Tuition and fees for 2010-2011 to be set

<p>$8,983 instate base
$24,233 out of state base</p>

<p>Some schools have higher rates--business and engineering for example.
Approximately 5.5% increase in base tuition.
After all the cuts and additions in the state budget the UW Madison will have about 4.3% increase in base funding excluding research, gifts, endowment, and other non-academic items (dorms, sports, etc). Not great not terrible in this climate.</p>

<p>In the interest of full disclosure, the 5.5 percent increase is the average increase across the board for the whole UW System. The in state increase at UW-Madison is 8.7 percent.</p>

<p>UW</a> System proposes 5.5 percent tuition increase for 2010-2011 school year</p>

<p>The 5.5% is not the average increase across the board for the whole UW System. There has been a tuition freeze in effect since 2006 for the UW system's 13 2-year colleges which provide an affordable entry point to the UW system. </p>

<p>Also, when considered in the context of Big Ten Conference Schools, UW-Madison has the second lowest tuition rate.</p>

<p>You're right, of course. I meant four year colleges. In any event, this board cares mostly about UW-Madison itself. I wanted to make sure that barron's post didn't give a misimpression.</p>

<p>I gave the exact actual numbers so it would be hard to create anything. Now what's that U Virginia number?? Over 9% increase and instate and out of state tuition both far higher.</p>

<p><a href=""&gt;;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Topic at hand- this IS the UW-Madison board. Who cares about VA? Certainly not the students and parents trying to get information about our school. Let's drop all of the info about VA- those interested can PM nova or go to their board. Likewise those interested in the other state schools will go to other sites.</p>

<p>Nice to have tuition set already, some years it's been later- all dependent on the state legislature.</p>

<p>I didn't say anything at all about U-Va and, as for barrons, well, it's his thread and he can say whatever he wants I guess. </p>

<p>Anyway, the point is that in state UW-Madison students can expect to pay 8.7 percent more in tuition and mandatory fees next year. It is what it is.</p>

<p>A substantial percentage of in state UW-Madison students qualify for the hold harmless grant thus will not be expected to pay an 8.7 percent increase in tuition. (Also, I don't believe the increase in mandatory fees has been determined yet).</p>

<p>I just find context so important Nova. UC schools up 25%, UVa nearly 10%. Just putting a little context out there for some of our peer schools.</p>

<p>Barrons, I don't think you need to apologize for or justify to Wis75 what you choose to say in a post.</p>

<p>Madison85, you're right that many in state UW-Madison students will be held harmless. But many won't be, along with a substantial majority of out of state students. The cut off for the hold harmless grant is $80k a year, but this number wasn't pulled from thin air. This number takes into account the relative wealth of students enrolled at the UW-Madison campus compared to other UW campuses. UW-Madison enrolls a lot more wealthy kids than low income kids.</p>

<p>There were 5,958 students who received the hold harmless grant ($1.65M) as of March 2010; fewer than I thought.</p>

<p><a href=""&gt;;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>That makes two of us -- looks like 80 percent of undergrads should count on an 8.7 percent increase.</p>

<p>Personally I think UW tuition is too low and should be bumped to the B10 average ASAP and later moved to the top 25% or so or just kept around 90% of UM's number. A portion of the bump to be used for more fin aid. The additional funds would be sufficient to give UW another significant advantage in hiring more faculty and improving some support areas. But that is strictly my opinion and UW has a different one.</p>

<p>I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree.</p>

<p>I'm very glad UW has a different opinion that you, barrons. So, so glad.</p>

<p>Disagree with using increased student tuition to subsidize other students via financial aid. ALL students have some subsidy in the form of not paying the total cost of their education- it would be grossly unfair to students and their families who saved for college/worked hard to be able to afford college to have to spend more so others spend less for the same school. I would rather pay the high state taxes and have the tuition kept down- I feel fortunate to have translated my good UW and other higher education into the high tax brackets. Easy for those living out of Wisconsin to come up with ideas that don't impact them. UW has a statewide mission, not just the campus one. We benefit when local students consider UW-Madison instead of cheaper alternatives, we don't want to price our best students out of the best state school.</p>

<p>You would not price anyone out as there would be more fin aid for those that need it and more merit aid for keeping the best instate kids instead of losing some of them to better deals from Uminn or Michigan as the local papers documented. No reason UW needs to be at the bottom of the B10 in tuition. Nobody thinks cheap=quality. Quality should command premiums. Instate families earning over $150k or so can afford to pay a bit more--we are talking maybe $2000/year instate. Out of state would also pay more with some going to better fin aid too.</p>

<p>Sounds like wis75 is one of those people who believes in pulling the ladder up behind her. Who is she to assume that folks who "saved for college/worked hard to be able to afford college" worked any harder than folks who didn't? There are a lot of people out there with a lot of different circumstances. The model that barrons proposes is the one that works for the best public universities. Both UMich and U-Va charge substantially more in and out of state tuition than UW, but when they compete head to head for top students these other two schools more often than not will top UW.</p>

<p>It's not just a matter of "pricing people out"- it's fairness. Why should my dollars go to someone as financial aid, why should I subsidize a student in this manner? The issue isn't the tuition charged but the proposal of how to distribute the student money collected- I do not favor giving it directly to other students as barrons proposed. Read the first sentence of my past post- it gives the context of further comments. Do not take phrases out of context.</p>

<p>Because that's how it is done in many publics and most privates. They already are doing this with the money raised under the tuition supplements in Business, Engineering and the Madison Initiative. Fairness is a debatable matter. to many it's just progressive taxation and more fair.</p>