Many Black students can barely afford Cal State. Tuition hikes will only make it worse

In summary

The California State University system is considering annual tuition hikes to help cover a billion-dollar budget gap. Increasing attendance costs could make it harder for Black students who are already facing stubborn achievement and economic disparities.

Isaac Alferos

Isaac Alferos is a higher education equity researcher and community organizer. He served as the Cal State Student Association president emeritus from 2021-22.

Introduction

With rising costs of housing, costs for food, budget shortfalls and COVID aid in the rearview mirror, the time has come for educational institutions to start looking for new ways to finance their operations. And no matter how predictable, it’s surprising to see that this time it’s the California State University system ready to ask students to pay up.

Tuition Increases and Equity Gaps

Cal State has increased tuition only once in the last 11 years, which has cemented the system’s reputation as one of the state’s most desired options for baccalaureate programs. While the university budget faces a $1.5 billion gap, an annual tuition increase risks pushing out more low-income students and widening equity gaps for Black students.

Increases in tuition today will further threaten a growing population of students coming to Cal State. And though CSU remains the most affordable option for students looking for a four-year degree, it’s still too expensive. A 2022 report by Community Engagement for College Success Network noted that 40% of CSU students worry about affordability – by far their largest concern.

Affordability Crisis and Basic Needs

Even though a large population of students receive grants and institutional aid to help lower costs, it’s still not enough, and this inflating cost of attendance is no doubt impacted by California’s overall affordability crisis. But it’s important to note that the basic needs crisis this creates throughout Cal State leaves many students unable to fully invest in their own education. A system-wide report found that 41% of students face food insecurity and 10% of students experience homelessness in any given year.

Impact on Black Students

Turning around to ask students to pay more for their education when it is already leaving students struggling to feed and house themselves is simply a cruel jest.

If that weren’t enough, being able to afford a degree exacerbates existing equity gaps that plague CSU. Reportedly, 76% of Black graduates within the system leave with debt compared to 46% for their white peers. When we add this to the reports of Cal State obscuring Black student data to hide the reality that Black graduation rates have maintained a 20% gap below white students over a 15-year span, why did this year’s Black Student Success report fail to reference affordability or transparent data in its recommendations?

The Future of CSU

The reality is the system is already struggling to substantively support Black students, with Black student enrollment struggling to push past 4% system-wide. As graduation and retention rates maintain their respective gaps, it’s clear that a tuition increase will only place more obstacles in front of Black students.

I have a deep love for Cal State. It’s not because of its structure or history or governance, but because of what CSU really is: extraordinary faculty, staff and students collectively committing to the just cause of building educational opportunities for communities where education historically failed.

With this in mind, it’s hard to see the direction CSU is going as being aligned with the steps needed to rectify the existing crises, helping create affordable, equitable, quality education.

Like many CSU students, I found myself outside the dated perspective of what a “traditional” student is. And though I am fortunate to come from a family of proud Black Cal State grads, I’m scared I could be the last in my family to call CSU home.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The article discusses the impact of potential tuition hikes on low-income and Black students, highlighting the issues of affordability and equity in education. These align with the goals of SDG 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all, and SDG 10, which focuses on reducing inequalities.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and quality primary and secondary education.
• Target 4.5: By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations.
• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

The article emphasizes the impact of tuition hikes on low-income students and the existing equity gaps for Black students. These targets address the need for equal access to education and the reduction of inequalities based on socioeconomic status and race.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator 4.1.1: Proportion of children and young people (a) in grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and (c) at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in (i) reading and (ii) mathematics, by sex.
• Indicator 4.5.1: Parity indices (female/male, rural/urban, bottom/top wealth quintile, and others such as disability status, indigenous peoples, and conflict-affected, as data become available) for all education indicators on this list that can be disaggregated.
• Indicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, by age, sex, and persons with disabilities.

The article does not explicitly mention these indicators, but they can be used to measure progress towards the targets. The first indicator measures the proficiency level of students in reading and mathematics, which reflects the quality of education. The second indicator measures gender and socioeconomic disparities in education, while the third indicator measures income inequality.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: calmatters.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.