Another Lawrence University Giving Day has come and gone, and with it, the understandable spike in student discussion of the sheer audacity of a university charging nearly $70,000 a year to nickel and dime its student population for a few more precious cents. It’s well deserved; Lawrence’s tuition is in the same ballpark as some of the cheaper Ivy League schools, and the cost of room and board is not exactly competitive given our location in suburban Wisconsin. Keep the John Mulaney references coming — the outrage is warranted.
At the same time, it might be worth playing the game.
As problematic as Lawrence’s high tuition is, tuition is not getting any lower anywhere in the country. This may be a defeatist sentiment, but it seems to me that managing tuition is simply not something students have much impact over. The clearest way students can show they disapprove of tuition is by not paying it and going somewhere else instead, and then what? Other people who are willing to pay will take their place? Lawrence goes out of business? Like it or not, exorbitant tuition is not going anywhere.
The more meaningful concern for students is the way that money is allocated across campus, and this is something students can have much more influence over, both through advocacy and through events like Giving Day. I don’t have insider information on how Lawrence budgets, but I would imagine it goes something like this: the first thing they account for is things that need to happen for Lawrence to be a school and a living environment. This means doing things like paying faculty and staff, coordinating with Bon Appetit, paying the heat and electrical bill, etc. Next, I would imagine they look at larger projects that need to be undertaken. Which buildings are the closest to collapsing this year? How can the school expand to generate more students and income? Once they’ve accounted for the capital needed to support these sorts of priorities, then I can imagine they might turn to things like student scholarships, funding events on campus, supporting distinctive student projects and providing the things that make the Lawrence experience more than just what you get in the classroom. Taken this way, student and alumni donations may go towards projects that aren’t important to the ones donating, but it seems a lot more likely that this money makes its way back to students than income streams like tuition.
If you could pay one dollar for someone to give you $500, you would do it in a heartbeat. If you could pay one dollar for someone to spend $500 on something that really mattered to you, that would also probably be a pretty good deal. I’m not saying that’s exactly what’s happening with student donation matching on Giving Day, but it seems to me as though this is the clearest way to boost funding for things that matter most to students pretty much for free, as well as putting further pressure on administration: we paid tuition and donated. What more could you possibly need from us?
Something else to consider is that major projects are often funded by alumni donations — the only saving grace for projects that otherwise seem completely out of touch with student needs — and in addition to greed, part of the reason why administration pushes so hard for student engagement with Giving Day is that these statistics work as a way for alumni to judge whether it’s worth it for them to give. If students, who alumni know are broke because they were too, are donating, it’s a sign to alumni that the school is worth investing in. The fact that you’re here, paying tuition and spending your valuable time contributing to this campus is evidence enough that you believe that to be true to some extent.
If every student gave a dollar on giving day, the school would raise just short of $750,000 through donation matching, hardly an amount to sniff at but also not even a fifth the cost of, random example, a new track. If, however, even 75 percent of current students gave a dollar on giving day, would that motivate alumni to make a significant investment they might not otherwise make? What about 50 percent? Nothing is for certain, and it’s all pointless if students don’t advocate for themselves, talk to administration, organize protests, write op-eds and more to communicate how money should be spent to the powers that be.
At the same time, a sense of pragmatism might improve student experiences in the short term and long term. I think it’s worth a dollar to find out.