Why does the State of Michigan allow its flagship UMich to be 50% out of state students?

[Anonymous]

They do it to make money. Fin.

[Anonymous]

As someone who had a full ride at Michigan (and declined a full ride at MSU), it’s purely about money. MSU makes tons of money on the backs of rich international students, too. Long reigns of horrible Republican governors and Republican-led legislatures have decimated state funding for higher education - the Republicans channel their progeny to Hillsdale, Calvin, Sienna, and Hope, anyway.

[Anonymous]

Michigan has had a very szeable OOS enrollment for decades. That is nothing new. They charge top dollar, and get it, because enough people are willing to pay for a world class education in a fantastic setting. A top public with a huge endowment can be every bit as good as top privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it's a way to ensure it remains a world-class institution whose reputation transcends its location. Not every state has the same profile as California.

Somehow North Carolina and University of Virginia remain world class with 80% and 75%, respectively, in-state.

UT Austin is 90% in-state.

That poster about the MI student profile is FOS. It's all about money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who had a full ride at Michigan (and declined a full ride at MSU), it’s purely about money. MSU makes tons of money on the backs of rich international students, too. Long reigns of horrible Republican governors and Republican-led legislatures have decimated state funding for higher education - the Republicans channel their progeny to Hillsdale, Calvin, Sienna, and Hope, anyway.

this. i don't get some of the prior comments about "both sides of the aisle." there is one party waging a war on public education and science and it is not the Dems.

[Anonymous]

Michigan and Wisconsin both have 50% OOS. It is about money but it’s also about being a National University and major public research organization. They attract more diverse students and better professors and researchers with the 50% requirement, which leads to higher rankings and more research dollars. It is why University of Maryland (which requires 75% in state) is viewed as a regional school by everyone outside of the mid Atlantic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA boosters are desperate as ever. No one cares about your silly state school outside of Virginia, seriously.

Tell that to Oxford and Cambridge. Lots of UVA graduates are there. My DD joins them at the end of this month. Also UVA has produced more Rhodes Scholar than any other public university. Two Rhodes were awarded this year. Also it’s law school is now the no. 1 public in the nation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State funding has declined from 80% of annual budget in the 1960s to only 13% today:

https://publicaffairs.vpcomm.umich.edu/key-issues/tuition/general-fund-budget-tutorial/

During that same period, tuition went from 20% of annual budget to 80% today.

With the state's economy and demographics, plus U-M's traditional (and quite honorable) role of taking in good students that others don't want (Jews, Asians, Californians who can't get into one of the prime U-C campuses), the result is a very high OOS percentage there (and very high OOS tuition too!).

You can add to that list Virginians who can't get into UVA or VT! Over 60 TJ kids enrolled at U-M this fall, for example. Many of them would have gone to UVA or VT in previous years, but didn't because of the FirstGen/URM/non-NOVA kick or whatever you want to call the current priorities of UVA and VT's admissions offices.

Wait. How do you know some of those kids were also admitted to UVA and Tech, but chose Michigan?

I thought they were trying to say they weren't admitted to UVA or VT and therefore went to Michigan. But I doubt that there is much real data.

The numbers in TJ Today Senior Issue were 35 to Michigan, 37 to UVA, 35 to William & Mary, and 20 to Virginia Tech.

DP. Several of the admits had admission to UVA and/or VT but chose Michigan (my DC being one of those) for a variety of reasons. Tough choice for us.

[Anonymous]

The need to the out of state money to prop up their highly rated graduate programs. It's those programs which give the perception of quality undergrad programs (preception, versus reality). It's called the "halo effect."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA boosters are desperate as ever. No one cares about your silly state school outside of Virginia, seriously.

Tell that to Oxford and Cambridge. Lots of UVA graduates are there. My DD joins them at the end of this month. Also UVA has produced more Rhodes Scholar than any other public university. Two Rhodes were awarded this year. Also it’s law school is now the no. 1 public in the nation.

This whole comment screams insecurity and desperation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The need to the out of state money to prop up their highly rated graduate programs. It's those programs which give the perception of quality undergrad programs (preception, versus reality). It's called the "halo effect."

The undergraduate program at Michigan, actually all academics for that matter, is overall superior to UVA. Michigan is a world class institution. The global rankings prove it. UVA, not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State funding has declined from 80% of annual budget in the 1960s to only 13% today:

https://publicaffairs.vpcomm.umich.edu/key-issues/tuition/general-fund-budget-tutorial/

During that same period, tuition went from 20% of annual budget to 80% today.

With the state's economy and demographics, plus U-M's traditional (and quite honorable) role of taking in good students that others don't want (Jews, Asians, Californians who can't get into one of the prime U-C campuses), the result is a very high OOS percentage there (and very high OOS tuition too!).

You can add to that list Virginians who can't get into UVA or VT! Over 60 TJ kids enrolled at U-M this fall, for example. Many of them would have gone to UVA or VT in previous years, but didn't because of the FirstGen/URM/non-NOVA kick or whatever you want to call the current priorities of UVA and VT's admissions offices.

Congrats to your DC. Go Blue!

Wait. How do you know some of those kids were also admitted to UVA and Tech, but chose Michigan?

I thought they were trying to say they weren't admitted to UVA or VT and therefore went to Michigan. But I doubt that there is much real data.

The numbers in TJ Today Senior Issue were 35 to Michigan, 37 to UVA, 35 to William & Mary, and 20 to Virginia Tech.

DP. Several of the admits had admission to UVA and/or VT but chose Michigan (my DC being one of those) for a variety of reasons. Tough choice for us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The need to the out of state money to prop up their highly rated graduate programs. It's those programs which give the perception of quality undergrad programs (preception, versus reality). It's called the "halo effect."

The undergraduate program at Michigan, actually all academics for that matter, is overall superior to UVA. Michigan is a world class institution. The global rankings prove it. UVA, not so much.

Why would you say that? What specifically would make Michigan better than UVA at the undergraduate level?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA boosters are desperate as ever. No one cares about your silly state school outside of Virginia, seriously.

Tell that to Oxford and Cambridge. Lots of UVA graduates are there. My DD joins them at the end of this month. Also UVA has produced more Rhodes Scholar than any other public university. Two Rhodes were awarded this year. Also it’s law school is now the no. 1 public in the nation.

This whole comment screams insecurity and desperation.

Oxford and Cambridge are dependent on foreign nationals for funding (similar to Michigan being dependent on OOS and Columbia being dependent on revenue from NYC people "credentialing" themselves in certain graduate programs). This goes on everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State funding has declined from 80% of annual budget in the 1960s to only 13% today:

https://publicaffairs.vpcomm.umich.edu/key-issues/tuition/general-fund-budget-tutorial/

During that same period, tuition went from 20% of annual budget to 80% today.

With the state's economy and demographics, plus U-M's traditional (and quite honorable) role of taking in good students that others don't want (Jews, Asians, Californians who can't get into one of the prime U-C campuses), the result is a very high OOS percentage there (and very high OOS tuition too!).

This is misleading spin and a bull**** talking point. The state contributes more ($) than it ever has to U of M at Ann Arbor. The University just blows more than it ever has on admin bloat, sports and new construction.