2024-2025 Differential Tuition

Present:

• David Jones (College)
• Deepak Keshwani (College)
• Jacob Gunther (ECE/School of Computing)
• Levi Leckie (Business Services)
• Kaylee Shelton (Engineering Senator)
• Miriam Smith (E-Council President)
• Austin Ball (CEE Faculty)
• Ning Fang (EED/College)

Minutes:

After initial introductions, Levi started the meeting by explaining the purpose of the annual meeting and how differential tuition differs from course fees.

Levi presented the differential tuition distribution data and discussed the amounts spent by each department and the corresponding areas of focus such as TA wages, supplies, etc. It was indicated that per the original proposal, differential tuition cannot be used to pay salaries of tenure track faculty, but funds can be used to hire or pay salaries of teaching faculty such as lecturers, adjunct faculty, and professional practice professors, which Deepak asked about. The presentation was geared toward funds specifically collected for FY25, and the associated expenses, to see what was brought in and spent within one full year. Levi stated that the vast majority of DT expenses are on TA/instructor/Grader wages, which is very important.

Deepak asked how we know that the funds are spent on the allowable expenses outlined on the website and Levi explained that the funds are separated into their own accounts in each department and the college by the undergrad an graduate differential tuition. Levi also explained that the department heads are very familiar with the use of the funds and so are the business managers that help allocate the funds.

Levi stated that we can have some carryforward with differential tuition. Levi also stated that all of this information is posted to the College of Engineering website.

It was discussed that departments can have large periodic expenses such as equipment, upgrades, etc. and this is where the differential tuition can be beneficial and when there might be a carryforward balance. Austin gave an example of how he has equipment that is 25 years old, but still works as it’s in ideal conditions, but in the field it wouldn’t have lasted that long. However, we will have a need to replace it eventually and that is an example of a larger expense in which carryforward balances would be used.

Kaylee asked if there was a specific period of time that differential tuition had to be spent because as a student she would want to benefit from those expenses. Levi had mentioned that the college typically spends about the amount in one year that it brings in, but over the years there have been carryforward balances that have accumulated and Levi and Austin explained that due to this, it balances out and students are benefiting from some differential tuition paid before them and theirs could help the next year, etc. This was tied back to the example of large equipment purchases.

It was asked of Kaylee and Miriam how students felt about the amount of DT paid in engineering and if that was a factor in a student choosing USU engineering or not. Kaylee mentioned that it wasn’t likely a factor for engineering, but that she knows of examples where it did deter someone from business. Ning also mentioned that he asks students frequently why they choose to come to USU and he hears often that the tuition is less expensive overall, even compared to U of U.

David mentioned that the amount of funding we are collecting is not enough to make large, long-lasting impacts and asked the question if the rate is where it needs to be. There was discussion in how our differential compares to other schools at USU, like business which was brought up as a very high amount, or compared to U of U, which was about double what ours was according to information Austin looked up.

David asked Miriam and Kaylee if the differential increased what the students would feel about that and Kaylee mentioned that if it went up a little bit that wouldn’t be a huge impact, but if it went up to around $100/credit it would start to have an impact on students and Miriam agreed.

Though Computer Science was not part of the college in FY25, it was discussed that now they are under the College of Engineering that their courses would follow the same model as other engineering courses in as soon as Fall 2026. This would eliminate course fees on 3000 and above level courses in computer science.

Another discussion point was courses from a specific department taught by an instructor in another department and that current practice is that the funds collected for the course follow the department of the instructor each semester. Most instructors are from the same department, but occasionally that can change. There was also discussion on what will happen with EED (ENGR courses) next year after the EED department is disbanded and the faculty are dispersed to various academic homes.

David asked how would the meeting be codified and Levi stated that the meeting notes as well as summaries of the data are published to the College of Engineering website annually.

Differential Tuition Summary for the 2024-2025 School Year

Total Differential Tuition Received $753,216

Uses of Differential Tuition

Differential Tuition received for the 2024-2025 school year was used to support the following:

• Support TA’s/Graders/Tutors
• Provide supplies/equipment for class projects/labs
• Support college-wide clubs and departmental clubs
• Equipment Upgrades
• Adjunct Instructors
• Senior Design Support
• Engineering Writing Center
• Support the IDEA/Metal Factory

Differential Tuition Funds Allocations

Differential Tuition funds were allocated to the academic departments based on the student credit hour enrollment. 20% was allocated to the Dean’s Office for support at the college level.