I imagine that applications are going to go way up now.

Is there enough capacity and facilities to handle the increased enrollment?

What about accreditation being impacted by the increased number of students requiring more instructors and staff?

Maybe it will increase academic competitiveness for admission. I haven't read anywhere where SUNY schools are required to admit. I guess my concern is, my son is starting at a SUNY school this fall on a STEM scholarship which similar to this -- indeed, seems to be the genesis of this, requires him to work in NYS for five years, in a STEM job,after graduation. I'm hopng this doesn't drive a glut of workers -- if anything this may reduce the value of a bachelor's degree even further but on the other hand, if it reduces fealty to student loan companies, all the better.

...a nominal registration fee of about $100 per semester or year, I forget now.

In addition to that, NYS offered all college students a small scholarship of a few hundred dollars a semester. I forget too what the qualifications were, but they weren't very strict.

I wound up going to a full-scholarship college and still got $200 a year from the state, so I was ahead of the game by a little each year.

While I applaud the move on the whole* I have a number of unanswered questions about possible effects down the line.

1. Since not everybody can attend one of these public universities—you will have to be accepted first, as has always been the case—I wonder how this move will affect acceptance rates and policies. It largely depends on how the state compensates the schools. If generously and at full (and annually increasing) cost, it will work fine, and a range of types of students will reap the benefits. But if the state ever makes cutbacks or stints, it will force the schools to turn to more out-of-state and foreign students paying full or enhanced tuition prices. And that means fewer spots for the average in-state student. This is already happening at many private and public universities, and the only way to reverse the trend is the influx of more money. The state will have to play that role. Will it always be able to do so?

2. The amount of state money flowing into these institutions will also directly affect the schools' abilities to maintain top-notch research facilities and to hire the best full-time permanent, tenure-track faculty. Again, if budget cutbacks become necessary during downtimes (and higher education is usually the first to lose), we'll see more use of poorly-paid, rotational adjuncts and fewer full professors. The quality of education could be affected.

I withhold any judgment for now, because it seems the really right move. But I do wonder why some of the potential downsides are never discussed. We always admire the European countries that offer free tuition, but we never discuss the number of students who are able to avail themselves of higher education there, or the quality of the general systems, as compared to the US.




•We have had free tuition at city colleges here in Chicago for quite a few years, for anyone in CPS maintaining a B-average in high school and a clean record, with no income limitations to my knowledge—and since most students at the city colleges are minorities (a natural outcome, as the city's public school student body is 90% minority), it is a real boon to those communities, and an incentive to do well and tread the straight and narrow for otherwise challenged kids.