TOPS is too expensive for the state, and the program needs an overhaul.
Rep. Joe Harrison, R-Napoleonville, plans to introduce a bill (for the fourth time, he says) this spring that would require students who lose their Taylor Opportunity Program for Students scholarship in either of their first two years to repay some or possibly all of their reward to the state.
“There’s got to be some sort of line of responsibility to the taxpayers,” Harrison said. “Students who don’t go full-time are the ones causing the losses, which I think is ridiculous and immature.”
Harrison also plans to propose a freeze on TOPS awards, meaning even if tuition and fees increase thanks to the LA GRAD Act passed in 2010, students will not receive more money.
Bravo, Rep. Harrison. At least to part one — the repayment plan.
Louisiana lawmakers continue to spend beyond their limitations, and unfortunately, somebody has to pay the bills.
The state budgeted $172 million for the 2012-13 fiscal year to educate roughly 43,000 TOPS recipients ($4,000 per student), according to the state budget report.
That’s approaching one-fifth of the nearly $1 billion budgeted from the state general fund toward higher education as a whole. And TOPS receives funding from other budget categories as well, such as statutory dedications.
Holding onto TOPS funding is no walk in the park, though.
About 34 percent of TOPS recipients since 2003 have lost their funding because they dropped to fewer than 24 credit hours for the year, according to an annual Board of Regents report.
Boo hoo.
Twelve credit hours per semester should be a feasible goal for any student riding through college on taxpayer dollars.
I understand some students need part-time or even full-time jobs to stay afloat without parental or governmental allowances. But if school is free and you’ve elected (rightfully so) to pursue a college education, in theory, the all-nighters should pay off. Unless, of course, you’re buried in debt up to your nose hairs at graduation.
But that’s a whole different column.
As for the proposed scholarship freeze in Harrison’s bill, I’m going to have to disagree. Once the state promises a student it will pay for his or her education as long as he or she meets requirements X, Y and Z, if that student achieves those goals, I would find it unfair if tuition increases, approved by the same body of legislators, were not matched by the scholarship.
A fundamental goal of TOPS is to retain Louisiana’s “best and brightest” students, educate them properly and, in a perfect world, have them work in Louisiana until they die.
Has TOPS accomplished this since its inception following the 1997 legislative session?
Who knows? Zero studies have been done following each and every TOPS-produced in-state graduate, making it quite difficult to assess the program’s success.
It’s easy to see why. Drafting such a research experiment would cost a fortune and probably lead to a handful of clinically depressed researchers who failed to realize the impossibility of the task at hand.
Instead, inquisitive citizens can view the Board of Regents’ annual constitutionally necessitated report on TOPS, which points out that from 2003-09, students with TOPS funding were 25 percent more likely to stay in college four years than those without it.
It’s a mind-boggling statistic — students who came into college with far greater higher education preparation than their peers lasted longer than their less-prepared classmates.
Still, barely more than half of TOPS recipients returned to school for a fourth year, compared to one-third of non-TOPS receiving students.
Jason Droddy, the University’s director of external affairs, who wrote his dissertation on whether TOPS eligibility requirements predict in-state enrollment retention, said several questions need to be asked to properly evaluate TOPS’ ability to meet its goals:
If students were not awarded TOPS, what choices would they make about which University to attend?
Would they even attend college at all?
How many students would the state lose if TOPS requirements changed?
And finally, just because a student loses TOPS funding, does that mean he or she failed?
In many cases, Droddy said, students would drop a course, falling below the credit hour requirement, lose their TOPS and then continue their education.
Harrison’s bill is by no means a save-all solution to the state’s budget woes and mismanaged higher education funds, but it successfully points out that the wildly popular program (for good reason) has some major flaws and is costing taxpayers more than it’s worth in some cases.
My solution: Raise the requirements.
A student who earns a 20 on his or her ACT, equal to the state’s average but a whole point below the national average, can receive a full-ride to any in-state institution he or she is admitted to.
Since when does “best and brightest” include completely average?
Only top-achievers can save our state.
Ben Wallace is a 21-year-old mass communication senior from Tyler, Texas.
