Skyrocketing
In 2004, Central Michigan University possessed the third-lowest tuition in the state and was known for its quality and bargain.
Then came 2005, the first year of the CMU Promise. CMU trustees raised tuition 38.6 percent for incoming freshmen but promised the same rate for five years.
Now, four years later, incoming freshmen are paying a rate that ranks fourth among Michigan universities. This number - $9,720 for a full-time, 30-credit student - ranks behind only the University of Michigan, Michigan State and Michigan Tech.
Admittedly, the university shot itself in the foot when it developed the CMU Promise. Thursday was a chance to rectify that.
But unfortunately, costs continue to rise and tuition was raised another 6.6 percent on top of the 21.1 percent it was raised last year.
And while administrators like University President Michael Rao may spin the 6.6 percent increase and tell everyone who will listen CMU still ranks eighth in the state in average tuition, one thing is clear: we may be near the top of the tuition list to stay.
Sure, other universities raised tuition about 6 percent this summer. But did they raise rates for incoming freshmen 97.9 percent in the prior three years? Not another university can claim such a feat.
The administration isn't clueless, but when looking at the numbers, how could they not see this coming?
Look at inflation, and it isn't even close. The tuition rate is more than 2.3 times what it should be adjusted correctly. MSU's is only 1.5 more than it should be.
Of course inflation isn't the only factor that raises tuition. Declining state aid and the lackluster economy are other excuses administrators may use. And they have some merit.
But one can't overlook how much CMU's tuition for incoming freshmen has increased in such a short amount of time. The 6.6 percent increase may have been necessary, but it wasn't fair to the fall's incoming students.
At this point, proposing a solution falls upon the entire university. The CMU Promise allowed the university to do some things it hadn't done before. But is it worth it? That's the question that needs to be asked.
Has the university advanced so much in four years that tuition should be hovering around twice as much as it was ($4,609.50 in 2004)?
Will students pay the extra money to come to Mount Pleasant when they can just as easily attend Western or Eastern? That will depend if the money has been well spent and if CMU's programs can rise above the rest.
Energy plans have been developed to save money, and have worked. But even more cost-cutting measures need to be taken. Innovative and inspired individuals must come together to make this campus run like a well-oiled machine.
Otherwise it will become an over-priced, average university in the years to come.
