In fact as another poster pointed out, families in the Mid-Atlantic have long been sending kids to colleges like Michigan or Wisconsin. Those kids often then return back to the Mid-Atlantic to raise the next generation. But that then becomes a potentially very important sports market for the Big Ten–if it can get access.
We are a CA family who’ve faced this question with all three kids. D18 and S18 were top students, admitted to both UCB and UCLA as well as multiple other flagships around the country. We weren’t interested in paying $80K per year compared to $30K instate but would have considered $50K-$60K for the right program.
S18 looked at options like UVA and W&M (awarded their selective scholarships but no money) because he was interested in the east coast and politics but concluded it wasn’t going to be good value for money. He stayed instate and moved to DC after graduation. He did have to put up with the unpleasant UC housing (triples with no AC) but everything else was great and he had an amazing experience.
D18 was seeking a strong audition-based BFA ballet program, where the best options are at various OOS publics. She picked the best program she was admitted to but fortunately was also awarded a full ride academic scholarship, so cost wasn’t a consideration. She did have a lovely new apartment-style dorm, but it didn’t affect the decision. Again she had the perfect combination of the right program, a place she liked and excellent finances.
S23 was a different kid, smart but not at the top of the class. We considered a range of flagships (Utah, Arizona, ASU) and the final decision was again made based on strength in his major (astrophysics/astronomy), even though Arizona was the most expensive. However he subsequently got off the waitlist at UCSC which is also good in astrophysics, and he went there, because it was both closer and cheaper. He is also happy with his choice.
In summary, the main reasons in our view were 1) the right program (lower ranking colleges are often top ranked for specific majors) and 2) incremental cost for full pay families can be substantially less at public flagships than need-based privates (and in some cases much more merit is available). A lot of our friends’ kids have picked OOS flagships like Michigan and Purdue for similar reasons, especially if they can’t get into the most competitive majors (CS/Engineering) at higher ranking UCs.
8 Likes
I don’t know what school this is, but it sure sounds like Utah. They have an excellent ballet program, the best dorms of the many schools we visited and are very generous with merit.
Whether it’s Utah or not, The U is a GREAT example of a lower ranked school that offers a top notch undergraduate experience and great outcomes. It’s a school where it might be worth attending from OOS in spite of and not because of its ranking.
4 Likes
Wealth factors in to all of this. It is a privilege to attend a football school or pretty campus that requires flying or very long car rides…over SUNY.
My daughter attended a dinner for vals and sals across NYS (going back awhile). Many counties were represented, not just the wealthier ones (ie Westchester etc). Transportation costs were covered if necessary.
She came home with a brochure indicating the schools that were chosen. At least half of these kids chose a SUNY, and not just Binghamton. Schools such as Brockport and Oswego were represented.
Sometimes we forget that the more popular schools/competitive schools are a privilege and that for many, getting a full ride to a less popular school is truly the golden ticket. Off topic, sorry.
OP if your son remains instate and takes full advantage of what is offered, he will do fine.
14 Likes
The strength of applicants based on the measures that the school uses to select applicants is highly relevant here.
Yes she attended Utah. Other top publics for ballet include Indiana and Oklahoma, both of which she liked.
3 Likes
I sent both my kids to an OOS flagship. Why? Well first and foremost, we could afford it. We saved for their educations and had sufficient funds to cover 4 years of the OOS school for both of them. When they were applying, we told them what their budget was. If they applied to a school that was more expensive and didn’t get merit then they couldn’t go there. After that, it was their choice. Our D disliked our state flagship so much that she didn’t apply. Her number one fit requirement was that it be in a city and our flagship is not. Our son did apply to our flagship and was accepted but he decided he really wanted to be in a city too. Again, both kids stayed within the budget we gave them so we let them make the decision.
6 Likes
We’re in a Bay Area public that sends more than half its seniors OOS, often to other flagships. The most popular are Oregon, Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, with Indiana and Vermont on the ascent. Washington gets a handful every year, too, but it’s not as popular as its distance and location might lead someone to assume.
The competitive, high stats kids at our school love Michigan. I remember the day they released their EA decisions for my D22—quite the moment as it came during the school day and the news of who was accepted and who was not spread like wildfire. It regularly gets more kids than Davis, Santa Cruz, Irvine, UCSD, Riverside, any CSU besides SDSU or CalPoly. Same with Oregon and Colorado.
I think kids at our school are attracted to these schools as much for their fun, social reputations as the solid academics. If you aren’t getting the reputation of a top UC or CSU, then putting up with some of the drawbacks of the UC/CSU system is less appealing (housing, locations, crowded classes). The OOS schools look more interesting on many levels—a new state, fun sports teams, better housing, less impacted majors, etc. (money is not often a top consideration here.)
The popularity of OOS publics with our students also seems to be an exercise in group think. For example, Wisconsin became the backup to Michigan, and now Indiana is the backup to Wisconsin as Wisconsin has become more selective. Why not The OSU? I imagine because no one at our school chooses it so there’s no chatter or experience to rely on for the next class.
6 Likes
Ohio State is popular in the northeast. Many pay full price to attend even if it means not getting the major they want. They want the experience. Others take the merit money and honors.
3 Likes
Same in my neck of the woods. For some kids, various Big Ten colleges just nail their vision of classic big college fun. Then they ALSO have lots of great academic departments and divisions, and that is enough for some kids to start really seeing themselves there.
I also agree this is a factor. I’d probably call it something like peer validation, but the bottom line is if friends and such are talking positively about the same colleges, that is naturally going to help them make a kid’s list. In fact, this is basically how an additional reach got on S24’s list at the last minute.
And personally, I think all of this is fine as long as it is comfortably affordable for the family.
3 Likes
Historically this stems from UVM’s inclusion in the “Public Ivy” book from the mid eighties that listed UVM. Its inclusion was always dubious. UVM is a fine school don’t get me wrong, but Burlington is in the middle of nowhere. UNH is an alternative that should be on more students lists.
5 Likes
In our area I would describe Ohio State as polarizing. Some people are really into it. Others are really into hating it. But to echo Oscar Wilde, many are at least talking about it.
A fallback for those who want to say “Go Blue”.
2 Likes
I see a big difference here between the public and private HSs even in similarly wealthy parts of the Bay Area. Families at public HSs are much more open to public colleges, many aspired to UCs for their kids and are looking for something similar if they can’t get in. But many of the private school kids automatically look to private colleges (even at a fairly low level of selectivity like say Drexel) and some don’t even bother applying to the UCs.
Agree - many upper-Midwest colleges are much better than their number of applications/stats/goofy rankings would suggest … just not as appealing to current 18-year-olds as their coastal or NE peers.
And there is also a locational hierarchy in that region, based proximity to urban centers, with Minnesota, in Minneapolis, in a much better situation, for instance, than Iowa, two hours to Des Moines and four hours to Chicago. The Michigan-Wisconsin-Minnesota-Iowa ranking among students is a ranking of perceived academic quality, but it is also a ranking of geography and proximity to a big city (big enough for major league sports, for instance). The same dynamic is at play with Macalester vs. Grinnell. By almost any measure, Grinnell has more advantages than Macalester (especially endowment). But Grinnell is the middle of nowhere, and Macalester is in a vibrant city.
In truth, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, all among the first 18 members of the American Association of Universities (the gold standard marker for excellence in research universities), are world-class universities - even Iowa, with its best-in-the-world writer’s workshop (and Iowa invented the MFA degree, I believe).
It speaks to the true depth of higher education in the US that there are so many excellent universities available to our children.
10 Likes
So true. I’m glad S24 was willing to strongly consider some of these colleges, and after visits a couple ended up high on his list. But he had a sharp limit to how “far from civilization” he was willing to consider, at least in that region, and colleges like Grinnell (otherwise a good fit on paper) didn’t even make the visit cut. And actually, it is a testament to Grinnell (and their efficient use of large financial resources) that they have accomplished being as prominent as they are.
I have to admit I sometimes get a little frustrated when people compare the US to other countries and complain that our “top” universities are private, small, selective, elitist, and so on. I’m always like, no, we arguably ALSO have the best public university system in the world. Like if “all” we had was the Cal system, the Big Ten, UNC and NC State, UVA and Virginia Tech and William & Mary, UGA and Georgia Tech, Florida and Florida State, Texas and TAMU, Colorado and Mines, Washington and Oregon, Arizona and Arizona State, the SUNYs, UConn and UMass, Pitt and Temple, Delaware, Clemson and USC, Auburn, NJIT, UNH, Utah . . . I’m running out of steam, and there are so many more.
But point is you could completely ignore our privates, and in terms of depth and breadth of higher education systems, I think we would at worse be tied with the Brits, and I am not sure even they really would hold up.
6 Likes
A lot of it is trickledown from the graduate programs. The top publics have had world class programs forever. For example, the the Wisconsin School of Economics predates the Chicago School as a leader in Economic Thought. The midwestern and west schools also tended to start and grow with the states. The states were very proud of their universities and supported them.
4 Likes
Which school if you don’t mind?
Kansas State. He was a big city OOS kid and was challenged, had great professors and got to study in Switzerland and Belgium for mini sessions and will have a rotation in Liverpool this spring.
3 Likes
IMO the other CA schools take an unwarranted hit reputation-wise because they aren’t UCLA and UCB, and they don’t have big time athletics. But while it may vary for specific students and interests, I’m not sure that any other state’s flagship is head and shoulders above Davis, for example.
5 Likes