David Rubenstein, Vice President of Finance and University Treasurer, presented Georgetown University’s financial plan for fiscal years 2015 to 2018 earlier this week. While it is generally comprehensive and plans to increase Georgetown’s endowment and prestige, the plan only pays lip service to one of the most pressing issues facing Georgetown students: the increasing cost of higher education and a lack of sufficient financial aid for many prospective students.
In his email to the Georgetown community, Rubenstein did address the issue of financial aid, writing that the University was making every effort to stand by its need-blind full need admissions and financial aid policy.
The financial plan itself, however, lacks details concerning how Georgetown plans to improve its economic accessibility. In real money terms, the cost of attending Georgetown has risen 22 percent in the last 10 years, which is on par with the average cost of the nation’s private, four-year universities. If Georgetown were to make economic accessibility one of the school’s highest priorities, it would make more of an effort to lower its costs compared to colleges of its pedigree.
More economic accessibility improves the value of a Georgetown education and makes the school a more attractive option for prospective students—especially students from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds, making Georgetown a more diverse place. High tuition costs and the need to borrow excessive student loans remain two of the most significant factors prospective students use to choose among colleges of equal or similar caliber.
In an interview with the Voice earlier this March, University President John DeGioia said that the university is doing everything it can to meet its full-need pledge. When asked if he thought Georgetown students had to borrow too much money to attend, he said the formula used to predict how much money students’ families need to contribute asks that they borrow a maximum of $17,500.
In actuality, however, most families borrow roughly an additional $2,000 per year of attendance. DeGioia said that this extra borrowing is unnecessary. Yet, if the average family is taking on this nearly $8,000 of extra debt, however, then the borrowing is clearly necessary.
Georgetown must reconsider the way it calculates how much students and their families are expected to contribute—by using a flawed method for calculating family contributions, the university is unintentionally precluding many prospective students from applying and going to Georgetown, severely limiting this school’s diversity and applicant pool. Going forward, GUSA should make it a top priority to push the University to reexamine the way Georgetown determines student aid and fight economic exclusion at this university.
Georgetown is unfortunately caught between its requirements to build additional on-campus housing while planning an expansion of the endowment, but this must not stop its commitment to a Georgetown for students of all economic backgrounds.
