College Discussion - View Single Post

hoedown · 06-30-2006, 08:16 AM

Oh boy, so much to respond to!

First of all, there are people here (and elsewhere in the state) trying to get a handle on the "migration" problem. You can't fault people for not staying if the jobs aren't here. However, they is some thinking that young people move out of the state for awhile but come back when they're more settled down. I think we'll see more data on that. It's also not true that all young accomplished graduates are fleeing the state.

The lack of college education problem will not be solved by U-M. It's an important problem, but it's one that has to be tackled by schools with a mission of access and the resources to help those kinds of students attend & succeed at college. The reality is, Michigan applicants who don't get in to U-M because of space issues still go to college. They just do it elsewhere. They were going to go to college no matter what. If U-M took more instate students it would shift college enrollment--not increase it.

One problem is that in the past, thanks to good auto jobs, you could eschew a college education and still earn excellent money (with bonuses and overtime) in this state. There are autoworkers earning $80,000 and more with no more than a high school education. A lot of families felt a college education was superfluous--and in some sense, they were right. Things have changed, and attitudes may shift, too. But that may take awhile.

There is no state law that says that U-M has to admit a certain number of residents. There have been years when the appropriations bill has included that language. It doesn't right now. That doesn't mean that U-M is free to ignore Michigan residents. if it did, that language would go back into the appropriations bill next year and U-M would find itself in a heap of trouble with Lansing and with the press and the public.

Similarly, sometimes the appropriation bill has had language asking that state schools "buy local" whenever possible. I don't think that's in there right now. The State of Michigan itself has been in hot water for outsourcing some of its work to other states, so take that for what its worth when you demand Granholm "do something."

U-M does feel it owes something to the state of Michigan, and it is grateful for its support. Not all alums may feel that way, but I assure you the University values its status as a state school (even though it is frustrated at how state support is still $40 million lower than it was in 2003). It is not possible for the University to force its students to 'feel obligated' to the State. However, it works with the MEDC, the State, and Michigan companies to make sure students know of possible job prospects in the state, and it does its part to make Michigan (particularly SE Michigan) an appealing place to live.

06-30-2006, 08:16 AM	#75
hoedown Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: MI Threads: 5 Posts: 3,061	Oh boy, so much to respond to! First of all, there are people here (and elsewhere in the state) trying to get a handle on the "migration" problem. You can't fault people for not staying if the jobs aren't here. However, they is some thinking that young people move out of the state for awhile but come back when they're more settled down. I think we'll see more data on that. It's also not true that all young accomplished graduates are fleeing the state. The lack of college education problem will not be solved by U-M. It's an important problem, but it's one that has to be tackled by schools with a mission of access and the resources to help those kinds of students attend & succeed at college. The reality is, Michigan applicants who don't get in to U-M because of space issues still go to college. They just do it elsewhere. They were going to go to college no matter what. If U-M took more instate students it would shift college enrollment--not increase it. One problem is that in the past, thanks to good auto jobs, you could eschew a college education and still earn excellent money (with bonuses and overtime) in this state. There are autoworkers earning $80,000 and more with no more than a high school education. A lot of families felt a college education was superfluous--and in some sense, they were right. Things have changed, and attitudes may shift, too. But that may take awhile. There is no state law that says that U-M has to admit a certain number of residents. There have been years when the appropriations bill has included that language. It doesn't right now. That doesn't mean that U-M is free to ignore Michigan residents. if it did, that language would go back into the appropriations bill next year and U-M would find itself in a heap of trouble with Lansing and with the press and the public. Similarly, sometimes the appropriation bill has had language asking that state schools "buy local" whenever possible. I don't think that's in there right now. The State of Michigan itself has been in hot water for outsourcing some of its work to other states, so take that for what its worth when you demand Granholm "do something." U-M does feel it owes something to the state of Michigan, and it is grateful for its support. Not all alums may feel that way, but I assure you the University values its status as a state school (even though it is frustrated at how state support is still $40 million lower than it was in 2003). It is not possible for the University to force its students to 'feel obligated' to the State. However, it works with the MEDC, the State, and Michigan companies to make sure students know of possible job prospects in the state, and it does its part to make Michigan (particularly SE Michigan) an appealing place to live.