Queen’s students will face an average 3.6 per cent tuition increase for the next two years, following the approval of tuition changes at a Board of Trustees meeting May 6.
Principal Karen Hitchcock told the Journal the changes to tuition were made after much consultation within the faculties.
“The overall recommendations came forward in the context of a commitment to not, in any way, jeopardize access,” she said. “I think they were well-considered, well-thought out proposals.”
AMS President James Macmillan said he opposes the increases.
“The AMS is always against any sort of tuition increases,” he told the Journal.
“The AMS just hopes that the University will continue to focus on accessibility as a priority, and that they make an effort to track the impact of … these changes.”
Vice-Principal (Academic) Patrick Deane said he thinks the tuition changes are an appropriate response to the provincial government’s recently-released tuition framework.
“They recognize the financial stresses that the University is under, as well as the financial stresses faced by students,” he said. “I agree with almost all students that higher education needs to be accessible to all and as affordable as possible … [but] I also see from the other side that what’s vitally important is the kind of education that people have access to.” All first-year Arts and Science students physical and health education, music, fine art, computing and nursing students will face a 4.5 per cent increase in their tuition costs. Upper-year students will be faced with a four per cent increase in their tuition costs.
Tuition changes toward Applied Sciences include a four per cent increase for all years.
Dean of Applied Science Tom Harris told the Journal that the decision to increase tuition by the same amount for every year was based on the faculty’s current tuition costs.
“According to the provincial guidelines, we could have raised tuition eight per cent in first year and four per cent in upper years,” he said, adding that the decline in engineering applications in recent years was a considerable factor in avoiding this.
“One of my justifications was before we have other significant increases, I wanted to make sure our needs-based and merits-based awards reflected tuition differentials,” he said.
“I thought it would be prudent to do four per cent for all years,” he said. “It means that we are more harmonized with increases in arts and science.” Harris said he hadn’t heard any from students about the changes, but that the faculty has had a lot of with engineering students through its website.
“We have great ability around [tuition increases],” he said. “What I would say is that [students] are not happy about the increases, but they understand why.”
David Walker, dean of health sciences, told the Journal he thinks the tuition changes for the faculty are reasonable.
“Making doctors is a very expensive proposition these days and we have to be able to use whatever sources [we have available to us],” he said.
“We’re measured against medical schools across North America,” he said, adding that the University’s medical programs need to meet the same standards as schools like Harvard and the University of California. “It’s an expensive business.”
Walker said he remains concerned about the effect the increases will have on accessibility and students.
“We’ve continued to try to make sure that we attract students independent of their means,” he said. “We don’t want a generation of physicians from wealthy backgrounds.”
—With files from Matthew Trevisan and Anna Mehler Paperny
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].