The article points out according to the survey, 80 percent of Carlson school undergraduate hold a negative view towards the 2000 dollars per year surcharge proposal. The reasons why Carlson School needs to charge more tuition are mainly as following two, hiring faulty and increasing scholarship funds.
The author provides a chart to show students' opinion. It seems the chart based on survey is a logos proof. However, what I find here is the survey may be not accurate enough. The sample size is only 72 students. Compared with the total amount of Carlson students, although I have no idea about the exact number, the size is not large enough. At first, I considered strong opposition from students as an ethos appeal, in order to stop the surcharge decision. But imagining myself as a Carlson student too, definitely, I would oppose, since I only think about personal benefit rather than the benefit of the school as a whole.
As for claim types, policy claim here is obvious, to phase in a tuition surcharge. There are also value claim and fact claim. For example, "It's a great school" is a value claim. "While the number of Carlson School undergraduate increased by nearly 20 percent since 2007, the number of faculty has remained relatively stagnant", and this one belongs to fact claim.