Rethinking Financial Aid

By MITCHELL CRAWFORD

As the 2004-05 school year drew to a close last spring, I remember talking with friends and colleagues about the upcoming year: classes, teachers, housing—and, of course, financial aid. Since most students rely on Juilliard to absorb at least some of their educational expenses, financial aid is a topic of almost universal concern among the student body. What surprised me in the discussions I had regarding Juilliard's financial aid policies was that nobody expressed satisfaction. It appeared to me that, in lieu of attempting to please too few students by awarding fewer, more thorough scholarships, Juilliard had opted to please no one, and left everyone wanting (or needing) more.

Mitchell Crawford

Juilliard claims to award financial aid mainly on the basis of "need," determined by a strict government formula that takes into account factors ranging from parental salaries to the number of siblings a student has, and the mortgage on the family home. The problem with such a method is that it seems to be rewarding mere circumstance to the exclusion of talent, promise, and other vital artistic qualities.

Here are two hypothetical situations. Bill is a talented, hard-working individual who came to Juilliard with a purpose: to become a master artist. He practices consistently and shows measured improvement. He shows up for classes and lessons, and demonstrates a general concern for his education. Jim is a promising student as well, with plenty of talent. Unlike Bill, however, he isn't able to find an acceptable balance between work and play, and seldom practices like he knows he should. Classes, he feels, are boring and he attends as few as possible. The work ethic he displays is bordering on non-existent. According to Juilliard's financial aid policy, these two students would wind up getting comparable scholarships provided their economic backgrounds were similar. Bill is not rewarded for his hard work, nor his accomplishments. And as he sees that, his motivation sinks.

Herein lies the problem. Juilliard seems concerned with making financial aid something that isn't competitive—when, in all honesty, it should be. Has everyone forgotten that when we leave the hallowed halls of our alma mater, we will be entering one of the most competitive professions? Juilliard does an excellent job of preparing us to be successful artists, but a much less satisfactory job in preparing us for reality. The time will come when Jim, if he doesn't practice or show up on time to auditions, will simply be out of luck. That's the way the world actually works.

Understandably, Juilliard might not be able to meet the need of every student. What is not understandable is how few factors Juilliard considers when determining financial aid. The very same attributes that will make us successful in the professional arts world are sorely overlooked by the present system of formulas and analysis. Most students compensate by taking on loans they can't repay.

For art to succeed, one most invest in it. That was the opinion of Mary Louise Curtis, when she established full-tuition scholarships for every student at the Curtis Institute. While I know that the institute is a far cry from Juilliard, I admire the fact that Curtis literally invests so much in their students. Such a program would never be feasible here at Juilliard, with the much greater enrollment our school sustains. But I often wonder whether it is a good idea to admit more students than a school can properly assist. The "unmet need" that is routinely faced by a majority of students forces them to spend valuable hours toiling away at minimum-wage work-study jobs and taking gigs that don't further their artistic development. This can't be a productive way to spend time.

As the School embarks upon its 100th year, I believe it is time to reconsider the way financial aid is administered. Students should be rewarded for their excellence, not just their socioeconomic standing. Juilliard must show that it is willing to do whatever it takes to nurture the next generation of artists. If institutions such as Juilliard refuse to invest in us, how can we expect society to?

Mitchell Crawford is a second-year organ student.

As scholarship support is such an important issue to Juilliard's students, faculty, administration, and donor community, The Journal asked Joan Warren, associate dean for financial aid and academic support services, to explain some of the complexities that factor into Juilliard's financial aid allocations.

Every year, the members of the Financial Aid Scholarship Committee struggle with how best to award limited funds to the most deserving students. Although scholarship awards are based primarily upon need, there are opportunities for students to receive institutional funds from prizes and competitions, which are awarded based upon merit.

It was not that long ago when only the elite of American society could afford to attend highly competitive institutions of higher learning. Federal and state financial aid programs were developed during the early 1960s to ensure that no one would be denied an opportunity to obtain a college education because of economic status. The need-based financial assistance formula provided a level playing field to ensure that aid would be distributed consistently and fairly.

Juilliard's high standards are evident in our admit rate; only 8 percent of applicants are accepted into the School. Every admitted student has "merit." In addition, student Jim, as described in the above Voice Box column, would be subject to the strict scrutiny of our faculty and Scholastic Standing Committee. Recognizing that Jim may need help with transitioning to conservatory life, we would provide him with information about all of our academic and other support services to help him improve—but if Jim's grades continued to fall, he would be dismissed from the School. Furthermore, we believe that student Bill would be acknowledged in other ways for his efforts, including better grades, additional performance opportunities, etc. Bill would have a better reputation, which would serve him well in the future. He would thrive in many other ways that might be unforeseen to him at this time, and we would hope that his current scholarship award would not be his only measure of success or reward.

Scholarship support is provided to 75 percent of the students enrolled in the School. If we only offered full-tuition scholarship support, 200 fewer students would receive scholarships, and would therefore probably be unable to attend the School. Financial assistance was never designed to be a reward; it was designed to ensure that the most talented students would be able to attend Juilliard regardless of socioeconomic status. We are also concerned about student debt, and therefore we provide budget counseling, and regularly disseminate information about outside scholarship opportunities. However, we have often found that students will take additional loans rather than take the time to apply for outside grants.

Juilliard's Development Office is working hard to solicit more scholarship donations, and as our endowment grows, we will continue to provide a greater level of financial support to our students. In addition, Juilliard will continue to invest in our students' education by improving our programs, increasing the number of practice rooms and rehearsal spaces, enhancing our academic technologies, and expanding our support services. We want to see both Bill and Jim, who made it through our rigorous audition process, succeed here at Juilliard. When you see them, please tell them that the administration and faculty are here to support them, and if they need help, not to be afraid to ask.