Tuition rate going up

<p>

As I said in post # 5: Why? Because they can.
That said let's not attribute any noble reasons or motivation to why and how UM decides it's OOS tuition rate. It isn't based on charging OOS students the amount that Michigan taxpayers are paying to support UM but instead on an attempt to get as much money as they can from OOS families to offset their instate funding issues. In other words: If the state of Michigan (taxpayers) are unwilling to provide the money necessary to operate UM then UM will make up the difference by minimizing IS tuition increases and maximizing (supply & demand) the OOS tuition increases. In this case...a 6X higher $ amount for OOS than IS tuition increase....because they can.</p>

<p>"The vote translates into a net increase of $178 for in-state students and $1,064 for out-of-state students."</p>

<p>

Do you have a breakdown on how that aid is distributed between IS and OOS students and how much is provided in loans vs grants? These kind of numbers can be seriously misleading without the details.</p>

<p>aglages, there is no breakdown, but how it is misleading? It's not like UVa has a tiny OOS population. Like Michigan, 30%-35% of UVa students are out of state. It is safe to say that UVa, like Michigan, is not extremely generous with OOS students.</p>

<p>supply and demand definitely is a factor in the reason why MSU's OOS tuition is so much lower than U of M's. Who picks an out of state school that is as weak as MSU? Why would someone shell out nearly 30k for OOS tuition at MSU when they probably have better state/private schools in their own state? MSU's lower OOS tuition is in part to attract out of state students to their school. </p>

<p>and why do you have so much butthurt about all this, triple posting the thread? Are you angry because your OOS and want to go to michigan?</p>

<p>Maybe MSU's facilities aren't as expensive to maintain? Or maybe the demon unicorns that decide what tuition should be every year are angry with us for not offering virgin sacrifices any more.</p>

<p>aglages, and when a private university charges students $40,000 in tuition ($55,000 including R&B), is there a "noble reason" assigned to that price? </p>

<p>We can agree that Michigan is one of the nation's top 3 public universities and one of the top 50 universities (including LACs) overall. And yet, there are 150 colleges and universities that are more expensive than Michigan. Why criticize Michigan? Why not criticize the American university system instead? Is it because you feel it is unfair that residents of Michigan should be blessed with having access to such an excellent university for so low a price?</p>

<p>Top</a> 500 Ranked Universities for Highest Total Cost of attendance</p>

<p>


Can be misleading. Let's look at a possibility.
Suppose UVA meets 100% of all (both IS and OOS) it's students demonstrated need (27% of their enrollment) equally by providing no-loan aid to them. Lets say that UM only meets 30% of the TOTAL need of it's IS students and less than 5% of the TOTAL need of it's OOS students, but overall 46% of UM students get some aid. Are we comapring apples to apples here?</p>

<p>Without the details of how the aid is distributed the 46% and 27% figures can be seriously misleading.</p>

<p>

This is such a typical college homer response that adds nothing to the discussion and it is unworthy of further comment.</p>

<p>

There are virgins in Michigan?</p>

<p>

You certainly seem to enjoy inserting apples to oranges comparisons. Do private universities charge different tuition rates for OOS students? NO. Are they state supported? No. Do you see supporters of these private universities justifying the costs to some students (OOS) by invoking the "it's only fair because that OUR state taxpayers are supporting the univiersity". No. Different situation and not comparable.</p>

<p>

How many public universities charge as much for OOS tuition at UM?

Absolutely not! They should be delighted that UM is affordable to IS students. Why / how OOS tuition is so much higher is what I THOUGHT we were discussing in this thread.</p>

<p>I still don't understand what's misleading. Are you telling me that 74% of all UVa applicants do not need financial aid? That would be amazing. At every other elite university, be it the Ivies, Duke, MIT or Michigan, that figure hovers around 50%. Clearly, UVa does not accept many students who require financia aid. Michigan may not meet 100% of need, but they do not discriminate based on financial need either. Whether that is good or not is debatable. </p>

<p>Below is the % of students who require aid at some elite universities:</p>

<p>Amherst: 53%
Boston college: 40%
Bowdoin: 43%
Brown: 44%
Cal: 49%
Caltech: 47%
Carleton: 55%
Carnegie Mellon: 48%
Chicago: 46%
Claremont McKenna: 45%
Columbia: 47%
Cornell: 40%
Dartmouth: 53%
Duke: 42%
Emory: 40%
Georgetown: 40%
Grinnell: 60%
Harvard: 57%
Haverford: 48%
Johns Hopkins: 46%
MIT: 64%
Michigan: 46%
Middlebury: 45%
Northwestern: 42%
NYU: 51%
Oberlin: 52%
Penn: 43%
Pomona: 52%
Princeton: 56%
Rice: 37%
Southern California: 42%
Stanford: 47%
Swarthmore: 47%
UCLA: 50%
UVa: 27%
Vanderbilt: 40%
WUSTL: 41%
Wesleyan: 48%
Williams: 49%
Yale: 51%</p>

<p>Most universities offer aid to 40%-60% of their students. UVa sticks out like a sore thumb here. Admittedly, publics like the UCs and Michigan offer only $12,000-$15,000 in aid on average, compared to $18,000 at UVa, but that still does not explain how only 26% of UVa students need aid.</p>

<p>"How many public universities charge as much for OOS tuition at UM?"</p>

<p>Very carefully constructed question! hehe! The answer is, of course, none. If a student is willing to live on the streets at Cal or most UCs, Michigan is indeed the most expensive public university in the nation...and arguably the best. Funny how that works. However, students need housing, and the UCs are far more expensive where room and board is concerned. In terms of cost of attendance, Cal and UCLA and a couple other UCs are more expensive than Michigan. </p>

<p>"You certainly seem to enjoy inserting apples to oranges comparisons. Do private universities charge different tuition rates for OOS students? NO. Are they state supported? No. Do you see supporters of these private universities justifying the costs to some students (OOS) by invoking the "it's only fair because that OUR state taxpayers are supporting the univiersity". No. Different situation and not comparable."</p>

<p>No apples and oranges. OOS students should approach Michigan as they would any private university. As you point out, the state provides Michigan with $300 million annually. When you factor in that 16,000 undergrads are residents of the state, that amounts to $18,000 per student. In-state students pay an additional $11,000 in tuition. So, the University receives, in principle, $29,000 per in-state students. That's not much less than the $35,000 that OOS students pay. </p>

<p>Now don't get me wrong, you can look at some previous posts I wrote on the subject, I believe that the University of Michigan should start tightening its grip on the state or go private altogether because under the current system, in-state students are really getting an incredible deal at the expense of the university. But I don't see how OOS students are getting stiffed here. They are attending one of the best universities on earth at a price that is pretty much in line with other elite universities. Do you suggest that Michigan start charging in-state tuition to OOS students?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do you suggest that Michigan start charging in-state tuition to OOS students?

[/quote]

C'mon! Have I even hinted at that? Of course not. I do however question whether an increase in tuition for this year for OOS students of 6X the increase for IS students is equitable or justified.</p>

<p>

What I am telling you is simply this: Without knowing the details / breakdown on how aid is distributed between IS and OOS students and how much is provided in loans vs grants, these kind of numbers can be seriously misleading. I don't know how else to say that without details we are only guessing on these details and cannot make a judgment call on which college is more generous with FA.</p>

<p>I may be missing something but the following link seems to indicate that UVA meets 100% of the demonstrated need of all students (both IS and OOS students). Do you have a link to UM's commitment in this area?</p>

<p>AccessUVa</a> - Makes it Happen
"HOW AccessUVa WORKS
The financial aid plan assists students and families through four key components:*</p>

<ol>
<li>Meets 100 percent of demonstrated need for all admitted undergraduate students.</li>
<li>Replaces need-based loans with grants in the financial aid packages of low-income students — those whose family income is equivalent to 200 percent of the federal poverty line or less.</li>
<li>Caps the amount of need-based loans offered to any student at approximately 25 percent of U.Va.’s in-state cost of attendance over four years, and will meet all need above that amount with grants. All students, regardless of state residency, will receive the in-state cap level."</li>
</ol>

<p>"C'mon! Have I even hinted at that? Of course not. I do however question whether an increase in tuition for this year for OOS students of 6X the increase for IS students is equitable or justified."</p>

<p>No, it is not equitable or justified. I think Michigan should start standing up for iteslf against the state.</p>

<p>

What is the source for these figures?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think Michigan should start standing up for iteslf against the state.

[/quote]

While as the parent of a potential future UM student it would be "nice" to see UM take a stand with the state, I think that is a pipe dream. The board of regents has evidently decided that the supply and demand equation of UM is still far enough out of proportion that the OOS market can afford to absorb a disproportionately larger and larger share of those costs that the state of Michigan is evidently underfunding.</p>

<p>I am somewhat disappointed in the Regents saying in one breath that the lack of funding from the state is necessitating these increases, and then in the next saying:
“Many students and their families will pay less to attend the University in the coming year than they did last year,” Sullivan said, citing the University’s commitment to meet the full demonstrated financial need of in-state students.
^^^
How is the above going to be paid for?</p>

<p>Here's what it come down to. In-state people think they are entitled to such low tuition because their taxes go towards the school. Well, guess what...the university isn't getting much money from the state like it used to. Therefore, your whole argument about your tax money helping fund the school is THROWN OUT OF THE WINDOW. I don't think in-state students are entitled anymore to deserve such low tuition charges. And let's be honest...the average out-of-state student is MUCH more competitive than the average in-state student from the state of Michigan.</p>

<p>We are entitled to lower tuition and a spot at this University because a lot of instate kids stay in Michigan when they graduate. A lot of OOS kids go back home or move somewhere else. How is it fair that you get educated in our state to never give a **** about it again after you graduate when we could have all instate kids that will stick around and actually care what happens to Michigan's future.</p>

<p>Also, OOS kids don't ***** about paying the tuition costs because most of your parents foot the bill.</p>

<p>Haha GREAT assumptions Joshrk22. As if all instate students pay their own way through? That is the biggest ******** I've ever heard. Yeah, all the in-state students stay in Michigan huh? Look at what good that has done for the state. That 14.4% unemployment rate (Highest in the nation) speaks volumes about Michigan's great in-state work force.</p>

<p>You basically just admitted that the whole real argument about you paying taxes to support the school....is irrelevant now. So you go for the next best thing you can find which is "because a lot of instate kids stay in Michigan" -- that reason in NO WAY entitles you a cheaper education ha. Just look at how the state is doing. The education you have received obviously isn't being applied very well...</p>

<p>"How is it fair that you get educated in our state "</p>

<ul>
<li>That's the whole point. The funding that the university receives from YOUR STATE isn't jack **** like it used to be. Thank god U-M has good people managing our endowment and have made it grow over the years. The fact that the university resides on Michigan land doesn't exactly entitle you to much. Sorry to break it to your face. Regardless, a lot of us out-of-staters, because we are more competitive, actually land some pretty decent academic scholarships from the university. Example: most of the Shipman Scholars I know are all out-of-state. So sorry, we don't all need our mommy's and daddy's to foot the entire bill of $50,000 a year (although there are many that do, and why is that of concern to you? if their parents did well in life, they should be able to pass that down to their children without receiving the judgments of other people like yourself)</li>
</ul>