Jump in tuition

July 27, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
By now, most people from Indiana who currently attend or are planning to go to Indiana University Maurer School of Law in Bloomington are aware of the 24.5 percent tuition hike approved for next year. I’m not sure how many know about the increase for the 2010-11 year of 8.1 percent. I read about it in the Indiana Daily Student, the school’s newspaper.

Based on 2008-09 figures from the law school’s Web site, students enrolled in 2010-11 will pay nearly $30,000 a year in tuition and fees. That doesn’t factor in living expenses. I don’t know how much out-of-state tuition is supposed to increase, but the Bloomington school is definitely closing the gap between the two. According to the Indiana University School of Law -- Indianapolis Web site, tuition per credit hour for in-state students will increase about 13 percent next year.

State contributions to public schools have been cut or lessened because of the economy, meaning that schools will need to find that money elsewhere, but tuition increases of this magnitude may end up backfiring.

Increasing tuition this much in two years will inevitably price some students out of law school. Those already in law school now may have to scramble to find loans to cover this increase. Most likely, those loans will have to be private and will come with a high interest rate – if a student can even get approved for them.

With costs rising so dramatically, some students may just decide to fork over the extra money to attend a private school, perhaps even one outside of Indiana. If we are worried about brain drain, we should be keeping students in state. Chances are they’ll be more likely to stay here and get a job.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • With the cuts in aid, many students are
    feeling the pinch. Hopefully the current administration
    gives them some much needed relief.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT