Jump in tuition

July 27, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
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. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT