By James Riswick
Assistant Opinions Editor
Me shake my head sometimes. Don’t get me wrong, my time here has been great and I’ve never regretted coming. But from my point of view, the university seems to do things that just don’t make sense sometimes.
In the past week alone, Pepperdine proved this theory rather nicely. On Tuesday, RLO ran out of housing. On Wednesday, I couldn’t get into most of the general education classes the university requires me to take.
Also on Wednesday, we all received a little note in the mail from Seaver Dean Dr. David Baird saying we will all be charged more to go here next year. Then, if that wasn’t enough, I learned on Thursday that the university would really like to connect the fountain in the quad with the fountain in front of Stauffer Chapel, using waterfalls to beautify this campus.
We can’t live on campus, we can’t take the classes we want, but we can be charged more money to come here. Plus, we get the privilege of looking at a pretty new waterfall that rich benefactors will be kindly providing.
If the timing of it all doesn’t make you scratch your head, then the whole situation certainly will. In the eyes of most students, the administration would probably have an easier time explaining baseball’s infield fly rule than providing students with the logic behind this series of events.
Let’s take these issues on one at a time, beginning with the housing crunch. According to Seaver Associate Dean Jim Brock, “It’s hard for (RLO) to predict how much of an issue (housing is) going to be. There’s a lot of factors there that make it impossible to determine.”
Are you kidding me? Are administrators actually saying they’re not entirely sure why some sophomores who are required to live on campus couldn’t get housing, not to mention countless upperclassmen?
Well, could it possibly be that there are roughly 1400 freshman and sophomores who are required to live on campus, while there are only about 1750 housing spaces? Could it be that the university hasn’t built any new dorms to accommodate the raising number of students who want to live on campus? And could it be that many students don’t want to – or simply can’t due to lack of car – drive 25 minutes through the canyon every morning for class, then park in the nether regions of Firestone Fieldhouse parking?
Yes, I believe I’ve found the answers. If I can figure this out using simple logic, I’m sure the administration can as well.
Now, let’s deal with the fact that some of us can’t get into classes we’re required to take. I have no problem with GEs, but if I’m required to take English 102 and Religion 102, I’d certainly like to take them before I’m a senior. How is it that when I signed into PepXpress at 7 a.m. on Wednesday, the first day of sophomore registration, all of Religion 102 was full? I think that means virtually no would-be sophomores got into that class. I could also only get into an English class from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. (which is exactly when I want to take English) because the others that weren’t closed conflicted with the one and only Humanities 112 class I’m also required to take.
I’m sorry, but if we’re required to take classes such as English 102 and Religion, we should be able to take them. I will only be able to take 15 credits next semester and I doubt I was not the only one this happened to.
I shouldn’t have to be forced into summer school one of these years because otherwise I won’t graduate on time — especially since my family now has to pay exactly $26,280 for tuition. This increase of over 4 percent from last year is in addition to the 4.54 percent increase in room and board mentioned in Dean Baird’s letter. On the upside, at least this increase is not as high as last year’s that was over 5 percent.
But the letter mentioned that the university raised its costs “after careful consideration.” I can understand the logic behind the increase, but this logic certainly wasn’t disclosed in the letter. Wouldn’t it be nice if they told us their logic behind the increase just as a courtesy to those who don’t realize or understand what’s going on? I’m sure many students are wondering what constitutes “careful consideration.” By not explaining, the administration’s logic behind the increase it comes across as this: We did it and basically it is too bad for students and their parents.
Well, I think I might have an idea as to why they raised our tuition by 4.37 percent. According to Jeff Pippin, vice president for finance and administration, 70-75 percent of Pepperdine’s operating budget comes from tuition. That being so, in the midst of continuing economic pressures (as Dean Baird said in his letter), an increase of tuition would certainly help out the university’s bank account. Then add the projected 26 extra students and the university has another $2.5 to $3 million.
This does answer why they raised tuition and is almost a no-brainer. But it certainly doesn’t excuse why they didn’t feel it was necessary to let us know why they were raising the cost of tuition, room and board.
So maybe the school makes some sense. But there has to be a better way to handle economic pressures. Students see new palm trees, automatic towel dispensers, rich benefactors giving millions of dollars for storks in the Chapel fountain and the infamous flowers in the caf.
I understand that beautification improvements such as flowers and fountains are largely dependent on the benefactors that give the money for them. But can’t these charitable people realize that their money could go to more important things? Instead of storks in a fountain, couldn’t they pay instead for a much-needed new dorm? I mean if I was a benefactor, I’d rather see Riswick Dorm than Riswick Stork Fountain.
Especially if it’s true that they want to replace the concrete walkways next to the rock with a grassy lawn and connect the two fountains with some elaborate waterfall.
We overlook the Pacific Ocean for pete’s sake. I’m pretty sure we don’t need any more water. We also have arguably the most beautiful campus in the world. Why would we have to beautify it?
Surely this money can be used for better things.
In the meantime, I think it was a good thing that the administration at least told us they were raising our tuition. They certainly could have waited until we got our bill at the end of the year to break the bad news. At the same time though, it would have been nice for them to tell us exactly why they were raising our tuition and room and board. Because by not letting us know the details, some students would naturally think that the 4.37 percent increase would help pay for the new fountains and the new lawn.
You can call me insane, but I’m pretty sure most people would appreciate a nearby roof over their head and the classes they want rather than a waterfall connecting two fountains. Our tuition might not be going to these things, but to me, and many other students, it certainly looks that way.
March 28, 2002