Before spring break, we continued an effective dialogue that began on the google doc. This dialogue mainly centered on the issue of tuition, one we had been tentative to probe. Tuition maintains a healthy cash flow which could ensure the stability of our school. Charging tuition has a heavy cost, however; doing so would place EdCo among the many independent schools who risk perpetuating elitism by compromising values for dollars and cents. So, we collectively decided not to charge tuition for the majority of our students (as little as possible, really) in order to more fully embrace the pool of potential students.
Refusing to charge tuition puts our school at a disadvantage from a practical standpoint. The interest accrued from our sizable assets may be sufficient only if our school remains small. Fundraising from wealthy donors will prove essential in replenishing our operating cost. Our lack of cashflow may mean we affiliate with another larger institution–perhaps a nonprofit or university. But, as I will outline below, each of these consequences that seem like compromises actually support our fundamental philosophy that is the core of our school.
First, a smaller student body enhances our ability as educators to ensure that each of our students can thrive. Since interpersonal feedback and customized curricula are both critical to the conception of EdCo, having a small student-to-faculty ratio ameliorates multitudes of potential logistical headaches. Moreover, with a smaller number of students our culture of abundance becomes much more feasible. With smaller class sizes come a smaller number of high-caliber, well-paid faculty. We can also afford to admit more at-risk youths and those of lower economic strata. In instrumenting this policy we plan to begin as a high school and then open a middle- and lower-school at later stages to gradually implement a broader no-tuition system.
Second, we plan to affiliate with an institution of higher education to facilitate our mission and establish an economy of mutual benefit. A board of trustees from that college or university provides a pool of education- and social justice-minded donors that might be interested in supporting us. Furthermore, collaborating with students and faculty at both undergraduate and graduate levels expose future educators and policy makers to the benefits of experimental education. An affiliation also helps solve some practical issues like facilities management and maintenance. Ideally, through this partnership enrollment would be guaranteed at the institution in question, thereby eliminating the external pressures of the "college hunt."
As a proof of concept regarding this second point, we plan to explore connections with Occidental College in Los Angeles, a liberal arts college that considered administrating a high school within the last decade. Occidental has many administrators and trustees that can give us clarity on our plans and the process of affiliating with a university. Once we establish a connection with Oxy, an affiliation with a school with graduate programs in education (UVA, for example) will seem more legitimate.
Below are some hard facts we came up with this week that will shape the profile of our school:
-High School (25-35 kids)
-Roughly 20 faculty (starting salary around 60K)
-As much as half or two thirds of our starting assets invested and accruing interest
-80%+ student body financial aid recipients
-Sports/arts programs in tandem with college/university offerings
-Board of trustees of affiliated institution
I am interested in your affiliation with a college to ease college stress on students and guarantee enrollment into higher education. However, it seems way to good to be true. With the current model of your school, it seems without a doubt that every one of your students will be ready for college when he/she/they graduates, but college tuition is rising. Your graduates will be diverse in their economic backgrounds because of your aim of being a no-tuition institution, so I'm guessing that some of them will not be able to pay a full college tuition, which makes your ideal affiliation with a college more complicated. If every one of your graduates is guaranteed enrollment, is financial aid also guaranteed to anyone who needs it?
ReplyDeleteYour group's dialogue on tuition parallels many of the same concerns voiced by my group. The idea of a mandatory tuition definitively gives way to a more limited student body (esp. in terms of economic diversity), but, at the same time, liberal financial aid packages call upon questions of practicality. Ultimately, my group reached a slightly different conclusion from yours (we'll be charging tuition to the majority of our students, with the hopes of putting aside funds for financial aid packages that will meet the needs of our student body).
ReplyDeleteI'm engaged with a lot of your ideas and I think you have some really cool plans. What would the reality be for students going into college? Would they be required to attend the college/university that you pair with? While I understand the incredible benefits that are offered by a partnership of that sort, I'm wary that students would be shuttled into the system without full knowledge of all of their options. We've had a million speeches about how there are over 8 billion colleges and you can pick the perfect one or whatever, and I just want the kids at your school to understand and fully embrace that idea. That being said, the partnership would be miraculous for their high school experience, and I'm intrigued by that path.
ReplyDelete