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.

The reason all state schools do -- money. They get more tuition from OOS students and it helps fund the overall enterprise since they charge them more than the actual cost of attendance.

Anonymous wrote:University of Michigan has always been prestigious because of engineering, research, and all the state's automotive and manufacturing fortunes from 1900 to 1980. Detroit was basically Silicon Valley of the early and mid 20th century. The college's reputation has literally nothing to do with full-pay New Jersey, Long Island and DMV kids. And if 40% of them disappeared tomorrow, the university would remain top rung.

Peak domestic automotive ended in the late 1970s. UM had money issues in the early 1980s.

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

Ding ding ding

Anonymous wrote:The State of Michigan has plenty of universities. Michigan State is actually bigger than U o M. Michigan Tech would love more students. As would Central Michigan, Western Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Michigan. And that's just some of the publics. Plenty of space for their Michigan residents.

Grand Valley State is a better school than the directionals.

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

it's the money money money.

MI figured this out a long time ago.

The University of MD did as well. They accept GPA's in the lows 2's if full pay OOS. Ask me how I know????

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.

Are you kidding me? What a flyover comment. The feds started slashing money to colleges and universities, starting under Reagan. State governments have followed suit. The Michigan legislature is controlled by the GOP and, similar to Wisconsin, they have nothing but disdain for the state's higher ed institutions, even if the latter brings accolades to the state.

Plenty of smart students in state, but the university has decided that OOS money is the way to maintain their high profile.

+100000000 Ding Ding Ding

Not like U of M isn't giving Michigan residents a chance. For class of 2024 in state acceptance rate was 48% OOS 22%. Wish UVA was that high.

Anonymous wrote:You also have to look at historical reasons why Michigan and Wisconsin have proportionately more out of state students than other flagships and why that reason makes sense that most of those out of state students wouldn't have wanted to go to UVA or other southern schools.

care to elaborate?

It’s always about the money.

You also have to look at historical reasons why Michigan and Wisconsin have proportionately more out of state students than other flagships and why that reason makes sense that most of those out of state students wouldn't have wanted to go to UVA or other southern schools.

*able to attend

The problem with UVA is that’s it’s too small to handle the large amount of qualified instate students. It should have at least 25,000 undergraduates based on the size of the state and its status as the state flagship. I know a lot of alumni would probably hate to see the school grow larger, but it’s really not fair that such a small amount of the top seniors in the state are not able to attend. The notion that larger is worse is also nonsense. Cal, UCLA, and Michigan all have similar numbers of undergraduate and are all prestigious.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There is nothing "world class" about UVA. Check any world ranking.

All Michigan has to do is shrink its undergraduate student population to 17,000 students, the approximate size of UVA. Then it can claim to be mostly instate. Michigan has more undergraduates from instate at it’s Ann Arbor campus than UVA. I’d say it serves its state as well as UVA serves Virginia.