What Will UNC Tuition Hikes Pay For?

Tuition hikes in higher education are painful, reluctantly accepted, and justified with promises that the money will go to essential needs. If students really must pay more, an important question is how the money will actually be spent.

For the first time in years, the University of North Carolina System has approved in-state undergraduate tuition increases. In theory, tuition hikes should directly benefit the people paying them: students. Yet, reviewing what UNC System schools have promised to spend the extra revenue on, one doesn’t find a pretty picture.

A significant portion of the new funds is going toward administrative priorities, boutique expenses, and costly student-services initiatives. The UNC System will allow constituent institutions to increase tuition by up to three percent, or about $125 per year for the average in-state undergraduate. Starting in fall 2026, new students will pay around $4,684 to $4,809 per year on average. This change will apply only to new students; current students will not see a tuition increase.

Instead of solely paying for teaching and learning, a significant portion of the new funds is going toward a mix of administrative priorities, boutique expenses, and costly student-services initiatives. The Martin Center is against these tuition hikes. But, if we’re going to have them, let’s at least spend the extra money properly. That does not appear to be what is happening.

If we’re going to raise tuition, let’s at least spend the extra money properly. Disappointing examples abound. At NC State, nearly $4.9 million is going toward “expanded institutional opportunities,” including more “professional advisors and mental health support” for the campus community. (For this and other examples, see pages 9-12 of this document.) Such spending may assuage progressive fears about student fragility, but it has little to do with what actually takes place in the classroom.

At App State, nearly half a million dollars will go toward seldom-read library “collections, subscriptions, [and] journals,” the costs of which “have increased 9.6%” since 2022. UNC Charlotte will spend more than $1 million on the same thing.

At NC A&T, another $400,000 will be spent on “student-facing support areas to address students’ social and emotional well-being,” another left-coded initiative. Here and elsewhere, students are paying to get an education, not therapy. Much of the extra tuition across the system is going toward building out support systems instead of improving what happens in the classroom itself.

Happily, some of the extra money will be spent well. NC A&T and East Carolina University are adding faculty and staff to reduce class sizes, which can be positive for students, especially in high-demand programs. Several institutions plan to hire more academic advisors, which can benefit students to the extent that the new spending keeps more undergraduates on track for timely degree completion. At UNC-Chapel Hill, more than $9.6 million is being set aside for enrollment growth. If tuition hikes are going to happen, this is a much better use of the money than other UNC System institutions are making.

While the less beneficial initiatives described above may seem helpful, spending less would actually help students more. College-goers have a slew of costs already, and death by a thousand cuts can attend even well-meaning tuition increases. Why are new students being asked to use their savings (or loan dollars) to fund programs that don’t even focus on the core mission of a university: teaching and learning?

In my opinion, putting money into modern educational helpmeets such as AI or into training for high-demand fields would do more for students than anything else. Bigger, better programs attract more students and help them land higher-paying, in-demand jobs, which is good for their careers and brings the school’s focus back to what really matters.

Other helpful ways in which the money could be spent are on scholarships for students, expanded research opportunities for undergraduates (albeit not more absurdly expensive academic-journal subscriptions), partnerships with local businesses for internships and career prep, or more flexible hybrid courses. Courses that offer career preparation, AI learning, computer science, and cybersecurity are practical and real-world oriented and would be helpful additions for students.

The extra money could also go toward admitting more students in the first place, as UNC-Chapel Hill seems determined to try. Giving deserving young adults the chance to attend university, earn an education, and boost state university-enrollment rates seems to me like money well spent.

Enough wasteful spending could be cut to keep up with inflation and then some. Looking at the bigger picture, the UNC System’s spending priorities seem off. Of course costs rise with inflation—that is basic economics. It is hard to avoid the suspicion, however, that enough wasteful spending and excess could be cut to keep up with inflation and then some. Universities need to maintain competitive pay to keep professors and key staff, and some money must go toward technology upgrades, to be sure. These kinds of spending are acceptable and expected. Spending that strengthens an already massive “support-services” bureaucracy on campus isn’t.

If these spending trends continue, they could change how North Carolina students view the value of a college degree altogether. UNC Board of Governors chair Wendy Murphy recently said that long-term efforts to hold tuition flat “created a new affordability baseline for North Carolinians, one that prioritizes families and their needs.” According to Murphy, in-state undergraduate tuition at NC Promise schools will stay at $500 per semester. Moreover, through the Next NC Scholarship, families earning $80,000 or less can get at least $5,000 a year to send a child to a UNC System school. These are fine initiatives that should be praised, even as tuition increases elsewhere in the System counteract the BOG’s good work.

If these spending trends continue, they could change how North Carolina students view the value of a college degree altogether. More students nationwide are already questioning whether the reward of college is worth the cost, and tuition hikes without clear academic benefits only add to that skepticism.

Above all, students deserve transparency and real value for their tuition. If universities are going to raise prices, students and families should be able to easily see where every dollar is going. That means breaking down spending in clear, accessible terms, not in vague categories such as “student services” or “academic support.” Just as importantly, schools should be held accountable for showing how these investments actually improve outcomes, whether that’s smaller class sizes, higher graduation rates, or stronger job placement. Without that kind of accountability, it’s too easy for tuition increases to become routine, while students are left guessing what they’re really paying for.

The most important purpose of universities is to create more intelligent, independent thinkers who can navigate the career landscape successfully. Tuition money should go toward that goal.

Reagan Allen is the North Carolina reporter for the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.