Critical Analysis of an Article on Universities Disparity Related to Endowment Funds

Student
Professor
Course
Date
Critical Analysis of an Article on Universities Disparity Related to Endowment Funds
Introduction
The authors of this article highlight using data how wealthy universities, such as Harvard, Columbia, and Cornwell, manage to get high endowment funds and gifts from their wealthy alumni. Conversely, other non-profit universities could not generate such significant endowment funds due to American society’s unequal distribution of wealth. Using facts and figures to explain the inequality related to endowment funds, the authors explain how wealthy institutions began to utilize their vast endowments in investments. At the same time, other colleges and universities failed to do so. Moreover, few wealthy institutions have aggressive portfolio management policies but spend only 5% of the total endowment funds. As a result of this financial inequality, an undergraduate from lower social strata experience heavy debts. Since such indebted students do not attend wealthy universities, they always need loans since their universities do not provide them with many scholarships (Kimball and Sarah).
Consequently, the authors, using data and facts, depict a realistic picture of the financial inequality in American higher education institutions. So it is safe to assume that this article provides a realistic view of the financial disparity between higher educational institutions in the United States. Moreover, besides the discussion made in the article, the ground realities also corroborate the fact that wealthy universities are practicing monopoly in terms of the endowment fund. For the same reason, these universities have become a favorite place of only the wealthy strata of society; this disparity is the cause of the growing dropout ratio and financial burden on students of lower social strata.
Evidence Provided in the Body Paragraph
The authors utilize several factual aspects of current and previous practices to highlight this financial inequality. For instance, they reveal that only 3% of the total 3,300 non-profit institutions of higher education hold 80% of the total endowment fund; moreover, they elaborate on how the endowment fund of rich universities increases. For this purpose, they explain that since their alumni are wealthy, they receive precious financial gifts from their alumni; in this way, their donations increase proportionally to the increase in their annual endowment fund (Kimball and Sarah). The authors also provide a brief but accurate historical background of the endowment funds granted to wealthy universities. In this regard, they reveal how in the late nineteenth century, renowned began accumulating endowment funds as a better source of income than other sources of revenue. In doing so, the authors build up a steady and factual timeline of the development of endowment funds of these universities that generated si...