By Spencer Burger (2L)
Now that everyone’s settled in, I wanted to take this opportunity to make a public service announcement of sorts regarding changes made to Financial Aid last year, suggest a few potential areas of change for this year, and, most importantly, encourage students to participate in the process.
Last year, former Dean Moran tasked the Financial Aid Committee with designing significant ways to improve the Financial Aid program. Your SLS representatives on the committee did exactly that, and several significant changes have been introduced that will be in place for this year’s Financial Aid evaluations:
- Treating all Students Equally According to Need – Ending Disparate Bursary Treatment Based on Year. A common complaint among upper year students was that financial aid seemed to decrease significantly after 1L. Students felt that was problematic because i) it did not focus money solely where it was needed and ii) it created a bait-and-switch situation where students would decide to attend U of T based on financial aid commitments that they later found out only applied to their first year.
Indeed financial aid was previously distributed with some form of an envelope reserved per year regardless of need. SLS members on the Committee (Peter Flynn, Enoch Guimond and myself) emphasized this issue in particular after a series of consultations with students and passed amendments in this area to ensure that all students will be examined entirely based on financial need – the spirit of U of T’s financial aid program – and regardless of their year (consultations with students were crucial in getting this issue addressed).
- Improved Access to Credit: The limit on Scotiabank loans has been increased from $100,000 to $150,000.
- A Pilot Process to get a Better Understanding of the Individual Profiles of Students, to Better Target Funds.
These were some of the key changes passed through Faculty Council last year and subsequently negotiated by the University. But I think we left a few stones unturned, and there are a number of additional areas that could further benefit U of T students and enhance the accessibility of the institution:
Competition Among Loan Providers: At the moment, the Law Faculty works almost exclusively with Scotiabank to provide specialized loans for students to keep up with constantly increasing tuition fees. The University has negotiated a rate of prime + 0.5%. The Rotman School of Management also arranges opportunities for its MBA students to access loans; but they have two banks competing for their students’ business – RBC and BMO – and needless to say, the interest rate is more generous than that of Scotiabank: just prime. This is despite the fact that University of Toronto Law graduates have a higher job placement rate than Rotman graduates – while the MBA and Law programs charge very similar amounts for total tuition.
In other words, Law’s better job placement rate should merit a lower interest rate for Law students than we have otherwise received, and I believe encouraging competition among lenders will achieve that. The Financial Aid Committee should explore this approach to help drive down borrowing costs for students. It won’t fix our financial woes entirely, but it might make them just a little bit easier to handle – at no cost whatsoever.
Bridging Credit Issues For Financially Vulnerable Students: One particularly glaring gap in the school’s financial aid system is that there is no safety net for students who may or may not qualify for financial aid, but have difficulty accessing credit to meet financial obligations. For example, students who had to borrow heavily to finance their undergraduate degrees may not be able to access credit according to Scotiabank’s credit limits. Students who may have made mistakes in the past or have not had the opportunity to develop strong credit scores are also often refused loans by private banks.
This is a difficult issue to wrestle with, but I think it’s one the Law School should address. The business model, so to speak, of the Law School is dependent on accessible credit: that is, the idea that tuition increases can be paid for by students without detrimentally affecting accessibility through a combination of loans and targeted financial aid. We clearly need to do a better job providing options for students in difficult circumstances to ensure all are able to continue to access the Law School regardless of financial need. An option worth exploring may involve including the Law School as a co-signor for specific circumstances and with appropriate safeguards.
A large takeaway from last year’s process was that student consultation and feedback was crucial in getting many of the above changes (and others) through. As such, my colleagues on SLS and I would really appreciate it if fellow students would communicate their thoughts or ideas regarding the financial aid program at the school – from petty frustrations to perceived systemic issues. Please let your representatives know what you think.
Financial Aid is the Law School’s most powerful tool to ensure unmet financial need is addressed to support a successful experience at U of T Law regardless of financial background. In our world of deliriously increasing tuition rates, we need to ensure we get this area right, and continue to improve how our Financial Aid system operates.
