Enrollment increases by close to 3%

Alexandre
Mon, 06 Nov 2017 05:18:20 +0000

Corbett, the University of Michigan is admitting 45% of in-state applicants. That is truly amazing. No university of Michigan’s calibre has an acceptance rates over 25%, let alone over 40%, and that includes the UCs (even in the case of their in-state students).

But I am not sure I understand the source of your misgivings. In-state enrollment has not declined. It has remaining fairly steady over the years (16,000-17,000). Any drop off in numbers has been completely insignificant and if anything, trailed the decline in college-bound in-state students over the years. Highly qualified in-state applicants are virtually guaranteed admission to the University of Michigan, and considering the quality of the university, I am not sure they should be admitting any student that is not stellar. Michigan residents have a pretty sweet deal if you ask me.

OOS and international students are not stealing the seats of in-state students. They are paying for the privilege of attending our great university without taking any seats away from its residents. The increase in the number of OOS students is in fact also improving the quality of the experience in an out of the classroom. It has been proven countless times that diverse groups function better than homogeneous groups. There is no doubt that students learn from each other, and the broader the spectrum of mindsets and opinions, the better the experience.

Back to my point, however. I never said that those who push back lack credibility. It is natural for people to want a great deal, and the residents of Michigan are no different. I said the reasoning behind the pushback lacks credibility, because it is not viable in the long term. If I was not clear on that point, I apologize. My concern is with the financial viability of enrolling in-state students at the current level without the financial backing from the state. Michigan with 20,000 undergraduate students is exceptional. Michigan with 35,000 undergraduate students is just another “State U”.

Like I said, the current trend is not sustainable. At the current rate, one of three things can happen:

1. The state of Michigan increases funding to the University of Michigan to cover the cost of enrolling 17,000 in-state undergraduate students, in which case Michigan can remain the same size or perhaps even shrink a little, but at the expense of geographic diversity, which is in fact bad for the classroom experience. Unfortunately, for that to happen, the State of Michigan will have to contribute almost double the current among ($500 million/year instead of $300 million/year).

2. The University of Michigan reduces the number of in-state students from the current 16,000-17,000 to a more manageable 9,000. This move would be in keeping with the funding provided to the university by the state. OOS enrollment would have to increase by 2,000 in order to make up for the 7,000 reduction in in-state students.

3. Things stay exactly as they are, in which case Michigan will be forced to add to its overall student count in order to fund operating costs. In the long term, the University of Michigan will be indistinguishable from Ohio State, Penn State or the University of Minnesota. That is what I meant when I said that if things stay the way they are, those in-state students who wish to attend a truly exceptional university will be hurt...because the University of Michigan will no longer be exceptional. In-state students are draining the university of its exceptional resources.