<p>Giterdone, not that Hersh is an authority that I know, but he was clearly not listing universities in order of excellence. He was merely naming universities that he thought were not shortchanging students on providing them with a rigorous education grounded in the liberal arts. He did not spend more time on MIT or UVa than he did on Michigan. The fact that he even mentioned is testament the university’s excellent curriculum and commitment to undergraduate education.</p>
<p>I am not sure I understand your misgivings. All universities of Michigan’s stature cost between $35,000 and $40,000 in tuition alone. Michigan is no different. In fact, when you include other costs of attendance, Michigan usually ends up cheaper than most of its peers. </p>
<p>If think you resent the fact that Michigan provides a discounted rate for residents of the state. That is not unique to Michigan. That is how public universities function. People pay taxes to the state, and in return, they get to attend public schools at a discounted rate. </p>
<p>But even among public universities, Michigan is not the most expensive. All of the UCs, College of W&M, Vermont and UVa charge approximately the same. Many other public universities are catching up quickly, including Colorado-Boulder, Texas-Austin and UIUC. The only way public universities can maintain their high standards is through financial stability. Tuition is one of the ways universities remain financially viable. </p>
<p>I definitely agree that Michigan (and other universities like it) can do a lot more to make itself more affordable to middle and lower income families, but that is going to take time to fix.</p>