Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are so lucky to live in VA. We are considering paying $70-$80k to send our kid to one of your schools…if they are lucky enough to even be admitted.

Maybe Virginia need to shrink the out of state student body to make more spots for taxpayer in state kids.

The catch is that OOS tuition is a major line item in campus budgets. The struggle has been even more visible than this at Michigan for years. Plus increasing the OOS ratio enhances selectivity. Plus OOS tuition is far more reliable than tax-base support that can be reduced by legislatures. State appropriations are a constant fear at public universities. So it's tougher math than it looks.

Except that UVA receives less than 6% of its budget from the Commonwealth. It made this decision a decade ago so it could be autonomous.

Source? Everything I can see says 11-12 percent.

Depends on if you count the hospital in the overall budget

We don’t. The answer is 11.65% funding from the state.
DP
https://uvafinance.virginia.edu/budget-management/budgeting#:~:text=The%20recently%20approved%20FY2024%2D2025,dollar%20amount%20for%20state%20funding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can argue how much BS is in the current "holistic" admission process though (think Harvard). I think it's fair to ask for merit based admissions.

You don't get to decide that. Fact is---a kid with a 1520 is really not any different than one with a 1580. For even the top schools, it's "Great you met the SAT threshold, now let's see the rest of your application". Because in real life and the workforce, a lot more matters than just how you perform on a 4 hour test at 8am on a Dec Saturday. Just like someone with a 3.9 UW is not that much different than a 4.0UW. And wait until you graduate college and realize that you are working alongside someone who only got a 3.1 in college despite you getting a 3.9, and you likely are being paid the same. Or there's a chance the 3.1 person is now your manager

More to life than just grades and SAT scores. That's why we have holistic admissions

Anonymous wrote:This is ridiculous. There is already a plan to significantly grow VT. It has the land but this will take time. UVA doesn't have the space to grow. W&M has grown its student body by 1400
since 1985 and has plans to expand further with new dorms, etc.

Our child, who had 4.2 and good rigor was deferred from VT and flat out rejected from UVA. Figured out during the winter of her senior year that she was interested in nursing which she hadn't applied to at UVA and Va Tech doesn't have. She is graduating from JMU Nursing in the spring.

She couldn't be happier. It all works out. We are lucky to have many great schools in Virginia, not just Tech, UVA, and W&M.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are so lucky to live in VA. We are considering paying $70-$80k to send our kid to one of your schools…if they are lucky enough to even be admitted.

Maybe Virginia need to shrink the out of state student body to make more spots for taxpayer in state kids.

The catch is that OOS tuition is a major line item in campus budgets. The struggle has been even more visible than this at Michigan for years. Plus increasing the OOS ratio enhances selectivity. Plus OOS tuition is far more reliable than tax-base support that can be reduced by legislatures. State appropriations are a constant fear at public universities. So it's tougher math than it looks.

Except that UVA receives less than 6% of its budget from the Commonwealth. It made this decision a decade ago so it could be autonomous.

Source? Everything I can see says 11-12 percent.

Depends on if you count the hospital in the overall budget

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are so lucky to live in VA. We are considering paying $70-$80k to send our kid to one of your schools…if they are lucky enough to even be admitted.

Maybe Virginia need to shrink the out of state student body to make more spots for taxpayer in state kids.

The catch is that OOS tuition is a major line item in campus budgets. The struggle has been even more visible than this at Michigan for years. Plus increasing the OOS ratio enhances selectivity. Plus OOS tuition is far more reliable than tax-base support that can be reduced by legislatures. State appropriations are a constant fear at public universities. So it's tougher math than it looks.

Except that UVA receives less than 6% of its budget from the Commonwealth. It made this decision a decade ago so it could be autonomous.

Anonymous wrote:You can argue how much BS is in the current "holistic" admission process though (think Harvard). I think it's fair to ask for merit based admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are so lucky to live in VA. We are considering paying $70-$80k to send our kid to one of your schools…if they are lucky enough to even be admitted.

Maybe Virginia need to shrink the out of state student body to make more spots for taxpayer in state kids.

Taxes barely contribute to W&M and UVA's budgets. At that point they would be better off going private, out of state students help maintain their budgets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That makes no sense. There are a lot of great VA in-state options. Why not attend one of those?

Their child has a 4.0! They deserve to get in!

Someone with a 4.0 deserves to get into all three. DC didn't even get into VTech. Waitlisted. Ridiculous and absurd.

No. Who is posting such dumb things on a Sunday evening? It's not about a specific GPA. It's about competing with peers. If you're not in the top X%, you don't get in. This is the way it works for ALL prestigious universities the world over. Why do you want your special snowflake to get undeserved access?

Now if you want to talk about US methods for selecting students - as in, is the "holistic" method fairer than a straight-up academic comparison - then we can talk. Because I don't think the uniquely American method of selecting based on a murky formula of grades+scores+ECs+essays is a fair or equitable one at all. It usually takes a lot of family dedication/money, not just student talent, to achieve at a high level in an extra-curricular. People say grades are a contaminated by racial and socio-economic inequity, but that's nowhere near the lack of access to time-consuming, traveling or expensive ECs faced by low-income families! No method will be 100% fair, but a nationwide scoring system (like APs, SATs or ACTs) are the least inequitable way to compare students. Sadly, this is apparently not acceptable by Americans.

The college admissions process is incredibly stressful for families, because they're not starting off their applications with a good idea of where their kid should apply, and they wait on tenterhooks until decisions are made. Whereas in other countries who rely solely on academics, students don't waste their time and emotions on reach schools. They apply where they're likely to get in. McGill is a good example: it posts minimum grades on its website. If you don't meet that minimum requirement, you're not getting in. It lowers the stress level CONSIDERABLY. Even in Asians countries with extreme obsessions with academics and college admissions, you pass the exams and you're done. Your rank determines where you can get in, and that's it. It's takes the guesswork out of the equation.

You can discuss college admissions from various points of view and different levels of complexity, but the one you're stuck on is really not the right one.

Anonymous wrote:Do that to the state’s best schools, and they won’t be the best for long. OP, you want the school’s reputation without the school’s admission and course rigor. Those things are incompatible. If your kid can’t get into these schools, they belong at a lower-ranked VA school. As others have said, there is a VA state school for everyone. You just need to accept that the schools you covet are not an academic match for your kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps raise tuition for the three flagship to double for in state students vs. the lessor schools.

Really? You want to reduce demand by pricing students out of the market? For a state school?

A few states price their flagship higher than the second tier schools and community colleges. For folks on financial aid it is meaningless. But keeps sharp elbowed rich folks looking at OOS options or paying fair share.

Why is University of Virginia and UNC at Chapel Hill so heavily subsidized for instate millionaires?

You really should educate yourself before posting. 30 seconds on wiki would have told you that UVA negotiated with the Commonwealth to start self-funding itself about 10-12 years ago in exchange for autonomy. It was so successful at self-management that the endowment ballooned and the legislature tried to regain control but failed. Today, UVA receives less than 6% of its entire budget from the Commonwealth. There is no "heavy subsidization".

As for providing education for "instate millionaires" I guess you don't understand how FAFSA (a federal financial aid program works); how UVA is one of the few publics that participates with Questbridge; that UVA actively seeks out potential Pell Grant recipients; that UVA runs UVA-Wise, which focuses on rural low-income students; that the current President, James Ryan, started a new program about three years ago called Blue Ridge Scholars which seeks out low-income students in the rural parts of Virginia which normally don't send many students to UVA, etc. The Board is always looking for ways to further reach out to low-income families. I believe it started a guarantee program similar to Harvard's where anyone with a HHI of less than say $120 (I woukd have to look it up
for the precise figure) attends free.

What more do you want out of a public? It's self-funding. The cost is almost negligible to the taxpayer. UVA funds the best hospital in the state and actively seeks out both URM and low-income students, all while self-financing. If you thinking legacy preference, that was made illegal last summer

The "millionaires" I know send their kids to Ivies or $93k a year SLACs because they can, not to UVA

Geez. UVA is not self-funding. If you took away the state dunding in state tuition would go to private school levels. There would be a huge impact to capital projects. UVA gets much more from the state on a per in state stdent basis than schools like GMU and JMU. Are you going to claim they are autonomous and self-funding as well?

If UVA was a private school, they would not have to take 66% of their students from in state.

I support keeping UVA a state university but UVA, Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, Austin and a few other public would all be financially better off if they were private.

Let's see how financially better off they would be if, to start, they had to purchase all the land and buildings from the state.

PP here

Good point.

I guess my point is that they can fund themselves without being a burden on the state budget if they could admit more than 1/3 of their students from OOS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps raise tuition for the three flagship to double for in state students vs. the lessor schools.

Really? You want to reduce demand by pricing students out of the market? For a state school?

A few states price their flagship higher than the second tier schools and community colleges. For folks on financial aid it is meaningless. But keeps sharp elbowed rich folks looking at OOS options or paying fair share.

Why is University of Virginia and UNC at Chapel Hill so heavily subsidized for instate millionaires?

You really should educate yourself before posting. 30 seconds on wiki would have told you that UVA negotiated with the Commonwealth to start self-funding itself about 10-12 years ago in exchange for autonomy. It was so successful at self-management that the endowment ballooned and the legislature tried to regain control but failed. Today, UVA receives less than 6% of its entire budget from the Commonwealth. There is no "heavy subsidization".

As for providing education for "instate millionaires" I guess you don't understand how FAFSA (a federal financial aid program works); how UVA is one of the few publics that participates with Questbridge; that UVA actively seeks out potential Pell Grant recipients; that UVA runs UVA-Wise, which focuses on rural low-income students; that the current President, James Ryan, started a new program about three years ago called Blue Ridge Scholars which seeks out low-income students in the rural parts of Virginia which normally don't send many students to UVA, etc. The Board is always looking for ways to further reach out to low-income families. I believe it started a guarantee program similar to Harvard's where anyone with a HHI of less than say $120 (I woukd have to look it up
for the precise figure) attends free.

What more do you want out of a public? It's self-funding. The cost is almost negligible to the taxpayer. UVA funds the best hospital in the state and actively seeks out both URM and low-income students, all while self-financing. If you thinking legacy preference, that was made illegal last summer

The "millionaires" I know send their kids to Ivies or $93k a year SLACs because they can, not to UVA

Geez. UVA is not self-funding. If you took away the state dunding in state tuition would go to private school levels. There would be a huge impact to capital projects. UVA gets much more from the state on a per in state stdent basis than schools like GMU and JMU. Are you going to claim they are autonomous and self-funding as well?

If UVA was a private school, they would not have to take 66% of their students from in state.

I support keeping UVA a state university but UVA, Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, Austin and a few other public would all be financially better off if they were private.

Let's see how financially better off they would be if, to start, they had to purchase all the land and buildings from the state.

PP here

Good point.

I guess my point is that they can fund themselves without being a burden on the state budget if they could admit more than 1/3 of their students from OOS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps raise tuition for the three flagship to double for in state students vs. the lessor schools.

Really? You want to reduce demand by pricing students out of the market? For a state school?

A few states price their flagship higher than the second tier schools and community colleges. For folks on financial aid it is meaningless. But keeps sharp elbowed rich folks looking at OOS options or paying fair share.

Why is University of Virginia and UNC at Chapel Hill so heavily subsidized for instate millionaires?

You really should educate yourself before posting. 30 seconds on wiki would have told you that UVA negotiated with the Commonwealth to start self-funding itself about 10-12 years ago in exchange for autonomy. It was so successful at self-management that the endowment ballooned and the legislature tried to regain control but failed. Today, UVA receives less than 6% of its entire budget from the Commonwealth. There is no "heavy subsidization".

As for providing education for "instate millionaires" I guess you don't understand how FAFSA (a federal financial aid program works); how UVA is one of the few publics that participates with Questbridge; that UVA actively seeks out potential Pell Grant recipients; that UVA runs UVA-Wise, which focuses on rural low-income students; that the current President, James Ryan, started a new program about three years ago called Blue Ridge Scholars which seeks out low-income students in the rural parts of Virginia which normally don't send many students to UVA, etc. The Board is always looking for ways to further reach out to low-income families. I believe it started a guarantee program similar to Harvard's where anyone with a HHI of less than say $120 (I woukd have to look it up
for the precise figure) attends free.

What more do you want out of a public? It's self-funding. The cost is almost negligible to the taxpayer. UVA funds the best hospital in the state and actively seeks out both URM and low-income students, all while self-financing. If you thinking legacy preference, that was made illegal last summer

The "millionaires" I know send their kids to Ivies or $93k a year SLACs because they can, not to UVA

Geez. UVA is not self-funding. If you took away the state dunding in state tuition would go to private school levels. There would be a huge impact to capital projects. UVA gets much more from the state on a per in state stdent basis than schools like GMU and JMU. Are you going to claim they are autonomous and self-funding as well?

If UVA was a private school, they would not have to take 66% of their students from in state.

I support keeping UVA a state university but UVA, Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, Austin and a few other public would all be financially better off if they were private.

Let's see how financially better off they would be if, to start, they had to purchase all the land and buildings from the state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps raise tuition for the three flagship to double for in state students vs. the lessor schools.

Really? You want to reduce demand by pricing students out of the market? For a state school?

A few states price their flagship higher than the second tier schools and community colleges. For folks on financial aid it is meaningless. But keeps sharp elbowed rich folks looking at OOS options or paying fair share.

Why is University of Virginia and UNC at Chapel Hill so heavily subsidized for instate millionaires?

You really should educate yourself before posting. 30 seconds on wiki would have told you that UVA negotiated with the Commonwealth to start self-funding itself about 10-12 years ago in exchange for autonomy. It was so successful at self-management that the endowment ballooned and the legislature tried to regain control but failed. Today, UVA receives less than 6% of its entire budget from the Commonwealth. There is no "heavy subsidization".

As for providing education for "instate millionaires" I guess you don't understand how FAFSA (a federal financial aid program works); how UVA is one of the few publics that participates with Questbridge; that UVA actively seeks out potential Pell Grant recipients; that UVA runs UVA-Wise, which focuses on rural low-income students; that the current President, James Ryan, started a new program about three years ago called Blue Ridge Scholars which seeks out low-income students in the rural parts of Virginia which normally don't send many students to UVA, etc. The Board is always looking for ways to further reach out to low-income families. I believe it started a guarantee program similar to Harvard's where anyone with a HHI of less than say $120 (I woukd have to look it up
for the precise figure) attends free.

What more do you want out of a public? It's self-funding. The cost is almost negligible to the taxpayer. UVA funds the best hospital in the state and actively seeks out both URM and low-income students, all while self-financing. If you thinking legacy preference, that was made illegal last summer

The "millionaires" I know send their kids to Ivies or $93k a year SLACs because they can, not to UVA

Geez. UVA is not self-funding. If you took away the state dunding in state tuition would go to private school levels. There would be a huge impact to capital projects. UVA gets much more from the state on a per in state stdent basis than schools like GMU and JMU. Are you going to claim they are autonomous and self-funding as well?

If UVA was a private school, they would not have to take 66% of their students from in state.

I support keeping UVA a state university but UVA, Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, Austin and a few other public would all be financially better off if they were private.