NAICU Letter to Forbes

Re: "Economics 101"

Alex Davidson misses crucial differences between higher education and the for-profit business world ("Economics 101," November 12). Unlike makers of automobiles and household applicances, the nation's private, nonprofit colleges and universities provide the same quality of "product" to their students, without regard to their income. But low- and middle-income students are not the only ones subsized. The 13 percent of our students who pay full sticker price are too. The average price of tuition at our schools covers only two-thirds of the cost to the institution to provide an education.

Letter Printed in the Washington Times

Overlooked in your story about transparency in higher education ("Colleges to let public glimpse insider data," Nation, Tuesday) was the recently initiated U-CAN college consumer Web site. The University and College Accountability Network (www.ucan-network.org), made available by the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) on Sept. 26, gives prospective students and parents free, user-friendly and concise consumer information on hundreds of private institutions. The content and format of the Web site were shaped by focus groups with consumers.

Letter Printed in the Chronicle of Higher Education

Because of the great significance of learning-outcomes assessment in Washington and on campuses across the nation, I believe it's important to lay out clearly the position of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities ("A Year Later, Spellings Report Still Makes Ripples," The Chronicle, September 28).

Letter to the Macon, Ga., Telegraph

I would add one more tool to your helpful list of college search resources ("Good research can aid college search," Oct. 15). Prospective students and their families should tap the free U-CAN web site (www.ucan-network.org) for free, reader-friendly information about private colleges and universities.

Letter to the New York Times Magazine

September 30, 2007

There's a fundamental difference between a college choosing the tools it uses to evaluate student learning, and the government picking measures for it ("No Gr_du_te Left Behind," September 30).

Letter to the Washington Monthly

Mr. Adler's essay on the higher ed lobby's priorities misrepresented the driving factors behind the positions taken by the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, and completely ignored the non-"elite" institutions that enroll 99 percent of college students.

Letter Printed in Forbes

Empirical evidence refutes A. Gary Shilling's claim in "School for Scandal" (Dec. 25, 2006) that increasing funding for federal student aid would fuel tuition growth. Two U.S. Department of Education studies have shown that there are no associations between federal grants, state grants, student loans and changes in tuition, and that there is "little evidence" to show that federal student aid increases have contributed to tuition inflation.

Letter Printed in the San Francisco Chronicle

Leslie Carbone (Open Forum, Dec. 12) offers the perfect prescription for making American higher education unaffordable and inaccessible -- by cutting the federal student aid programs.

Letter Printed in the Washington Times

Leslie Carbone offers the perfect prescription for making American higher education unaffordable and inaccessible — that is, by cutting federal student aid programs ("Controlling college costs," Commentary, Dec. 10). Every piece of existing empirical evidence refutes her claim that federal student aid feeds college tuition increases.

Letter to the New York Times

A major consequence of the skyrocketing enrollment of high-income students at public universities ("Public Universities Chase Excellence, at a Price," Dec. 20) is that private institutions are increasingly the educator of first choice for needy students.