In a Feb. 24 email titled “Update on diversity and inclusion efforts,” Interim President Lisa Lynch described the foundation of a new scholarship model for the coming year. In part, Lynch stated that the University would be establishing “a new pilot program based on the Posse Model [that] will offer a full-tuition scholarship and a $10,000 stipend to as many as five students per year” in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. Lynch neither offered an explanation for the source of this funding nor elaborated whether this stipend would come with any stipulations. 

According to CBS News, Brandeis is the 37th most expensive university in the country. Students across the board struggle to pay their way through this university. 

To put this into a more personal perspective, in transferring to Brandeis my junior year, I will pay approximately $40,000 or more in unsubsidized loans that I did not require at Clark University. Most students share this burden — if not an even greater one. 

Therefore, while I am entirely in support of the University helping to assist those who cannot afford it, it is simply unjust for me to be penalized for my ability to pay a partial sum toward my education.  In other words, based on my family’s financial situation, I fall into the proportion of students who can neither fully afford college nor receive enough financial aid to do so without significant loans. Thus, like so many others, I am forced to take out personal loans to offset what I do not receive from the University.

I recognize the fact that I am privileged to be at a private university — lucky enough to have had my needs met at a young age. I also understand that so many others lack the luxuries that I received. And for that, I stand by Lynch and others, whose efforts will — among other substantive changes — provide full tuition scholarships to up to five graduate students who deserve but could not otherwise afford to attend Brandeis University. 

However, for the University to provide said students with a stipend to pay for other needs is systematically flawed. 

In announcing the creation of a $10,000 yearly stipend on top of full tuition subsidization for five graduate students but simultaneously failing to offer an explanation regarding the funding, students are left questioning whether their loans are indirectly sponsoring this program. Students who struggle to afford paying for college but are willing to take a long-term loan may continue to receive insufficient scholarship funds from the University, while students who are fortunate enough to take part in this program will both have their graduate school paid for and simultaneously have the funds to pay for housing, food and other daily necessities — possibly without having to take on loans or employment. While it is understandable that the University is seeking to offset the economic burden of necessities, to offer a stipend in such a manner seems to be an overcorrection. That said, if the University is seeking to establish a graduate program similar to comparable programs which offer a stipend for research on campus, this would make significantly more sense, but that does not seem to be the case. 

Moreover, compounding the confusion regarding the funding for this program, those who question the source of the funding may find a deficit of options. The sad truth is that the ways in which this money could have been raised are minimal. 

One possibility could include a specific donation dedicated to the establishment of the Graduate Posse program. Should this be the case, while money could have been better utilized elsewhere, one cannot in good conscience question the decisions of said donor. 

Another possibility is that the University received a donation meant for the improvement of the school population as a whole and a large portion of said donation is going to a small number of students. Should this be the case, the University would be acting in an anti-utilitarian manner that provides for a few lucky students. Rather than improving resources such as access to acceptable housing for upperclassman students — a need that has become exponentially greater with the impending demolition of Usen Castle — the University has decided to allocate funds to provide for five students’ extra living expenses.  

A third possibility could involve reallocation of funds already maintained in the University budget. In this case, the University would have acted once again to privilege a few rather than to focus on the campus as a whole. Perhaps, rather than offering five students a $10,000 stipend, the University could provide all students with free laundry services. This would benefit the entire on-campus community rather than five graduate students. Considering that Brandeis’ endowment of $915 million than those of comparable universities with endowments of one billion dollars or more, it is troubling that Brandeis would opt to support this program above other necessities. 

One final possibility is that the money is coming directly from tuition increases in order to prevent the reallocation of resources. In this case, the University has directly authorized this by its statement on Brandeis’ fee and tuition cost webpage: “In view of the constantly increasing costs of education, students may expect tuition increases during their academic careers.” If the University is directly taking from tuition funds in order to pay for this program, students are literally being forced into massive loans with four to nine percent interest rates in order to provide a $10,000 stipend to a few select students. 

One may voice the concern that the role of financial aid is to level the playing field for low-income and middle-class students, thereby allowing their entry and success at colleges and universities. It is fair, to offer for example, that students who, according to Federal Student Aid analysis, are unable to pay a penny are given a greater level of financial assistance than students who could pay half or more of their tuition. However, what begins to flip the playing field, rather than to level it, is when universities offer a stipend in conjunction with financial assistance. Students with no financial means to pay for college must not be privileged above students with minimal ability to pay for college. 

In a seeming attempt to achieve some level of redistributive justice for its most disadvantaged students, Brandeis University risks harming its general populace as a whole. I, and so many others, have no qualms with the University providing full or partial aid to those who have demonstrated both need and merit. There are ways, which the University has utilized in the past, to contact alumni for specific donations. If such donations have fully funded this program, the point is moot, but without a guarantee that this is the case, students are left questioning whether the University values all of its undergraduate students as much as it does five graduate students.