DOCSLIB.ORG

View As Restricted

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
View As Restricted STUDENT FINANCIAL AID LESSONS FOR THE UK FROM THE US Joseph Russo Director of Student Financial Strategies University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana USA OxCHEPS Fellow The Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies In the summer of 2006 the OxCHEPS Visiting Fellow was Joseph A. Russo, the Director of Student Financial Strategies at the University of Notre Dame, USA, where he has led the student aid operation since 1978. He holds an undergraduate degree in English and a Master’s in Higher Education Administration. He is the coauthor of two books published by Random House, one with a Notre Dame professor on financing graduate school, and the other with his counterpart at Duke University on saving for college. He has also served as the Editor of the Journal of Student Financial Aid since 1986 for the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators and has published numerous articles on student aid. His career of 42 years has involved three institutions, one of which was a two year community college in the State University of NY. He taught a graduate level course in student aid administration while at Notre Dame and has served in training capacities for the College Board and the US Department of Education. He has also testified before the US Congress. The author is grateful to the following: David Palfreyman for the invitation to undertake this project and the generous resources he provided through OxCHEPS; the University of Notre Dame for allowing the opportunity and the leave from campus; the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA) and The Student Loan Marketing Association (Sallie Mae) for the grant support each has offered; Janine Meersman, my administrative assistant at Notre Dame, for her reliable and expert word processing skills and all the typing; and my wife and best friend, Eileen, for her constant love and support throughout my career, including my time at Oxford. Finally, the warm welcome of Warden Alan Ryan, Bursar Secretary Kate Hunter, both of New College, and Jill Flitter, College Secretary at St. Antony’s College at Oxford, will all always be most appreciated and fondly remembered. Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies STUDENT FINANCIAL AID LESSONS FOR THE UK FROM THE US Joseph Russo MA MS Director of Student Financial Strategies University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana USA OxCHEPS Fellow OxCHEPS, Oxford 2007 Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies (OxCHEPS), New College, Oxford, OX1 3BN United Kingdom http://oxcheps.new.ox.ac.uk. Copyright © by Joseph A. Russo. Published by OxCHEPS. All rights reserved. ISBN Hardback ISBN Paperback Printed by Typeset by Cover design by Contents Preface ......................................................................................................................... i Chapter I History ............................................................................................................ 1 Chapter II Concept of Financial Need .............................................................................10 Chapter III Financial Aid..................................................................................................25 Chapter IV Current Dynamics ..........................................................................................36 Chapter V Tax Policies ...................................................................................................43 Chapter VI Issues .............................................................................................................48 Chapter VII Special Challenges .........................................................................................57 Chapter VIII Future Issues ..................................................................................................68 Chapter IX Lessons to be Learned ....................................................................................71 Chapter X Research.........................................................................................................79 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................88 Appendix I Comparing UK and US ..................................................................................90 Appendix II The Array of Higher Education Benefits.......................................................100 Appendix IIIa Legislative History .......................................................................................101 Appendix IIIb Need Analysis History..................................................................................102 Appendix IV Conundrum ..................................................................................................103 Appendix V Methodology................................................................................................105 Appendix VI Glossary of Terms........................................................................................125 Appendix VII UK Policies..................................................................................................129 Preface “To give away money is an easy matter and in any man’s power. But to decide to whom to give it, and how large and when, and for what purpose and how, is neither in every man’s power — nor an easy matter. Hence it is that such excellence is rare, praiseworthy and noble”. Aristotle The opportunity for one to share his lifelong work to help others is an extraordinary one. Being able to do this as an OxCHEPS Visiting Fellow is especially rewarding, as the support provided by such a scholarly and respected environment is truly inspiring. The time and effort involved in this exercise could not have been possible except for the generous support of David Palfreyman, Director of the OxCHEPS program at New College, Oxford, and the University of Notre Dame, the wonderful institution where I have spent the majority of my career as a student aid administrator. I am very grateful also to the National Association of Student Aid Administrators (NASFAA) and the Student Loan Marketing Association (Sallie Mae), for their significant assistance with some of the expenses. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I acknowledge the constant love and critical support which my dear spouse, Eileen, has provided, not only for this special adventure but also virtually for all of my long career as a professional student aid administrator. Having been involved actively since 1965, coincidentally the birthdate of America’s Higher Education Act, as an aid administrator, and even earlier as a recipient of financial aid as an undergraduate and graduate student, I have literally grown up with our policies and programs. This has included acting as a campus practitioner: a teacher, trainer, and mentor; and serving very actively in helping to organize and develop our profession. Having led the student aid operation at two other institutions, including a public two-year institution, has also broadened the base of experience from which I attempt to shed some light on the American way. David Palfreyman has contributed immensely to these important discussions in the United Kingdom (UK), including identifying and reviewing the major issues and helping to inform policymakers. As the UK is “moving closer to the United States (US) mixed-economy model and further away from the free public economy of the European Union (EU) higher education system”, (Palfreyman, David. “The Economics of Higher Education”, OxCHEPS, 2004) the questions arise: What should be the price paid? Who should pay? When should they ii pay? How should they pay? Who should be helped and how are they to be identified? How much and what kind of help should be provided? Where do the funds needed come from? Who benefits? How long should they be supported? What if they are not successful? Answers to these questions lead to further questions. As the UK begins to move its pricing and student aid policies to meet the future needs and demands of its citizens as well as those of an increasingly global society, the American model and how it has come to be, with all of its trendsetting excellence as well as its many flaws, can hopefully be used as a helpful benchmark for those policymakers responsible for shaping the future for the financing of higher education in the UK. The goal of this publication is to map out in simple terms the policies and procedures by which student financial aid has evolved in the US and how it is administered today. There may be as many questions raised as there are answers provided in an effort to further inform the debate and adventure upon which the UK is now embarking under the prevailing winds provided by the higher education 2004 legislation now in effect with the £3,000 tuition fees from the 2006/07 academic year. Each chapter of this publication takes on an important topic and attempts to review and highlight the important aspects of the US experience which could serve as the basis for broad comparisons and even more robust debates expected in helping to shape UK policies and procedures. One of the most constant problems across all of our US experiences has been that of information. Whether it be for the consumer, i.e., student and family: or for the policymakers, either institutional or governmental; or the media, who surely play an important role in both countries. Providing good, accurate, simple, timely information about the cost of higher education and its affordability,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2004 Haverford College Periodic Review Report
    HAVERFORD COLLEGE Periodic Review Report May 2004 Thomas R. Tritton, President Affirmation of Accreditation: June 1999 Evaluation Team Visit: April 1999 HAVERFORD COLLEGE Periodic Review Report May 2004 HAVERFORD COLLEGE Middle States Periodic Review Report 2004 May 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1 SECTION II: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 7 Haverford .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Organizational Overview ...................................................................................................................... 8 The Periodic Review Report Process .................................................................................................... 9 SECTION III: SINCE OUR 1999 SELF-STUDY ................................................................................... 11 Mission ................................................................................................................................................ 11 Institutional Essence ........................................................................................................................... 11 Governance ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Graduate School 2000-2004 Bulletin
    LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL 2000 ❦ 2004 The information in this BULLETIN is made as accurate as is possible at the time of publication. Students are responsible for informing themselves of and satisfactorily meeting all requirements pertinent to their relationship with the University. The University reserves the right to make such changes as circumstances demand with reference to admission, registration, tuition and fees, attendance, curriculum requirements, conduct, academic standing, candidacy, and graduation. BULLETIN OF LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY Volume 90, Number 3, March 30, 2002 Published once a month July 15 and once a month December 15, 2001; once a month March 30, 2002; once a month April 15, 2002; and once a month August 30, 2002. Loma Linda, CA 92350 LLUPS 18495 printed on recycled paper Bulletin of the Graduate School 2000-2004 This is a four-year BULLETIN, effective beginning Summer Quarter 2000. Loma Linda University Loma Linda, CA 92350 a Seventh-day Adventist health-sciences university CONTENTS I 7 LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY 8 University Foundations 9 Our Mission 11 Nondiscrimination Policy 12 Affirmative Action 14 The Calendar II 21 THE GRADUATE SCHOOL 22 Letter from the Dean 23 Philosophy and Objectives 24 Admissions Information 27 Programs and Degrees 32 Student Life 36 Policies and General Regulations 39 Financial Information III 41 THE PROGRAMS 43 Anatomy 48 Biochemistry 52 Biology 59 Biomedical and Clinical Ethics 62 Biomedical Sciences 63 Case Management 64 Clinical Mediation 65 Clinical Ministry 69 Dentistry 83
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-06-963, HIGHER EDUCATION: Schools' Use of the Antitrust
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees GAO September 2006 HIGHER EDUCATION Schools’ Use of the Antitrust Exemption Has Not Significantly Affected College Affordability or Likelihood of Student Enrollment to Date GAO-06-963 September 2006 HIGHER EDUCATION Accountability Integrity Reliability Highlights Schools' Use of the Antitrust Exemption Highlights of GAO-06-963, a report to Has Not Significantly Affected College congressional committees Affordability or Likelihood of Student Enrollment to Date Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found In 1991 the U.S. Department of Twenty-eight schools—all highly selective, private 4-year institutions— Justice sued nine colleges and formed a group to use the antitrust exemption and developed a common universities, alleging that they had methodology for assessing financial need, which the group called the restrained competition by making consensus approach. The methodology used elements already a part of collective financial aid another need analysis methodology; schools modified this methodology and determinations for students reached agreement on how to define those elements. By the 2004-2005 accepted to more than one of these schools. Against the backdrop of school year, 25 of 28 schools in the group were using the consensus this litigation, Congress enacted a approach. Schools’ implementation of the approach varied, however, with temporary exemption from officials from 12 of the 25 schools reporting that they partially implemented antitrust laws for higher education it, in part because they believed it would be costly to do so. institutions in 1992. The exemption allows limited collaboration Over the last 5 years, tuition, room, and board costs among schools using the regarding financial aid practices antitrust exemption increased by 13 percent compared to 7 percent at all with the goal of promoting equal other private 4-year schools not using the exemption.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Notre Dame Du
    NEW ISSUE — BOOK-ENTRY-ONLY RATING: Moody’s: Aaa (See “RATING” herein.) $400,000,000 UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC TAXABLE FIXED RATE BONDS, SERIES 2017 Dated: Date of Issuance Interest Payable on February 15 and August 15 The Bonds are being issued pursuant to an Indenture (the “Indenture”) dated as of December 1, 2017, between University of Notre Dame du Lac (the “University”) and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee, paying agent and registrar (the “Trustee”). Proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used by the University for general University purposes, including, without limitation, financing, refinancing and reimbursing the University for various capital and operating costs, the refinancing of certain outstanding tax-exempt indebtedness of the University and for the payment of certain costs relating to the issuance of the Bonds. The Bonds will be issued in book-entry-only form, in denominations of $1,000 or any integral multiple thereof and will be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York (“DTC”). Purchasers of beneficial interests (“Beneficial Owners”) will not receive certificates representing their interests in the Bonds. So long as the Bonds are registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, references herein to the owners shall mean Cede & Co., and shall not mean the Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. Interest on the Bonds will be payable on February 15 and August 15 of each year, commencing on February 15, 2018. Payments of the principal of, and interest on, the Bonds will be made directly to DTC or its nominee, Cede & Co., by the Trustee, so long as DTC or Cede & Co.
    [Show full text]
  • The Adoption of Loan Replacement Grants for Low- and Moderate-Income Students at American Colleges and Universities: a Comparative Case Study
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by D-Scholarship@Pitt THE ADOPTION OF LOAN REPLACEMENT GRANTS FOR LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME STUDENTS AT AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY by Adam Joseph Argaylis Lips B.A., University of Notre Dame, 1997 M.A.T., University of Portland, 1999 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education University of Pittsburgh UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF EDUCATION This dissertation was presented by Adam Joseph Argaylis Lips It was defended on April 2, 2009 and approved by Michael G. Gunzenhauser, Associate Professor Administrative and Policy Studies University of Pittsburgh School of Education Peter Miller, Assistant Professor Department of Foundations and Leadership Duquesne University School of Education John C. Weidman, Professor and Chair Administrative and Policy Studies University of Pittsburgh School of Education Dissertation Director: Erik C. Ness, Assistant Professor Administrative and Policy Studies University of Pittsburgh School of Education ii Copyright © by Adam J.A. Lips 2009 iii THE ADOPTION OF LOAN REPLACEMENT GRANTS FOR LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME STUDENTS AT AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY Adam J.A. Lips, EdD University of Pittsburgh, 2009 In recent years, a growing number of American colleges and universities have implemented financial aid policies targeted at lower-income students. These initiatives – referred to in this study as Loan Replacement Grant (LRG) programs – seek to reduce or eliminate loans as part of student financial aid awards and replace them with grants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of the US News and World Report Collegiate Rankings On
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Economics of Education Review 26 (2007) 244–255 www.elsevier.com/locate/econedurev The influence of the US News and World Report collegiate rankings on the matriculation decision of high-ability students: 1995–2004 Amanda Griffitha, Kevin Raskb,Ã aDepartment of Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA bDepartment of Economics, Colgate University, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA Received 3 June 2004; accepted 7 November 2005 Abstract The annual US News and World Report (USNWR) Guide to America’s Best Colleges is much anticipated by both high- ability high school seniors and college and university administrators. In this paper, we use a decade of Colgate University Admitted Student Questionnaire surveys to estimate the influence of changes in a school’s USNWR rank on the probability of matriculation. We find that school choice is responsive to changes in rank, that the sensitivity to rank declines at lower ranks, and this sensitivity is independent of other objective measures of quality. The importance of the rankings can also be different for women, minorities, and the highest ability aided students. They have also gotten more important over time for aided students. Our results suggest that it is rational for college administrators to pay attention to their USNWR rank because it is an important factor in yielding accepted students. r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. JEL classification: I2; I21; I22 Keywords: School choice; Student financial aid; Demand for schooling 1. Introduction can a college experience be represented by a single number?) and privately trying to avoid slipping in Every fall, college administrators await the arrival the rankings.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Policies for Increasing Socioeconomic Diversity at Selective Colleges and Universities
    ISSUE BRIEF March 15, 2021 Federal Policies for Increasing Socioeconomic Diversity at Selective Colleges and Universities Elizabeth Davidson Pisacreta Emily Schwartz Catharine Bond Hill Martin Kurzweil Ithaka S+R provides research and strategic guidance to help the academic and cultural communities serve the public good and navigate economic, demographic, and technological change. Ithaka S+R is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization that works to advance and preserve knowledge and to improve teaching and learning through the use of digital technologies. Artstor, JSTOR, and Portico are also part of ITHAKA. Copyright 2021 ITHAKA. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of the license, please see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. ITHAKA is interested in disseminating this brief as widely as possible. Please contact us with any questions about using the report: [email protected]. Federal Policies for Increasing Socioeconomic Diversity at Selective Colleges and Universities 1 Introduction Earning a bachelor’s degree is increasingly important to an individual’s longer-term economic prospects. Communities, at all levels, also benefit when their members earn postsecondary credentials, through improved economic, social, and health outcomes. Yet, despite an increase in college participation over the last two decades, severe inequities in bachelor’s degree attainment remain; inequities that often leave lower-income and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) students with debt and no or low-value credentials.1 With Democrats coalescing around a number of federal policy interventions, Congress and the Biden administration seem poised to take action to address these inequities and increase attainment.
    [Show full text]
  • IN Notre Dame 01
    1 APPENDIX A UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC **DRAFT**v3 2 UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DU LAC TABLE OF CONTENTS General Information .................................................................................................................... A-1 Governance ................................................................................................................................. A-1 Administration ............................................................................................................................ A-7 Academic Accreditation and Memberships .............................................................................. A-11 Undergraduate Education .......................................................................................................... A-11 Graduate Education ................................................................................................................... A-12 Relationships with Other Institutions........................................................................................ A-12 Faculty and Employees ............................................................................................................. A-13 Retirement Plans ....................................................................................................................... A-13 Student Enrollment ................................................................................................................... A-14 Student Recruitment.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Higher Education: Schools' Use of the Antitrust Exemption Has Not Significantly Affected College Affordability Or Likelihood of Student Enrollment to Date. Report to Congressional
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees GAO September 2006 HIGHER EDUCATION Schools’ Use of the Antitrust Exemption Has Not Significantly Affected College Affordability or Likelihood of Student Enrollment to Date GAO-06-963 September 2006 HIGHER EDUCATION Accountability Integrity Reliability Highlights Schools' Use of the Antitrust Exemption Highlights of GAO-06-963, a report to Has Not Significantly Affected College congressional committees Affordability or Likelihood of Student Enrollment to Date Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found In 1991 the U.S. Department of Twenty-eight schools—all highly selective, private 4-year institutions— Justice sued nine colleges and formed a group to use the antitrust exemption and developed a common universities, alleging that they had methodology for assessing financial need, which the group called the restrained competition by making consensus approach. The methodology used elements already a part of collective financial aid another need analysis methodology; schools modified this methodology and determinations for students reached agreement on how to define those elements. By the 2004-2005 accepted to more than one of these schools. Against the backdrop of school year, 25 of 28 schools in the group were using the consensus this litigation, Congress enacted a approach. Schools’ implementation of the approach varied, however, with temporary exemption from officials from 12 of the 25 schools reporting that they partially implemented antitrust laws for higher education it, in part because they believed it would be costly to do so. institutions in 1992. The exemption allows limited collaboration Over the last 5 years, tuition, room, and board costs among schools using the regarding financial aid practices antitrust exemption increased by 13 percent compared to 7 percent at all with the goal of promoting equal other private 4-year schools not using the exemption.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chemistry of Art Encouragement Erary Humor
    HAVERFORD Alumni Magazine Fall 2003 II The Classic Scholar-Athlete If you were pressed to describe a “typical” Haverford graduate—if you had to include a description for a time capsule, for example—you would do well to start with Hunter Rawlings. At Haverford, Rawlings was both serious scholar and serious athlete. And his career in academia bespeaks an education steeped in academic rigor, values, a lifelong love for learning, and tools necessary for leadership. One of the things we try to do when we put this magazine together (when we’re not fretting about getting it out six weeks late) is a big-picture inventory of how people, programs, and events have been covered over the years in our own publications. Last winter, we put together an issue devoted to newspaper journalists because it occurred to us that Haverford, for its size and for an institution without a journalism major, seems to have an inordinate number of accomplished newspaper people. When Hunter Rawlings decided to step down from the Cornell presidency and back into the classroom, it presented us with an opportunity to do a story. After some preliminary Jill Sherman Vice President for research, we couldn’t find any stories of note about Hunter and his years at Iowa. Institutional Advancement Nothing about his years at Cornell. The Spring 1966 issue of Haverford College Horizons Stephen Heacock carried a photograph of senior basketball players Dave Felsen, Dave Kane, Rawlings, Editor, Executive Director of Marsh Robinson, and Walt Whitman, along with a short piece about the team’s success.
    [Show full text]
  • Ivy League Price-Fixing: Conflict from the Intersection of Education and Commerce
    Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 21 Issue 1 Volume 21, Fall 2006, Issue 1 Article 1 Ivy League Price-Fixing: Conflict from the Intersection of Education and Commerce Arthur Austin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES IVY LEAGUE PRICE-FIXING: CONFLICT FROM THE INTERSECTION OF EDUCATION AND COMMERCE ARTHUR AUSTIN* INTRODUCTION "No one attending the [price-fixing] gatherings was so stupid that he didn't know the meetings were in violation of the law. But it is the only way a business can be run. It is free enterprise."1 Price-fixing is universally acknowledged as the most pernicious antitrust offense. 2 To Adam Smith price-fixing was evidence of a * Edgar A. Hahn Professor of Jurisprudence, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Cleveland, Ohio. 1 JOHN G. FULLER, THE GENTLEMEN CONSPIRATORS 191 (1962). 2 See A.D. NEALE, THE ANTITRUST LAWS OF THE U.S.A 444 (3d ed., Cambridge University Press 1980) (1960) (stating "Price-fixing agreements come first in importance among these offenses and nobody in the United States now expects to get away with overt price agreements or any of the obvious variants such as agreements for level tendering, formula pricing, and so on").
    [Show full text]
  • University of Pennsylvania Coordinates: 39.953885°N 75.193048°W from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    University of Pennsylvania Coordinates: 39.953885°N 75.193048°W From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The University of Pennsylvania (commonly referred to as Penn or UPenn) is an American private Ivy League University of Pennsylvania research university located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Incorporated as The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, Penn is one of 14 founding members of the Association of American Universities and one of the nine original Colonial Colleges. Benjamin Franklin, Penn's founder, advocated an educational program that focused as much on practical education for commerce and public service as on the classics and theology. Penn was one of the first academic Arms of the University of Pennsylvania institutions to follow a multidisciplinary model pioneered by several European universities, concentrating multiple Latin: Universitas Pennsylvaniensis "faculties" (e.g., theology, classics, medicine) into one Motto Leges sine moribus vanae (Latin) [6] institution. It was also home to many other educational Motto in Laws without morals are in vain innovations. The first school of medicine in North America English (Perelman School of Medicine, 1765), the first collegiate business school (Wharton, 1881) and the first student Established 1740[note 1] [7] union (Houston Hall, 1896) were all born at Penn. Type Private Penn offers a broad range of academic departments, an Endowment $7.7 billion[1] extensive research enterprise and a number of community Budget $6.007 billion[2] outreach and public service programs. It is particularly well known for its medical school, dental school, design President Amy Gutmann school, school of business, law school, communications Provost Vincent Price school, nursing school, veterinary school, its social sciences and humanities programs, as well as its Academic staff 4,246 faculty members[2] biomedical teaching and research capabilities.
    [Show full text]