Across the country during the fall 2020 semester, one common issue on the minds of students, parents, and educators is the value associated with the cost of education. This topic has been prevalent for the last decade, however as universities began enacting COVID-19 precautions to combat the spread of the virus, emotions regarding the costs of universities began to boil over. 

Some universities lowered various fees for students, taking some of the economic burden away, yet other institutions did nothing.

Since the fall semester of 2019, the University of Connecticut has had a mandatory $250 'Student Recreation Center Fee', which was formed directly as a result of the costly construction of the building. In early July, UConn announced that students who do not attend in-person classes in the Fall 2020 semester will have their fee reduced from $250 to $125. At first, this may appear to be the conscientious decision, as the university recognizes those students' inability to utilize the recreation center's benefits, however the value is still quite underwhelming. 

Students who have at least one in-person class are allowed to use the recreation center in its entirety, and therefore constitutes a normal fee of $250; on the other hand, students who are required to pay a $125 fee but have no classes on campus have zero benefits associated with the recreation center. 

In many instances, students living at home still have to pay a gym fee in which they are completely restricted to its usage. Fees required by universities, logically, should be interpreted through the value associated with student opportunity. In this case, these students have no opportunity to meet any value that would be logical in requiring this fee.

I acknowledge UConn's previous effort of reducing the cost to particular students, yet firmly disagree with the ongoing issue in our education system that is configuring value.