CHICAGO—The Committee to Study Affordability discussed the rising cost of tuition, fees and merit scholarships during its first meeting Monday.

The committee, created by the Illinois Board of Higher Education, will look at the way financial aid is distributed and consider equitable ways to give money to people in need.

Committee members voiced concerns about scholarship availability to all potential students. “Different segments of students have not gotten what they need in terms of financial support,” Committee Member Silas Purnell said.

Purnell said state-funded merit scholarships, where the top 5 percent of students in the state receive a $1,000 scholarship toward a state school, should be abolished.

He said most students in the top 5 percent already can afford to attend a college or university.

“Look at the top 5 percents’ income. It’s the poverty stricken that are violated. If they don’t get help right then, their whole cotton-pick’n career is gone,” he said.

Sheila Pruden, a representative of the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, said no student is receiving full tuition or fees, and merit scholarships are important because they keep students in the state.

“The sole responsibility of education is still placed on the students and their families. The student should be willing to sacrifice and work to help foot the bill,” Pruden said.

Committee Chair Rey Brune said the rising costs of tuition and student fees can be detrimental in the long run.

“Today things are so intricate. Any action by a governing board can have a great effect on the Illinois Student Assistance Commission,” Brune said. “When we raise student fees we put more strain on ISAC.”

He also expressed concern about the time it takes for a student to graduate and the added expenses involved.

“How much money are we spending on kids in college who are spending more money than they should be? Some students can’t get enough money for the first year, but we have people who receive money that go for five years,” Brune said.

However, he acknowledged the fact many students can no longer graduate in four years. “Universities say 12 credit hours is a full load, but if you take 12 credit hours every semester, you’ll graduate in five years.”

Purnell said he wants to save the taxpayers money. “If students take extra hours and semesters, the taxpayers pay for it. Students should be able to get a quality education in a timely fashion,” he said.

Brune said the system is perhaps too inflexible in its requirements.

“The world is changing today and I wonder if we aren’t too strict. This committee should propose a plan to the IBHE and come up with a three-year degree program, with less costs, which would create affordability to the students,” he said.

The committee also argued what perspective of enrollment it should use when discussing higher education. The two options it discussed were a straight head-count and full-time equivalent (FTE).

A straight head-count does not account for any difference in the enrollment status of students—for example, whether the students holds full or part-time status.

The FTE system, however, weights students by the amount of class hours they are taking. Brune argued this system could show skewed results. “True full-time equivalent could mean 12 students taking a one-hour course.”

However, Purnell argued another view. “If you do it on headcount you’re going to start with a lie and end with a lie.”