52 
A Study of Student Loans and 
short, it appears as if matters have been in an unconscious state of drift- 
ing and as a result some branches of learning have leaped far ahead of 
others and money has been used to disseminate knowledge in some quar- 
ters long outworn by changing conditions whereas a larger proportion of 
the funds available should have been spent to advance knowledge in that 
field. It is urgent that we study carefully the relative importance of the 
different fields of learning and ascertain the proper source for financial 
support of each. That is, there is needed a redistribution of emphasis 
in learning and the advancement of knowledge. This having been done, 
a reapportionment of costs should be made accordingly. 
Basis for Cost Allocation 
Diagram I shows roughly how the allocation of costs is now made in 
most institutions. Diagram II, following, shows a basis from which a 
Start could be made for a more ideal System of cost allocation. It is not 
proposed as a final solution of the problem of allocation of cost, but 
rather as a basis for further thought and discussion. With such a policy 
higher education could be placed on a sound financial basis. It is reason- 
able to suppose that philanthropy will still continue to give higher educa 
tion as much support as it has heretofore. Society could then be asked 
to match philanthropy which would mean that $200,000,000 should have 
been forthcoming from this source in 1924-1925 instead of only $135,- 
000,000. Philanthropy and society together would have furnished $400,- 
000,000 in 1924-1925. According to the proportions set down in Diagram 
II the Student would be asked to match both philanthropy and society. 
His share would be $400,000,000 as of 1924-1925, making the total income 
for higher education in 1925 $800,000,000 instead of $435,000,000. To 
sum up: philanthropy would continue to give an increasing amount of 
money to higher education, society would at least match it, and the 
recipient of the education would match both philanthropy and society. 
In this way higher education could broaden in scope and push forward 
more rapidly into both the old fields and new fields of knowledge. 
In Diagram II, the whole field of higher education is represented by 
ABCD. This is then divided into three equal parts, one part assigned 
to each of the three major purposes or aims: ABFH to the political, 
FHRK to the cultural, and RKCD to the economic. The field is again 
divided into three parts, representing the proportion of the cost each of 
the three major financial sources should bear. This division assigns one 
half of the expenses to the Student, ACD : one fourth to society, AED: and 
the other fourth to philanthropy, EBD. The last, philanthropy in higher 
education, should be devoted in the main to the advancement of learning, 
excepting the small portion EXT which should be given to the dissemi-