Differentiated tuition
Shadowed by the increased international student population are less apparent but equally significant reasons for the increased profit: differentiated tuition, additional fees and lack of financial aid. Not only has the number of students increased over the past years, but the actual cost of the tuition specifically for international students has also spiked up in conjunction while the financial aid opportunities stayed limited.
More and more public universities are now introducing international student specific tuition, with some institutions charging $4,000 more for undergraduate international students compared to their usual out-of-state tuition. It is nothing new for institutions to charge modest service and program fees for international students. But the current trend of abrupt increases in the differentiated costs is alarming to say the least. In addition, financial aid is minimal for most undergraduate international students, which leaves the burden of the entire tuition and the increased differentiated rate entirely on the students’ shoulder. This phenomenon of increasing cost of tuition for international students must not turn into a nationwide trend and needs to stop immediately.
Losing the edge
By excluding international students from financial aid applications, differentiating and increasing their tuition, and creating additional registration fees that are often mixed in the general budget without transparency, institutions are not only stepping further away from their commitment to international exchange of culture and intellect, but are also risking their reputation as the primary higher education destination for international students.
Historically, U.S. campuses held a strong attraction as the predominant destination for studying abroad, which acted as the primary reason for growth in international student population. In the post-World War II era we saw exponential growth and diversification of international students due to greater participation of the U.S. government in promoting and facilitating student migration. In the 1960s, the labor and technical demands of newly industrializing regions drew international students in unprecedented numbers. However, institutions must recognize that the current influx of international students is largely a reflection of increased Chinese students due to China’s changing socioeconomic status rather than as a result of U.S. institutions’ initiatives. This reversed dynamic puts universities in a vulnerable position, especially when they respond by instituting differentiated tuition and depending more heavily on this revenue source.
