It's not clear if a trend is underway yet, but 2024 is beginning to look like a period of controlling college costs through budget reductions. Job cuts were announced at numerous institutions ranging from community colleges to state universities to at least one elite university. The wave of cuts includes a variety of institutions with Ohio over-represented. After a year of cuts, it appears more are to come at West Virginia University. Cuts in staffing or budget that could lead to staff reductions were initiated to align with enrollment decline or in other cases were designed to control the increasing cost of higher education. Demographics, cost, and changing attitudes towards higher education will inevitably close some colleges, especially small, private, and religious institutions. Staff reductions at public institutions in Texas appeared to be more about politics. Texas community colleges are slated to increase budgets with a new funding model. Whatever the impetus, it will be important to stay abreast of staffing and other budget cuts and the way these changes play out in public opinion. The impact of cuts on staff burnout is particularly critical because overwork and exhaustion negatively impact the quality of the student experience.
Despite warning signs about enrollment and rising costs, business officers reported surprising levels of confidence in their institution's financial status. The survey also indicated that strategies that are being considered to manage financial affairs in the future, which included controlling the proportion of tenured faculty, maximizing efficient facilities use, and cutting spending on athletics and administrative overhead.
While some elite institutions have already crossed a $100,000 per year price tag, predictions are that others will soon follow. Controlling rising costs in U.S. higher education is voiced by both Democrats and Republicans but the two sides have different ways of getting there. U.S. House of representatives passed the College Cost Reduction Act along party lines, confirming Representative Foxx's accusations that all of higher education needs an overhaul. Democrats introduced numerous amendments, all of which were voted down by the Republican majority.
From a systemic point of view, it's important to recognize the role that elite and more expensive colleges and universities play in perpetuating social class in the U.S. Smaller elite institutions, and even larger institutions with enough resources to fund it, offer "small discussion and seminar-style classes that foster critical thinking, debate and personalized attention," approaches that prepare graduates for careers and roles of leadership. By contrast, larger public institutions rely more heavily on standardized testing, memorization, and lecture-style courses that reduce the potential for engagement and cultivation of critical thinking and social/organizational competencies. These differences amount to tracking, the result of which is enhanced networks that privileged graduates acquire simply by showing up in more elite institutions. Exceptions to this dichotomy can be found in large and public universities, but anomalies are primarily offered to "honors" students, or those who are granted admission to the ranks of elite learners by virtue of special talent.
The issue of higher education stratification contributing to social class distinction is imbedded in the different views advocated by Democrats and Republicans. VP Kamala Harris added to her speaking points that non-degree pathways should be advanced in order for all citizens to achieve employment and economic success. Candidate Trump has previously advocated more for-profit post-secondary options along with active criticism of U.S. higher education in general and elite institutions in particular. "Rethinking College" is partially about the cost of higher education but may also be the result of prospective students seeking other pathways to lucrative employment.
Ironically, overall state support for public higher education increased, offsetting the supplemental funds that were allocated during pandemic relief. The pattern of increases includes hefty increases in some of the states where higher education is under attack, as in the examples of Florida where the state funding increased by 16.6% and Texas where the increase was 46%, a large portion creating an endowment for public education. Illinois announced a funding plan to increase equity among its 12 state colleges and universities, a move that would serve regional and minority-serving institutions. Kentucky is poised to increase funding, a move to enhance employability of residents in rural areas. The U.S. Congress boosted funding for 707 projects in earmarks primarily for equipment purchases to help colleges and universities. The 2024 Presidential election provided a coalition for unions the opportunity to publish a "Statement of Unity" to advocate the full funding of higher education throughout the U.S.
The optimism that may be justified based on increased funding to state institutions is counter-balanced by 300 Billion worth of cuts in California and in states where consolidation of higher education is being sought. The Governors of Pennsylvania and Oklahoma have proposed the merger of public institutions in their states, with particular attention to regional institutions with declining enrollment. Budget cuts for Pennsylvania's higher education sector resulted in significant staff reductions and a new statewide coordinating board will oversee all public higher education. Legislative action is being considered by both conservatives and liberals to deal with Pennsylvania's enrollment declines. The proposals face potentially strong opposition where the institutions are in small towns where the institutions are the lifeblood for the economy. Mergers of independent arts colleges may allow them to survive even with current enrollment declines. Private institutions such as Goddard College Wells College and others, had no place to turn and are closing.
