Harvard's recent $2,000 increase in financial aid is a small step in the right direction and will help many undergraduates. Yet after the recently-completed campaign in which the University raised $225 million for financial aid alone, the administration should have immediately devoted more resources to helping undergraduates pay off high--and increasing--tuition costs.

This boost, by decreasing the amount of money that students must contribute from work or loan programs, will give undergraduates on financial aid more flexibility and freedom. Because of the increase, financial aid students can either work less during term-time or repay fewer loans after they graduate. The new move bears many similarities to the financial aid increase in 1998, when the University also increased grants by $2,000 and exempted outside scholarships from calculations of financial need.

For students who don't receive financial aid, the jump in tuition next year will take even more money out of their families' pockets. Tuition increased by 3.5 percent--the first time in nine years that tuition has increased by a higher percentage than the year before. We see little justification for this large tuition hike; the University's services to students have not improved so drastically over the last year, and inflation certainly doesn't account for the entire increase. In light of Harvard's burgeoning endowment, it seems perverse that the University is seeking even more money directly from undergraduates.

Regardless of the tuition change, the financial aid increase falls far short of Princeton's recent experiment. Instead of offering piecemeal measures, Princeton replaced all of its student loans with grants--ensuring that students will no longer graduate burdened by a mountain of debt. Princeton's move will both entice more people to attend the school and open up career options to graduating seniors instead of coercing them into high-paying private-sector jobs straight out of college.

Harvard's initiative, on the other hand, is more of a stopgap measure than a comprehensive solution. A truly visionary plan would look beyond these short-term programs for a broader solution to an old problem--that undergraduates on financial aid routinely spend a significant amount of time working and still end up saddled with debt after college. Harvard has already reduced these requirements to just above $3,000 per year; now is the time to finish the job. By replacing loans with grants, like Princeton, Harvard would ensure that all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, would be able to spend four years in study rather than jobs and to graduate unburdened by debt.