That could be the subtitle of this Op-Ed piece in the Washington Post by American University graduate student Sui Lang Panoke, who argues in favor of expanded federal student aid to graduate education
Is access to graduate education in America exclusively for the upper class?
As a first-year graduate student struggling to make ends meet, I believe the answer is yes. In my experience, searching for funding to pay the extensive costs of my higher education has been an upward climb leading only to dead ends.
I am a single mother who qualifies for the maximum amount in federal aid for graduate students. But this amount barely covers my tuition; paying for housing, books and living expenses is up to me.
I have no college fund, trust or inheritance. I don’t independently qualify for private student loans because I lack the substantial credit or employment history that is required, and I do not have the luxury of having a willing and eligible co-signer. Furthermore, I can work only part-time jobs while in school; otherwise I would not qualify for child-care assistance.
While I have applied for a few scholarships, I have yet to be awarded one, and I have found that they are an extremely limited and unreliable resource to use to fund graduate school. Scholarships represent less than 4 percent of the total aid available each year for college students, and much less than that for graduate students. Contrary to popular belief, there are not millions of scholarships out there going unused every year.
The majority of students in my situation seeking graduate degrees don’t have the means to just pick up and move to another city without some kind of government assistance. Yet federal Pell Grants and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants are available only to undergraduate students. There are very few alternative options for funding my graduate degree. What’s even more frustrating is that if I were seeking an undergraduate degree, being a single mother would qualify me to have most of my college expenses paid for.
There was a time in America when someone trying to better themselves was willing to make whatever sacrifices were necessary to acheive their goal. Today, they just go crying to Washington, complaining that they can’t do it themselves and demanding that Uncle Sam the American taxpayer pay their way. Times certainly have changed.
Update: Neal McClusky at Cato@Liberty takes Ms. Panoke’s argument plea for a subsidized life and pretty much rips it to shreds.
July 25th, 2006 at 8:23 am
She’s studying for an MPA. Enough said.
July 25th, 2006 at 9:07 am
I went to American University in that program. The student body for an MPA includes HR progressionals going for a higher credential in organization development, up and coming government employees, some funded by their agencies and some not, and recent graduates with fellowships. The degree itself teaches one to be a generalist in government service, although the questions it poses are more appropriate to senior managers than entry level federal workers. It is likely better to get a GS-5 entry level position than an MPA right away, since it takes two years to get your GS-9 either way.
My advice to up and coming graduate students is never start unless someone else is paying for it - then use the other aid for living expenses.
July 25th, 2006 at 9:14 am
Actually, I’d have to agree with her. I’m a grad student working full time, my employer pays a portion of my tuition, and I STILL have to take out loans. In a lot of jobs, a graduate degree is quickly becoming a requirement, as she mentions, but financing it is hard and I imagine it would be near impossible when you’re supporting a child as well. I would much rather my tax dollars go to supporting education than war.
July 25th, 2006 at 9:38 am
louisi,
What right do you have to ask me to pay for your education ?
July 25th, 2006 at 10:24 am
Ever Consider going to a public school and/or a school in a cheaper location.
American’s tuition is $1048/credit
George Mason is $705/credit (out of state)
$280/credit (in state)
Maryland is about $410/credit (in state)
Move to MD or VA and get in state tuition after a year.
Or go to school somewhere where a 1br apartment isn’t $1500/month. Going to school in a cheaper city (Syracuse, Pittsburgh, etc…) or a school in the country like the University of Georgia or IU-Bloomington.
Maybe instead of complaining about not being able to afford a private school in one of America’s most expensive cities, you should find a school/situation that is affordable.
July 25th, 2006 at 10:33 am
I’m not asking you. I am paying Citi for my loans and as Michael mentions, they are for living expenses. My point is that the demands in the workplace are not syncing with the available aid. The system does seem pretty elitist towards those that currently have money or are able to have someone pay their way through school since many professional jobs these days prefer or require a graduate degree. Everyone’s tax dollar goes to something that they don’t neccessarily support. I support education, you probably do in some regard, but disagree with me on this particular issue. No one is asserting a right to your money, but she is saying that the funds are there for undergraduate education, and she wishes that they were there for graduate as well. I think that is a fair observation to make since previously, all you needed was the undergraduate degree and times have changed.
July 25th, 2006 at 10:39 am
louisi,
If the private market can provide financing for graduate education, then I’m fine with it. The problem for me comes when the government gets involved either as lender or as guarantor.
And you’re right, everyone’s tax dollars go to something they don’t support. Which should be the main reason that the government limit itself to its core essential functions and leave us alone.
July 25th, 2006 at 10:43 am
louisi is an example of a person I don’t want in the government.
Doug asked her a simple direct question.
louisi gave long response in which she first says that she does not want Doug to pay for her education. Then she says that she does want Doug to pay for her education.
July 25th, 2006 at 10:44 am
Ms. Panoke wants us to pay for her life of ease and privilege as a graduate student, hoping that she can market that degree into a career of a well paid bureaucrat.
Ms. Panoke can borrow up to $138,500 in Stafford Loans as an independent student, with repayment terms of up to forty years. She doesn’t want to pay, however, she wants the education to be free for her and expensive for the taxpayer.
By the way, where’s the father of the child? Why isn’t he paying for all of the child’s expenses?
July 25th, 2006 at 10:53 am
i don’t want my tax dollars going to pay for that mess of a war in iraq. why do you ask me to pay for your thirst for violence and hatred?
there’s nothing saying that she wants the money for free. a loan is fine - you’d get your precious tax dollars back.
i myself can’t go to grad school because i have don’t have the credit for a loan of that size. i can’t get a higher paying job because i don’t have a graduate degree, so i can’t pay for the graduate degree. it’s a vicious circle that mommy and daddy’s boys really don’t understand. and if you are working all the time to pay for it, you don’t have the time that is required to actually study and LEARN (lest we forget that is the purpose of education.)
as for having to go to a cheaper school, that’s just more elitism for you. you have to be a complete moron to think that having “george mason” on your resume equals “georgetown.” why should someone who didn’t grow up with money be forced to settle for something less, something that is going to hurt them in the competition for jobs?
there is no reason the gov can’t offer loans to grad students as it does for undergrad. and why must the gov do it? because no private bank is going to loan money to poor people.
but then, no amount of reason and rationality will get through your thick skulls. you would rather see a class system of waspy white uberchristian hyperpatriotic men ruling the country rather than giving everyone equality of opportunity. isn’t that really what you mean?
July 25th, 2006 at 10:56 am
“where?s the father of the child?”
more elitism for you.
July 25th, 2006 at 11:04 am
While I?m often frustrated at the lack of mention of my alma mater?relative to its peers such at Georgetown University and George Washington University?in the local press, if this is the kind of student and thinker that American University nurtures and then unleashes on the world?and for which it is recognized in the newspapers?then I would prefer that AU continue to languish in media obscurity.
Simply put, AU graduate student Sui Lang Panoke believes that America?s wealth should be ?redistributed? to subsidize her education and lifestyle choices, to which I say the following:
1. If the university you have chosen has not acknowledged your value to it (and, in fact, may have disputed your value) by failing to offer you scholarships of a sufficient value to allow you to attend the university relatively stress free, then you should not expect that anyone else would want to subsidize your education. Universities award scholarships based on past academic success, standardized tests, and other relevant factors. If, in the eyes of the university you have chosen, you do not merit such rewards, don?t expect others to reach an opposite conclusion.
2. American University is an expensive institution?I know because I graduated from AU in 1995. You freely chose to enroll there with full knowledge of its high cost and its lack of financial support for you. Instead, you could have chosen to enroll in lower cost local universities such as the University of Maryland or George Mason University. Believe me, an American University degree does not have such cache that the benefits of having an AU degree vs. a UMd. or GMU degree necessarily will outweigh the extra cost. Additionally, there are other lower cost alternatives such as online programs offered by non-local universities.
3. You should not expect taxpayers to subsidize your education unless they can see a measurable economic benefit from doing so (and perhaps you shouldn?t even expect it then). Unfortunately, when comparing the known high cost of an American University education versus the likely low economic impact of your future career in the public sector, it would be difficult for anyone to determine that this makes economic sense. Perhaps another career choice would be more economically sensible.
4. The organization of the public sector, where pay and advancement are often tied more to tenure and academic credentials rather than individual performance and merit, may in fact contribute to the high cost and minimal scholarships associated with graduate degrees in public administration. Public sector workers know they can advance faster if they have a graduate degree, so that increases demand for the degrees. Faced with relatively high demand for their services, you should expect universities to keep costs high and scholarships low?it?s the rational thing to do.
5. Life is full of choices, and you seem to keep making choices that compound your problems. While you may not have chosen to become a single mother (or the dicey financial situation that comes with it), you certainly made a number of individual choices that led to this current situation. You have compounded this financial uncertainty by choosing to enroll in courses that you cannot afford and by working only part-time. You have done all of this knowingly. You should not expect others to subsidize your poor choices and their results.
6. You teeter on the edge of finding solutions to your problems, but fail to recognize or accept them. You say that ?you don’t independently qualify for private student loans because [you] lack the substantial credit or employment history that is required, and [you] do not have the luxury of having a willing and eligible co-signer.? Then why not put off your graduate education until you can build credit, a job history, and savings? As I said above, life is full of choices. And you can?t have everything when you want it. Given your situation, this is an instance that calls for delayed gratification, not subsidization.
7. Finally, there is no limit to the number of conclusions that could be reached by following your logic that ?money invested in graduate education will benefit the government by improving the quality of life for citizens.? If the goal is for the government to benefit by what it does, and it benefits when it improves the quality of life for citizens, then the government ought to by me a new house, a Mercedes, a plasma TV, and guarantee me a salary of $100,000 a year. Then my quality of life would be much better?imagine how much the government would benefit from that!
I hope that Sui Lang Panoke is at the beginning of her education at American University, thus giving her more time to benefit and grow from continued education. I?m still paying my student loans from both undergraduate and graduate school, but I?m not looking for anyone else to pick up the tab. But then again, I?m responsible and tend to make good choices, and I like to think that my time at American University helped me be the responsible person that I am. I wish the same for Sui Lang Panoke.
July 25th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Daedulus,
You: “there is no reason the gov can?t offer loans to grad students as it does for undergrad. and why must the gov do it? because no private bank is going to loan money to poor people.”
Again, what right do they have to my money ?
July 25th, 2006 at 11:19 am
Paul stated;
I agree with the spirit, but I would also claim students obtaining graduate degrees can benefit our society in ways besides economically. I’m currently a senior at GMU who is considering going to grad school so that I can eventually become a college professor. The extremely high cost of graduate school, however, has forced me to possibly reconsider. I consider myself to have a fair amount of money saved for an undergrad student with a part-time job. However, it would not be enough to cover my grad school and cost of living.
Many recent college grads are barely making ends meat when they get their first job (and those are the ones working full time). If a student then has to throw in the money for grad school, it becomes that much more difficult to actually stay out of debt.
I don’t believe any grad student expects their life to be easy. If grad school was easy, then everyone would have graduate degrees. As it is now, however, there are many people who don’t even have an undergrad. If the Government can assist future teachers, scientists, policy makers, etc. better themselves through higher education, then I believe it must be done.
July 25th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Policy makers, that believe the taxpayer should pay for their education in a top school because they cannot afford it themselves, are not the kind of policy makers I want in the government.
July 25th, 2006 at 11:55 am
My rule of thumb has usually been that if you have to pay for graduate school, then you probably shouldn’t go to graduate school (this does not include MBA programs, medical school, or law school where funding is rarely available no matter how qualified you are). My reasoning is that either (1) you aren’t viewed by the program as capable enough to merit funding or (2) the program is too weak to have any funds to provide for students. If you aren’t capable enough, then paying your money to get the degree is not likely to pay off in the future either because you will not complete the degree or your performance in the program will not be good enough to impress employers. If the program is so weak that it does not offer funding, then employers aren’t like to be impressed with your degree and it probably won’t pay off in the future. Either way, if you don’t get funding, then somebody is probably trying to send you a message that grad school might not be for you. Of course, people insist on going to grad school anyway and end up driving themselves into heavy debts. This is why every college and university under the sun is offering “graduate” degrees. It’s easy money. Unfortunately, many of the faculty at these programs are products of this same vicious cycle of ill-advised graduate education. What this has led to is the creation of a whole netherworld of second-tier graduate programs that add little value to society. People simply go to grad school for a credential so that they can make more money in their current jobs. All of this leads to degree inflation and the devaluing of graduate education. What is happening now is that graduate programs are dividing into programs/degrees that matter and programs/degrees that don’t matter. You are seeing the same thing in undergraduate education, as well.
July 25th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
Actually, on further reflection, not only grad school but advanced undergrad should be paid by employers, who should also pay living expenses and those of her dependents (although the employer should have help with this through the tax system), in exchange for a service requirement. As costs go up, this is essential.
Now, as to our hapless grad student, under the schema I describe, she would first join the federal service who would pay her tuition. Of course, she would have to compete for such a benefit, since not everyone can be a senior executive or manager and the MPA is really a management degree.
July 26th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
daedalus,
I’ve been enrolled in two graduate programs at two different universities and I’ve never paid for graduate tuition. I’ve had assistantships and scholarships pay for it. So, sorry, the money is there. I’ve taken out student loans as well, but that’s because I decided it was worth it in the long run to do so. My parents haven’t given me a dime since I graduated from my undergradate program (and besides, they’re far from rich). Of all the people I’ve met in gradaute school, none I’ve known has been particularly wealthy. Some even left better paying jobs to get degrees in something they found more interesting.
‘as for having to go to a cheaper school, that?s just more elitism for you. you have to be a complete moron to think that having ?george mason? on your resume equals ?georgetown.?’
Who exactly is being elitist here? You accuse others of elitism, and then claim that what school you go to matters. If that’s not elitist, I don’t know what is. While I agree that it does matter (to some degree, although less than you think), I’m not sure why the non-elite should subsidize the education of people who are going to go to elite schools, and will become members of the elite one day themselves.
The woman is basically complaining that we aren’t subsidizing her so that she can obtain better credentials than us, thus allowing her to be able to beat out the rest of us for jobs (and get paid better as a result).
Doesn’t that sound the least bit absurd?
At least if she’s wealthier, she’ll pay a greater percentage of her income in taxes.
Anyway, the more people that have degrees, the less valuable they are overall. The only reason why an undergraduate degree isn’t enough anymore (although that’s not really true) is because so many people have them, and have them increasingly in fields that have little value outside the university (psychology is the most popular major at the university where I work, among 25,000+ students).