Letters to the Editor

2/4/10 6:00pm

Editorial overlooks financial aid strides

To the Editor:We were disappointed by the Thresher's Jan. 29 superficial editorial about The Princeton Review's most recent "best value" rankings ("Slip in 'best value' rankings discouraging"). The editorial suggests that Rice has not been sympathetic to the financial needs of students and families, which is preposterous. Even a review of the Thresher's own articles about tuition and financial aid proves otherwise.

Five years ago, Rice announced that the university would no longer require students from families with incomes under $30,000 to finance part of their undergraduate education with loans. Two years later, we doubled the income threshold for the no-loan policy to $60,000, and that amount was raised to $80,000 for students who entered this past fall. The university also lowered the cap on loans in financial aid packages for need-eligible incoming freshmen to $10,000 for their four undergraduate years - down from the limit of up to $14,500 for freshmen who entered in fall 2008.

---

---

Since fiscal year 2004, the number of our students on scholarship aid has increased from just under 30 percent to more than 41 percent, and the average scholarship award has increased from $17,995 to $28,494. As a result of our financial aid policies, more than 18 percent of current students come from families with incomes below $60,000, as compared with fewer than 14 percent in 2004. And more than 18 percent of the current freshman class are recipients of Federal Pell Grants - a record for Rice and higher than many of our competitor schools. Among other benefits, this increased support of lower-income students has helped foster more diversity in our class.

Although nominal tuition has increased, net tuition has grown much more slowly, as we have implemented these policies and increased support to the families that most need it. Rice's tuition has been approximately $6,000 less than that of other premier research universities. We have not been able to match the programs implemented by a few schools that have much larger endowments, but Rice's financial aid policies and support are among the most generous in the country and have been very significantly enhanced over the last few years. Despite the decrease in Rice's endowment caused by the recession, the university has increased financial aid to students, which was reported in your front-page story on the "best value" rankings.

The "best value" rankings from The Princeton Review are based mostly on information provided by educational institutions and are issued separately from The Princeton Review's best colleges guide, which is based on surveys of students and is published in the summer. The Thresher article blended the two as if there were a cause and effect, but the two rankings are independent and use different criteria.

We're disappointed that the Thresher did not spend more time researching and analyzing what Rice has done to merit a top-10 placement on The Princeton Review's "best value" list the past four years in a row. In fact, Rice is the only university to appear on The Princeton Review's list of best-value private schools five of the past six years. Rice may have moved down a few notches from No. 4 to No. 7 on the list, but that's a reflection of variables being compared with what other schools are doing. What matters is that Rice continues to make its high-quality education affordable and accessible to people from all walks of life. Perhaps that's why applications to Rice this year have already exceeded 12,300 - more than 1,100 over the record 11,172 applications received last year.

Finally, Rice students benefit in the classroom, in labs, in their residential colleges and on campus from the fruits of the Vision for the Second Century. This includes two new residential colleges, enhancement of Hispanic Studies, Latin America engagement and other academic programs, a new recreation center, a pavilion, improved venues for baseball, basketball and other sports and new academic and research facilities like the BioScience Research Collaborative and the Brockman Hall for Physics. These are investments in their educations and in their lives. The V2C will continue to serve Rice students now and for decades, no matter what the ups and downs of the economy may be in the short term.

Kathy Collins

Vice President for Finance

Chris Muñoz

Vice President for Enrollment

Robin Forman

Dean of Undergraduates

Prices dropping for precious resources

To the Editor:

I am responding to the Backpage of Jan. 15, which noted that Student Association President Patrick McAnAnEy didn't know about the hidden scheme in Avatar wherein the "private military contractors" (and their greedy company employer) were seeking the precious material under the Tree of Life, a substance referred to in the Thresher as carbon nanotubes. Nanotubes are actually becoming less precious, and some of the best single-walled carbon nanotubes (indeed produced at Rice) are now reduced in price to a mere $225,000 per kilogram. In my life before Rice (hard though it is to imagine a life before Rice), while working for the United States Air Force Research Laboratory, we spent uncountable taxpayer dollars seeking unobtainium (the version from Pandora is apparently valued at $20,000,000 per kilogram), but the only material we ever received from our contractors was determined to be "balonyum," which was worthless.

Wade Adams

Director, Smalley Institute

---