Tuition</a> Differential for Undergraduate Business Program Wins Regent Approval](<a href=“http://www.bus.wisc.edu/gazette/may2007/tuition.asp]Tuition”>http://www.bus.wisc.edu/gazette/may2007/tuition.asp)</p>
<p>[Headlines</a> for May 29, 2008](<a href=“http://www.engr.wisc.edu/news/headlines/2008/May29.html]Headlines”>http://www.engr.wisc.edu/news/headlines/2008/May29.html)</p>
<p>Hmmm…
$96 per semester for renovation
$6.50 per semester for SERF
Okay, those aren’t too bad.</p>
<p>Tuition differentials:
$500 per semester for the Business School
$300, $500, then $700 per semester for engineering
I can see why that would be necessary if it went towards actual cost differentials. I disagree with forcing some students and/or their families to take on more debt to support others who get the same education without having to acquire that additional debt because they get need-based aid to cover it - unless you can prove beyond a doubt that earning power will be vastly larger among those graduates required to pay the Initiative surcharge (think how much and how long it takes to pay off a $7,500 debt). </p>
<p>An ADDITIONAL $7,500 on top of 5-6% tuition increases each year and the already charged tuition differentials for Business and Engineering? That’s crossing the line, IMO.</p>
<p>You don’t like it look at what other Big 10 schools are charging. Even with the extras (which many other schools have too) UW will be around the middle of the big 10.</p>