CSNbbs

It doesn't look good:

http://birmingham.bizjournals.com/birmin...ily36.html

Thanks Alabama Government!

At least I'm covered. Sucks though. :/

Why does the BIRMINGHAM sNews have UA(T)'s tuition hike on the first sentence, and UAB and UAH on the 2nd sentence? I digress...

It does the goverment good to starve it for a short time so it can cut the fat. That said, I hope this diet ends soon, UAB as an academic power was starting to really roll and cutting research and teaching positions hurt that momentum. We need to find a way to increase our enrollment (annex some surrounding buildings?)

*insert obligatory BOT hate here*

Cutting 230 jobs is not cutting fat at UAB. It's more like a fingernail clip when compared to the total number of employees at the University.

Increasing enrollment won't solve any problems. We need to cap enrollment and attract higher quality students.

STLouis Blazer Wrote:Increasing enrollment won't solve any problems. We need to cap enrollment and attract higher quality students.

I agree that we need to attract higher-quality students (and we are making significant progress in that direction), but we also need more full-tuition paying students and dorm-living students and meal-plan paying student we can use to pay for all this building on campus.

And those jobs are important if they are faculty and researchers.

uab's enrollment is being capped while tuscaloosa's is expanding.
will be interesting to see if that discrepancy becomes an issue in state funding. If the state moves toward per-student funding like some states have, uab could be at a disadvantage depending on how it would be structured.

It was capped before the budget crunch and the goal was to improve our student quality. Overall that should be the goal. However, if UAB can show that it can pay for more things by increasing enrollment, they just might be able to convince them to change their mind (if it truly is about the money and not something else) in the short term, and then we can go back to improving student quality once the lean years are over.

in some states that have per-student funding, there are academic incentives tied to the funding, which discourages simply opening the enrollment floodgates to get more state appropriations.

Tuition will rise 10-14% for all 3 schools. If I remember correctly, the Board will vote within a week on a 12% hike in tuition at UAT, 14% at UAB and I don't remember UAH's projected hike in tuition.

That makes sense, give UAT, the cause of the problem, a break, but force UAB to pay more. Great.

LightEmUp70 Wrote:Thanks Alabama Government!

it was the voters that objected to Rileys tax increase and reform package that would have prevented this problem. i am not a huge fran of our state government but the blame for any shortfall lies with us on this one.

If UAB increases the quality of incoming students then they will soon be able to justify increased tuition.

"Increasing the quality of incoming students" is a claim that plays well to those who want to bring in more suburban school district graduates and fewer students from the majority of rural and inner city districts who represent a greater challenge to the faculty. Of the 133 school districts in Alabama, only about thirty have the resources to regularly produce high scoring seniors on a par with the Hoovers, Vestavias and Mountain Brooks of this state. Yes, I know there are a few students from these deprived districts who have done well. I am talking about average students from these deprived districts who will find themselves excluded from state universities on the basis that "they just don't belong" because of "test scores" and higher entrance requirements their high schools lack the ability to produce.

I'm not sure why there's UA and BOT hate with regards to this, all 3 campuses are cutting jobs and raised tuition 10+%. You can't get pissed off at the Board of Trustees because of what the legislature did.

Increasing enrollment at UAB isn't necessarily a good way to increase revenue. Sure, tuition income will increase, but it's not 100% free money. You have to support the students with instructors, classrooms, and parking..all 3 things that UAB is severely lacking, and two of which cannot be funded with tuition alone. To significantly increase enrollment, UAB is going to need more classrooms and parking and/or a much improved transit system, because MAX is really letting UAB down.

Most of the jobs UAB will lose will come from a hiring freeze. There are a ton of positions open right now, so they just won't fill them.

I don't think the UA System would ever let the appropriations go to a per-student basis, because most of the money UAB gets doesn't go to student-based projects, it goes to research, and UAB makes up a huge portion of the UAS budget. Regardless of the conspiracy theories that exist, the Board isn't interested in destroying the money center of the system.

mixduptransistor Wrote:I'm not sure why there's UA and BOT hate with regards to this, all 3 campuses are cutting jobs and raised tuition 10+%. You can't get pissed off at the Board of Trustees because of what the legislature did.

Regardless of the conspiracy theories that exist, the Board isn't interested in destroying the money center of the system.

+2

MississippGreen "it was capped before the budget crunch and the goal was to improve our student quality. Overall that should be the goal. However, if UAB can show that it can pay for more things by increasing enrollment, they just might be able to convince them to change their mind" This Is CAROLs Plan - not BOT

[b]Morte" That makes sense, give UAT, the cause of the problem, a break, but force UAB to pay more. Great."The % of tution increase is Richards Plan- Why mention UAT They have nothing to do with the State's Money problems[/b]

Quote:"Increasing the quality of incoming students" is a claim that plays well to those who want to bring in more suburban school district graduates and fewer students from the majority of rural and inner city districts who represent a greater challenge to the faculty. Of the 133 school districts in Alabama, only about thirty have the resources to regularly produce high scoring seniors on a par with the Hoovers, Vestavias and Mountain Brooks of this state. Yes, I know there are a few students from these deprived districts who have done well. I am talking about average students from these deprived districts who will find themselves excluded from state universities on the basis that "they just don't belong" because of "test scores" and higher entrance requirements their high schools lack the ability to produce.

I understand what you are saying but I disagree that UAB should maintain a certain level of acceptance standards so students from rural areas who have a lower GPA or entrance test scores can get in. UAB should strive to attract an overall higher quality student in all areas: GPA, ACT/SAT scores, volunteer service, etc. There are other schools that can provide a solid education to those who aren't the brightest on paper but UAB needs to become THE premier public academic institution in Alabama and one of the top in the Southeast.

UAB has great graduate programs but some of the undergraduate programs are lacking. It's time to get them both on the same levels so we can attract better students, better faculty, better jobs for our students, more grant money, increase UAB's endowment, etc, etc.

How full are the dorms? Can they restrict commuter applicants in favor of on campus students>

By attracting better students, UAB can charge more money? Sounds like a marketing program.

I have heard the materials engineering dept is doing some interesting projects for the military, ie helmets.
UAB would be a steal in DFW. SMU is about $40 grand/yr. TCU is a little less.

Have said this before and realize I am not in the trenches, but UAB has an excellent reputation. Academics and basketball, in that order. Football on its way.