Should instate ps schools be majority instate students?

[8filltheheart]

When ds went on his tour of University of AL, the students in his tour group were from out-of-state. I can't remember the stat now, but it was close to 50%, of students are from out of state.

 

I just read an interesting article that says the stat is now 60% out of state. The writer of the article makes the very valid argument that the school is funded partially by taxpayers. But the flipside is that the quality of student body has increased by recruiting out of state students.

 

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/12/how_many_bama_students_should.html

 

What do you guys think?

[Dmmetler]

My former employer started to recruit heavily out of state when the state cut our budget by a lot, as did most of the state universities (I think the flagship might not have had to change their practices as much). Out of state students simply pay more at every score band than an in-state student, and when the state isn't making up the difference, the out of state student is more valued.

 

 

 

 

[In The Great White North]

 

 

But the flipside is that the quality of student body has increased by recruiting out of state students.

 

Perhaps.  But is more likely that the pp implied, it is the quality of their bottom line that they are most interested in.

 

Alabama does have nicer merit scholarships than most state schools, which probably has a larger effect on their quality of student than whether or not they are in-state.

[Laura Corin]

My former employer started to recruit heavily out of state when the state cut our budget by a lot, as did most of the state universities (I think the flagship might not have had to change their practices as much). Out of state students simply pay more at every score band than an in-state student, and when the state isn't making up the difference, the out of state student is more valued.

 

There is the equivalent here.  Overseas students pay much more, so attracting them is very valuable.

 

L

[8filltheheart]

I don't know the stats, but based on what I have read, I don't believe they are actually bringing in more $ from the out of state students b/c it sounds like the students are being attracted by the scholarship $$ which means that they aren't paying higher tuition rates.

http://scholarships.ua.edu/types/out_of_state.html

[nancy in nj]

The North Carolina state university system limits the OOS to 15% of the freshman and fines schools that inadvertently go over the limit.  The system is supported by in-state tax dollars and their mission is to provide quality education for the residents of NC.  I personally think that state-supported university's should have these limits, and I disagree that the OOS recruiting is necessary to increase the caliber of the students--if the state flagship focuses their efforts on recruiting/keeping the best in-state students.  At UNC Chapel Hill,  this model has certainly not negatively impacted the quality of education or the caliber of students (because it is able to attract the top NC students).

[8filltheheart]

The North Carolina state university system limits the OOS to 15% of the freshman and fines schools that inadvertently go over the limit. The system is supported by in-state tax dollars and their mission is to provide quality education for the residents of NC. I personally think that state-supported university's should have these limits, and I disagree that the OOS recruiting is necessary to increase the caliber of the students--if the state flagship focuses their efforts on recruiting/keeping the best in-state students. At UNC Chapel Hill, this model has certainly not negatively impacted the quality of education or the caliber of students (because it is able to attract the top NC students).

This is where I come out. If the state is partially funding the school, it seems to me that those taxpayers' students should have higher priority. I don't think the stat needs to be as low as 15%, but only having 40% instate seems just wrong for an instate school.

[Teachin'Mine]

From a taxpayers point of view, honestly it probably only matters if your own child is trying to get admitted.   Otherwise, with the exception of UA and some other state universities which offer great merit or financial aid  (UVa comes to mind) for OOS students, wouldn't you want the tax burden to be reduced by the OOS students' tuition?   From the point of view of someone OOS looking at state universities, the more diverse student body would be preferable to having a vast majority of in-state students.   Then again, IMO the state it's in does matter.

 

As for UA, if their goal is to become a top university, then they're doing the right thing bringing in top students.  As your son qualifies for the top scholarship, does it really matter?   Raising the school's stats should also encourage Alabama high schools to raise their standards to better prepare their students for admission to UA and qualification for the great scholarships.   I think their approach will definitely pay off in the long run.

 

Edited:   I missed your post above.  How I see it is that it's sad that more of their in state students aren't qualifying for the top scholarships and are going elsewhere.  I expect that will change and they'll be able to keep the higher academic standards and fill their seats with more Alabama students.  I think the imbalance will slowly shift.

[8filltheheart]

From a taxpayers point of view, honestly it probably only matters if your own child is trying to get admitted. Otherwise, with the exception of UA and some other state universities which offer great merit or financial aid (UVa comes to mind) for OOS students, wouldn't you want the tax burden to be reduced by the OOS students' tuition? From the point of view of someone OOS looking at state universities, the more diverse student body would be preferable having to a vast majority of in-state students. Then again, IMO the state it's in does matter.

 

As for UA, if their goal is to become a top university, then they're doing the right thing bringing in top students. As your son qualifies for the top scholarship, does it really matter? Raising the school's stats should also encourage Alabama high schools to raise their standards to better prepare their students for admission to UA and qualification for the great scholarships. I think their approach will definitely pay off in the long run.

My question is really just should there be a limit to the number of OOS. I personally think that there should be. I'm not sure what I think the number should be, but I don't think it should top 50% at any rate.

[Wildcat]

Here is my story. Ds was admitted/accepted to our state school with no problem. He isn't what I consider 'high stat', but he is in the top 15%, based on the school's stats. The state school offered him $2500 per year scholarship. Had ds been applying as an OOS student, he would have received..... wait for it......  a nearly free ride*. THIS is what I have a problem with. It's not so much that "top students in the state aren't being admitted", it's that the school is courting OOS for a reason.

 

*due to this, he nixed the state school and went out-of-state, which will save us significant $$ in the long run.

 

ETA.... yes I think the number of OOS should be limited and scholarships should be increased for in-state students. OR.... the school should have its tax money decreased by the % of OOS students attending.

[Pawz4me]

FWIW, I *believe* the OOS student limit for the UNC system schools is capped at 18 percent (not 15 percent).  As an in-stater, and someone who has paid taxes in this state my entire adult life (as did my parents and all grandparents), I think there should be OOS limits, although I don't know what would be a good balance between being fair to in-state students and accepting enough students from other states and countries for the diversity/cultural benefit.  I know there has been talk about raising the limit here.  I personally don't mind paying taxes to support a strong state university system.

[8filltheheart]

Here is my story. Ds was admitted/accepted to our state school with no problem. He isn't what I consider 'high stat', but he is in the top 15%, based on the school's stats. The state school offered him $2500 per year scholarship. Had ds been applying as an OOS student, he would have received..... wait for it......  a nearly free ride*. THIS is what I have a problem with. It's not so much that "top students in the state aren't being admitted", it's that the school is courting OOS for a reason.

 

*due to this, he nixed the state school and went out-of-state, which will save us significant $$ in the long run.

 

ETA.... yes I think the number of OOS should be limited and scholarships should be increased for in-state students. OR.... the school should have its tax money decreased by the % of OOS students attending.

 

The bolded is an excellent pt!   If a state wants to increase the number of their top students staying in-state, the scholarships for in-state should be better than the OOS.   For example, UA could increase their scholarships to reduce room/board for the top in-state students.

[Teachin'Mine]

I think a strong state university system with national and international diversity is ideal, but I also agree that there should be some incentive for the top students to want to stay in-state, or at least not pay more than an OOS student with a similar profile.   I would still prefer a great state university with a large percentage of OOS students over a mediocre one with a high percentage of in-state students.

 

Edited:  Another benefit of a strong in-state university is that the community colleges will likely need to step up to prepare the students transferring and to ensure course equality for transferring credits.

[In The Great White North]

 

 

 The state school offered him $2500 per year scholarship. Had ds been applying as an OOS student, he would have received..... wait for it......  a nearly free ride*. 

 

What state school was this?  I'd like to apply.

 

 

[regentrude]

No, I do not think they should actively try to keep the majority in-state students. In order to be a strong, competetive university, they should attract the best students they can for their level - from in state and out-of-state.

I do not consider it valuable to keep the student's of my state in a bubble; the contact with students from other states and countries is very valuable and broadens their horizons, especially in not-so-progressive areas where many people tend to stick to their small town, do not travel, stay where the family stayed for generations.

 

Ultimately, it is more beneficial for the entire state (and thus the taxpayer) to have a strong, competetive public university that attracts bright students from all over the country (and world), attracts good professors, grant money, innovation...much more important IMO than making sure state money only goes to in-state kids. That would be shortsighted.

[dirty ethel rackham]

If it is a state tax supported school, then it should have preference for in-state students.  The idea of paying taxes for a university that gives preference to students whose families do not pay taxes to support that school really bothers me.  I do get the idea that you want diversity, but it should not come at the expense of the families who pay to support it.  Our state's flagship university has upped the number of out of state students to help pay the bills since our state is so broke it can't pay its bills, including the university it is supposed to support. I don't think they are offering an abundance of full-ride scholarships to these OOS students as it would not help the bottom line.   A couple of years ago, this same university tried to limit the number of acceptances from certain counties in our state in the name of diversity.  However, since it is a prestigious university that is supported by taxes, there was an uproar that they would reject well-qualified students simply because they came from areas that put an emphasis on quality education. 

[Gwen in VA]

Our local state college (considered a "public ivy" because of its academic strengths) is required by our state legislature to accept at least 67% in-state students. Admission is MUCH more competitive for OOS students than for in-state because of this limit. (When asked about SAT scores, the admissions people give two statistics -- in-state and OOS numbers!)

 

The college does not like the requirement, since it limits diversity, academic excellence, and monies from tuition (OOS obviously pay significantly more) but as a taxpayer I'm glad the limit exists.

[Vida Winter]

Statistically, many out of state students lose their merit scholarships (due to grades). Colleges count on that.

[regentrude]

If it is a state tax supported school, then it should have preference for in-state students.  The idea of paying taxes for a university that gives preference to students whose families do not pay taxes to support that school really bothers me.

 

So what about in-state students whose families do not pay state tax? What makes them different and admission-worthy over students from another state?

I do not understand the whole argument. I pay plenty of federal and state taxes that pay for services that are also used by people who do not pay taxes. Taxpayers are funding institutions and infrastructure for the common good all the time; YOU are paying for something non-payers use all.the.time. So why do you feel different about people from "your" state vs people from "other" states?

 

That said, out of state tuition is usually MUCH higher than in-state, and many students do NOT receive scholarships offsetting the difference.  Also, scholarships are not usually state funded, but come from other sources - so why should the scholarship granting committees give preference to in-state students?

 

 

[creekland]

UA is doing what they can to become a top name in State Us - an equivalent to UF, UGA, UNC, UVA, UMich, Penn St. etc.  They are "buying" top students from anywhere as top students attract top professors, grants, companies, prestige, etc.  They are doing more to improve the image of their state (overall) than they would if they had kept with the status quo and been happy about it.

 

They are not "there" yet as prestige comes slowly, but they've definitely made significant inroads. Once they are "there" they could change back (some) if they so desire.

 

Middle son had UA - with a full tuition scholarship - as a choice.  They ended up being his third least expensive school (other schools like top kids too).  It was all close enough that he could have chosen any of his Top 3.  He didn't choose them as they didn't have what "he" was looking for (specifically neuro and brain sciences with ample research options, and they were too Greek + sports focused for him, but those were lesser considerations).   Had he decided to go there - or had other scholarships not come through to where they were the only affordable option - I think he'd have done just fine.  Without a significant number of other top students, he'd have never even considered them.

[Janice in NJ]

So what about in-state students whose families do not pay state tax? What makes them different and admission-worthy over students from another state?

I do not understand the whole argument. I pay plenty of federal and state taxes that pay for services that are also used by people who do not pay taxes. Taxpayers are funding institutions and infrastructure for the common good all the time; YOU are paying for something non-payers use all.the.time. So why do you feel different about people from "your" state vs people from "other" states?

 

That said, out of state tuition is usually MUCH higher than in-state, and many students do NOT receive scholarships offsetting the difference.  Also, scholarships are not usually state funded, but come from other sources - so why should the scholarship granting committees give preference to in-state students?

 

Good Morning, Regentrude,

 

I asked about this when my kids were offered in-state $$.  It's about stimulating local economies.  In general, people eventually tend to live and work where they grew up, not where they went to college.  If the state uni educates in-state kids, the hope is that they will stay in the state and contribute to the state's economy.  The argument is that OOS kids are exports; you educate them, and then they leave.  It's a (40 year) return on investment argument.

 

I'm not sure what the stats are.  

Do some/most kids really move back home to work?  

Do OOS students lose their scholarships at a high enough rate to make the acceptances lucrative in the end?  

 

I work with students whose parents have the resources to send them to any school they choose.  I must admit, I am surprised how many of them apply to OOS publics.  They won't even consider our NJ publics.  I have attended open houses at several of our publics.  They brag about their OOS applications/students.  Perhaps it's the old idea that if you can have something for less, you don't value it.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

 

 

[creekland]

 

I work with students whose parents have the resources to send them to any school they choose.  I must admit, I am surprised how many of them apply to OOS publics.  They won't even consider our NJ publics.  I have attended open houses at several of our publics.  They brag about their OOS applications/students.  Perhaps it's the old idea that if you can have something for less, you don't value it.

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Among my peers and the few families I see now in this situation, the main reason to go elsewhere is the desire to experience a different area and different school than the local masses.

 

I've adopted that attitude myself even though we aren't in a "money is no object" position.  I've just seen a bit of "good" coming from kids who get to experience different areas for longer than a vacation.  They may stay where they went to college (my oldest is doing this), they may return (many do), or they may go somewhere totally different (like myself).  I want mine to know the world is their planet - not solely the area they were brought up in.  They can choose based upon their opportunities and likes/dislikes.

 

It's not the only way to do things, of course, nor even the best way for all students, but I've no regrets.

[Jane in NC]

FWIW, I *believe* the OOS student limit for the UNC system schools is capped at 18 percent (not 15 percent).  As an in-stater, and someone who has paid taxes in this state my entire adult life (as did my parents and all grandparents), I think there should be OOS limits, although I don't know what would be a good balance between being fair to in-state students and accepting enough students from other states and countries for the diversity/cultural benefit.  I know there has been talk about raising the limit here.  I personally don't mind paying taxes to support a strong state university system.

 

Yes, there was some discussion in the fall about lifting the 18 percent cap.  Here is a Raleigh News and Observer story about it.

 

The UNC schools have been a bargain for in-state students, particularly when compared to the price of other state unis.  The NC constitution states: 

 

The General Assembly shall provide that the benefits of The University of North Carolina and other public institutions of higher education, as far as practicable, be extended to the people of the State free of expense.

The schools are far from free now, but the constitutional mandate to serve the people of NC has kept the cap on out of staters low.  And this also makes competition for the few OOS slots heat up!

[Jaybee]

Okay, I haven't checked to see if this changed for this year, but as late as last year (2012-2013), all UA merit scholarships were based solely on the SAT scores. You get the score, you get the scholarship. However, in-state scores of the same level get you more than out-of-state scores. So I don't really see how that hurts the in-state students. Seems to me that the in-state students are still getting the advantage.

 

Disclosure: Mom to two in-state sophomores on scholarships at UA.

[Pawz4me]

The UNC schools have been a bargain for in-state students, particularly when compared to the price of other state unis.

 

Yes.  DS has applied to seven schools, some in state and some OOS, some public and some private.  But we all know if he gets accepted at Chapel Hill (and I think he will), it's going to be very hard for anyone else to beat that value financially.  For the caliber of the school and in state tuition . . . unless one of the private schools he's applying to comes up with a lot of merit aid, well . . . it's just really hard for an in-state student to say no to UNC.  My niece went through the same thing last year and (no surprise) decided on UNC.

 

We've talked about the (potential lack of) diversity issue at UNC or any other state school, and while having interaction with others from different regions and countries may be somewhat beneficial, is it worth thousands of dollars more per year to go to a school with more diversity but that (probably) has no better academic reputation than UNC (or even one of our regional universities)?  No.  And that's an easy no.

 

[regentrude]

  In general, people eventually tend to live and work where they grew up, not where they went to college.  If the state uni educates in-state kids, the hope is that they will stay in the state and contribute to the state's economy.  The argument is that OOS kids are exports; you educate them, and then they leave.  It's a (40 year) return on investment argument.

I'm not sure what the stats are.  

Do some/most kids really move back home to work?  

Do OOS students lose their scholarships at a high enough rate to make the acceptances lucrative in the end?  

 

I work with students whose parents have the resources to send them to any school they choose.  I must admit, I am surprised how many of them apply to OOS publics.  They won't even consider our NJ publics.  I have attended open houses at several of our publics.  They brag about their OOS applications/students.  Perhaps it's the old idea that if you can have something for less, you don't value it.

Is that really so, that students move back home? I am very curious, because that is so far from my own experience of going where the job is. 

I also see that employers from our state very actively recruit our graduates, and that students from out of state accept offers from employers in our state - so educating the out-of-state student gains the state a highly educated graduate working for a company in state (who, if he had been educated elsewhere, may - by the same logic- have been less likely to come work in the state)

 

My DD is applying to several out-of-state public universities and to no in-state. The reason is simply the quality of the program in her major. We do not consider any public in our state simply because the only school with a strong program in this subject is the one where we parents teach and where she spent her high school years; all other schools do not make the list. It has nothing to do with price, but solely with quality, and I am willing to pay for it, within our financial possibilities.

 

Aside from this, I consider it beneficial for my student to expand her horizons, travel, live somewhere else than the small town she grew up in. I want her to get out, to broaden her horizons and experiences, to encounter people from other places, to benefit from cultural opportunities she does not have here.

Btw, the probability that she would ever get a job in our state  is very small; in academia, you do not usually have the luxury of choosing your location (we could not even pick the country).

[8filltheheart]

Okay, I haven't checked to see if this changed for this year, but as late as last year (2012-2013), all UA merit scholarships were based solely on the SAT scores. You get the score, you get the scholarship. However, in-state scores of the same level get you more than out-of-state scores. So I don't really see how that hurts the in-state students. Seems to me that the in-state students are still getting the advantage.

 

Disclosure: Mom to two in-state sophomores on scholarships at UA.

Not really. It my be the lower score gets equal % of tuition, but not the same $ award.

 

Instate

1330–1600 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a Presidential Scholar and will receive the value of tuition or $37,800 over four years ($9,450 per year)

 

OOS

1330–1390 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a UA Scholar and will receive the value of two-thirds tuition or $64,184 over four years ($16,046 per year).

 

Technically, the OOS student is receiving more than $7000 more per yr though they will still have to pay a portion of tuition. If you look at the students overlapping at 1400, the amt is hugely different in terms of dollars

 

OOS

1400–1600 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a Presidential Scholar and will receive the value of tuition or $95,800 over four years ($23,950 per year.).

 

They are receiving $14000 more per yr than the instate students. Granted tuition is a wash, but the $ awards are far from equal.

 

Fwiw, I really hadn't thought about any of it until I read the article which was linked on college confidential. Once I read it, it made me start thinking.

 

My thoughts are more along the lines of Janice's......what is the economic impact if a high percentage of your top university grads from your flagship university leave the state to go home and the top students from your state go elsewhere bc OOS offer them more $ than your instate uni?? There has to economic fallout from that.

 

I now wonder if other state flagships have a reversed percentage similar to UA or is this a unique situation. No idea. And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

[Catherine]

I haven't read the responses, but I know that when I toured out state flagship university, this was discussed. Part of the motivation to take out of state students here is that they pay significantly more in tuition, relieving our state of some costs. Still, it is much harder to be admitted there as an out of state than in state student, so there is plenty of demand for those slots.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Not really. It my be the lower score gets equal % of tuition, but not the same $ award.

 

Instate

1330–1600 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a Presidential Scholar and will receive the value of tuition or $37,800 over four years ($9,450 per year)

 

OOS

1330–1390 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a UA Scholar and will receive the value of two-thirds tuition or $64,184 over four years ($16,046 per year).

 

Technically, the OOS student is receiving more than $7000 more per yr though they will still have to pay a potion of tuition. If you look at the students overlapping at 1400, the amt is hugely different in terms of dollars

 

OOS

1400–1600 SAT score (critical reading and math scores only) and at least a 3.5 cumulative GPA will be selected as a Presidential Scholar and will receive the value of tuition or $95,800 over four years ($23,950 per year.).

 

They are receiving $14000 more per yr than the instate students. Granted tuition is a wash, but the $ awards are far from equal.

 

Fwiw, I really hadn't thought about any of it until I read the article which was linked on college confidential. Once I read it, it made me start thinking.

 

My thoughts are more along the lines of Janice's......what is the economic impact if a high percentage of your top university grads from your flagship university leave the state to go home and the top students from your state go elsewhere bc OOS offer them more $ than your instate uni?? There has to economic fallout from that.

 

I now wonder if other state flagships have a reversed percentage similar to UA or is this a unique situation. No idea. And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

I think it's hard to compare these figures. Even with a 50% scholarship the oos student would be paying more than the in state on scholarship. And the oos scholarship student would pay almost as much as an in state student with no scholarship.

The topic of staying in or leaving the state must vary a lot by location. There might be some info but I'm not sure how much. I saw some stats this week on salaries for VA grads by degree, but the state only had figures on those whose job after graduation was in VA (ok for polisci majors but less good for engineers or theatre degrees and no info for those who left the state for grad school ).

It might depend on the economics of the state (do Michigan student who go to CO for school go back to MI) and on the baseline mental image of the state (a student might stay in Texas or Missouri because they'd come to like it there).

 

Hope your dil's procedure is smooth.

[8filltheheart]

I think it's hard to compare these figures. Even with a 50% scholarship the oos student would be paying more than the in state on scholarship. And the oos scholarship student would pay almost as much as an in state student with no scholarship.

The topic of staying in or leaving the state must vary a lot by location. There might be some info but I'm not sure how much. I saw some stats this week on salaries for VA grads by degree, but the state only had figures on those whose job after graduation was in VA (ok for polisci majors but less good for engineers or theatre degrees and no info for those who left the state for grad school ).

It might depend on the economics of the state (do Michigan student who go to CO for school go back to MI) and on the baseline mental image of the state (a student might stay in Texas or Missouri because they'd come to like it there).

 

Hope your dil's procedure is smooth.

 

Thanks.

 

I think when you look at the 1400+ range that is where the recruiting of top in-state and top OOS is probably the biggest issue.   Both receive full tuition, but the OOS award is huge, while the instate isn't....there is not distinction between awards.  They are completely equivalent in terms of out of pocket expenses.  There is no greater incentive for the instate student.   They might end up with greater financial incentive OOS. 

 

[Nan in Mass]

,,,And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

 

Hugs, 8!  And sending sticky-if-best thoughts to your dil.  I SO wholeheartedly agree with the last bit.  Sigh.

 

Nan

[Elisabet1]

I think the scholarships and such should be kept instate.

 

I went to a state university where all scholarships went to out of state students "to bring in diversity." That drove me nuts! It was not a wealthy state. Many actual instate students could not afford to go as a result, or ended up with tons of student loans, while mediocre students from other states took all the funding. 

 

Now I live in a different state. I am unsure, but, UT Austin almost seems as if it admits out of state students who might not be able to get in if they had been instate. Not sure. Some people will post on college confidential that they got in from out of state, and I know people who are instate , with the same stats, did not get in. However, at least in UT Austin's case, I do not believe they are giving a bunch of grants and such to bring in the other of state students. 

 

So basically, I think the instate students should be a priority and all scholarship and grant funding should go to the instate students. The only reason to bring in out-of-state students should be to raise the stats and/or bring in more money from the higher tuition rates. I know that some other states will bring students in who are top students with instate tuition scholarships and such. I can see that, if the students really are way above the usual for the university and the university needs that boost. 

[regentrude]

I think many people are under a great misconception what "public state university" means in terms of funding.

In 2001, 41% of our local public university's revenue came from the state.

This has dwindled to a mere 23% in 2011 - a 44% cut!

So, your state may pay not even one fifth of the expenses of the "state" university. That is truly more "state located" than "state funded".

 

75% of the university's budget have to be obtained from other sources, such as tuition.

 

[creekland]

 I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

 

:grouphug:   I hope all goes well - and kudos for you being there for your DIL!  I know your son appreciates it tremendously!

 

Plus... I still say UA is doing more for the state of Alabama (prestige-wise) by attracting students from many other states while still providing a decent education for its own students.  I'd even venture to say it ends up being a BETTER education for its own students with more diversity and a higher profile.

[regentrude]

I think the scholarships and such should be kept instate.

 

You are assuming that the scholarships come from state money in the first place. It is unlikely that they do. As I posted earlier, our "public" university gets funded by the state to less than 25%. So, the money for scholarships to attract out of state students is most certainly not coming from state-taxpayer-funds, but other sources.

[Luckymama]

Our state flagship university receives 13.2% of its funding from the state.

[regentrude]

Our state flagship university receives 13.2% of its funding from the state.

 

... a percentage that hardly justifies subsidizing tuition for in-state-students, let alone mandating that the majority of student be from in-state.

 

[Jane in NC]

 And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

 

Oh hon...Sending best wishes to your daughter-in-law and eldest son. 

 

Hugs,

Jane

[LizzyBee]

So what about in-state students whose families do not pay state tax? What makes them different and admission-worthy over students from another state?

I do not understand the whole argument. I pay plenty of federal and state taxes that pay for services that are also used by people who do not pay taxes. Taxpayers are funding institutions and infrastructure for the common good all the time; YOU are paying for something non-payers use all.the.time. So why do you feel different about people from "your" state vs people from "other" states?

 

That said, out of state tuition is usually MUCH higher than in-state, and many students do NOT receive scholarships offsetting the difference.  Also, scholarships are not usually state funded, but come from other sources - so why should the scholarship granting committees give preference to in-state students?

 

Maybe if the state helps those children from non-taxpaying families get an affordable education, the next generation will earn enough money to be taxpayers.  My understanding has always been that state and community colleges were formed for the purpose of helping people within their state/community afford higher education.

 

My oldest daughter attends a state university in NC, and part of her financial aid package comes directly from the state of NC. Because of the educational environment in NC, I think a lot of the private endowments (another source of her aid pkg) were probably contributed with the assumption that they would help primarily in-state students.

[LizzyBee]

No, I do not think they should actively try to keep the majority in-state students. In order to be a strong, competetive university, they should attract the best students they can for their level - from in state and out-of-state.

I do not consider it valuable to keep the student's of my state in a bubble; the contact with students from other states and countries is very valuable and broadens their horizons, especially in not-so-progressive areas where many people tend to stick to their small town, do not travel, stay where the family stayed for generations.

 

Ultimately, it is more beneficial for the entire state (and thus the taxpayer) to have a strong, competetive public university that attracts bright students from all over the country (and world), attracts good professors, grant money, innovation...much more important IMO than making sure state money only goes to in-state kids. That would be shortsighted.

 

This is off-topic, but the bolded statement above made me pause. I grew up 5 miles outside a town of 251. (It's grown to 351 per a later census.)  The country seat had a population of about 2500.  The primary industries are farming and tourism. At least half the kids leave the area after graduation because there are so few jobs there. By the time I graduated from high school, I had been to or through at least half the states, plus Mexico and Canada.

 

I was fascinated when I moved to Baltimore because it seemed to be nothing more than a series of small towns/neighborhoods in very close proximity to one another.  Innumerable families moved from the city to the suburbs together (including my now husband's family).  Children buy or rent houses in their parents' neighborhood.  My dh and I lived in his grandmother's former house for the first 7 years of our marriage, next door to the house he grew up in.  The woman living next door had grown up 2 doors down from that house, where her parents still lived.  In between those two houses, dh's best friend's mother still lived, and her daughter lived in the house at the end of the block. This scenario is so common that Michael Tucker and Tracy Ullman did a skit about it on her TV show. (Michael is from Baltimore.)  Tracey and her dad (Michael) cried and cried because she grew up and was leaving home, spreading her wings, and going out on her own.  Finally, they hug one last time, and Tracey leaves the home and goes in the house next door.  It's a rowhouse (with marble steps and not to be confused with a townhouse), so she only had to walk about 3 steps from dad's steps to her own. Many of my friends in Baltimore had never been further away than Ocean City, MD.

 

As I said, this is off-topic, and I don't even know why I responded, except perhaps that I get tired of the stereotypes about people who are rural and/or poor.

 

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Thanks.

 

I think when you look at the 1400+ range that is where the recruiting of top in-state and top OOS is probably the biggest issue.   Both receive full tuition, but the OOS award is huge, while the instate isn't....there is not distinction between awards.  They are completely equivalent in terms of out of pocket expenses.  There is no greater incentive for the instate student.   They might end up with greater financial incentive OOS. 

 

 

So you could look at it as the OOS student getting more of a tuition grant. Or you could consider that the cost to the college of educating an in state and out of state student of similar stats and ability ought to be the same.  and in both cases, a full ride means that the college absorbs the whole cost of the tuition (for whatever reason: high performance student, athlete or oboe player)

 

On the other hand, a student paying 50% of $26k pays $13k, while an OOS student paying 50% of a $40k pays $20. The OOS will pay more for their education, even though they received a higher grant measured in dollars. In fact the 50% discount OOS student is paying about 77% of the non-discounted in state rate.  I would presume that the cost per student to run the university is actually something between the $26k and $40k.  [Cost per student to run the uni being somewhat distinct from the cost to educate each student, btw. But that's a different issue.] 

 

As the parent of a student, it doesn't matter to me how much the scholarship grants are, so much as it matters what the final net price is relative to the perceived quality of the education. I'm looking for the best value for our dollars spent, not just following the biggest grant.

 

(I used figures for Ohio and non-Ohio residents from Miami University, just to have some numbers to dice.)

[regentrude]

 

I get tired of the stereotypes about people who are rural and/or poor.

 

I was speaking from my own experience here in the small rural town where I live, not in terms of stereotypes - and I never mentioned poor people. The atmosphere has absolutely nothing to do with material poverty, but with a mindset of cultural impoverishment.

I feel the lack of open-mindedness, cultural broadness, and greater perspective as stifling, enclosing, limiting - and I absolutely will make sure my kids get out of here.

I fail to see how this is stereotyping. I see people who have never set foot outside their state, who can not fathom that elsewhere things are done differently, who are closed to new ideas. Students who gasp at the idea of going to the nearest big city for a cultural event, because oh my goodness, that is 100 miles! (And to make clear, this is not about the cost of driving, it is about the mindset that one can avail himself of the larger cultural opportunities the world has to offer by making an effort... too many are just content with the little that comes to their door.)

All those of my friends who did not grow up here, but hail from all around the globe or from other parts of the country (and most have lived in other countries), feel the same.

 

If those are stereotypes, then heck yes, this area in which I happen to live confirms every.single.one.of.them.

 

Ideally, I would want every young person to spend at least one year in a different country. Yes, a girl can dream. But it would do wonders for people's global perspective.

[LizzyBee]

I was speaking from my own experience here in the small rural town where I live, not in terms of stereotypes - and I never mentioned poor people. The atmosphere has absolutely nothing to do with material poverty, but with a mindset of cultural impoverishment.

I feel the lack of open-mindedness, cultural broadness, and greater perspective as stifling, enclosing, limiting - and I absolutely will make sure my kids get out of here.

I fail to see how this is stereotyping. I see people who have never set foot outside their state, who can not fathom that elsewhere things are done differently, who are closed to new ideas. Students who gasp at the idea of going to the nearest big city for a cultural event, because oh my goodness, that is 100 miles! (And to make clear, this is not about the cost of driving, it is about the mindset that one can avail himself of the larger cultural opportunities the world has to offer by making an effort... too many are just content with the little that comes to their door.)

All those of my friends who did not grow up here, but hail from all around the globe or from other parts of the country (and most have lived in other countries), feel the same.

 

If those are stereotypes, then heck yes, this area in which I happen to live confirms every.single.one.of.them.

 

Ideally, I would want every young person to spend at least one year in a different country. Yes, a girl can dream. But it would do wonders for people's global perspective.

 

That one part of your post made me stop and think, but it wasn't so much your post that irritated me as much as the general stereotypes that exist at every turn and which your post seemed to touch on a bit.  We all speak from our own experience, and my experience was that I encountered just as much cultural impoverishment in a large city as in my very small hometown.  Anyway, I wasn't picking on you; your post just made me stop and think and put into words one of my own experiences. I looked on youtube to see if I could find the Michael Tucker/Tracey Ullman skit to add some levity; but it's not posted there.

 

I agree that it would be great for everyone to spend time in a different country.  I've lived overseas, and visited a couple of other countries. I've seen McDonald's being guarded by teenage boys dressed in rags but carrying AR-15s and I've stood  on the North Korea side of the building on the DMZ - both were eye-opening.  My middle daughter went to Europe on a high school trip and can't wait to go back. My oldest daughter is planning a semester in Australia in the fall.  My youngest is a competitive Irish dancer and we hope we'll be traveling to England or Ireland for Worlds at some point.  We don't have much money but I'd rather have these experiences for my kids than a large house or new cars.  I guess I get it from my mom; she took us on trips instead of buying us nice clothes or electronics.   :-)

[Kathy in Richmond]

And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

 

Oh goodness, I'm so sorry to hear she's having problems...sending many hugs & prayers to y'all. Also lots of good luck wishes for your 12-14 news, too!

 

[Laura in CA]

And I don't have time to do any more reading bc our daily life flipped on its head yesterday. Long story short.....I spent the evening and night driving to pick up my grandbabies who might be here just until after Christmas or maybe until May......my dil's pregnancy is in trouble and she is almost 19 weeks and is having a cervical cerclage performed this morning in Nashville. :( my granddaughter is asleep beside me right now.......one of those parental "our older kids' problems are normally bigger real life issues than our younger kids."

 

Wow, best wishes and prayers for your family, 8Fill.

 

Interesting discussion! Looks like no one has mentioned the West Coast universities. Here in CA we've watched in morbid fascination as, just within the last few years, the UCs have gone from max 5% foreign/out-of-state (very unusual) to well over a quarter OOS/foreign -- paying full freight.

 

There are some states which lure OOS students with scholarships (my older son has a full-tuition OOS scholarship at a non-CA uni; they tried dropping this program a few years ago and basically no one came from OOS!); other states with desirable flagship state universities admit OOS students to help the bottom line. The UCs reassure residents/voters that in absolute numbers, they're admitting more CA students than ever; but as their percentage of the overall student body shrinks, overcrowding in dorms and classes obviously becomes a big problem. UC Santa Cruz and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo (and I'm sure others) cram 3 students into double rooms ... graduating in 4 years is becoming harder .... and still the OOS/foreign students are applying in droves. My other son may well end up at a UC ... we'll see!

 

Within limits (and similar to the debate about the large number of foreign nationals in U.S. graduate schools), this can perhaps be a win/win -- in-state (or U.S.) students need to step up their game to compete with better-prepared OOS (foreign) students; OOS students paying private-school prices means more scholarship $$ for low-income in-state students; etc. But taken to extremes, a public school becoming so full of OOS students (such as "UC Eugene" in Oregon) that local taxpayers feel alienated doesn't sound good to me.

 

(BTW my father was an international student at UC Berkeley back when that was unusual :) ... and when I was in college, tuition was only $700/yr at the UCs (!). Now it's $12k for in-state (up from $6k just a few years ago), and more than 3 times that for OOS/foreign.)

 

OOS students need higher stats to be admitted to the UCs; they don't bring diversity (not needed anyway) except geographic (kids who can pay $55k/yr for UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC Irvine etc. tend to be white or Asian).

 

 

I'll quote from two articles below that describe the tension between bitter locals and college administrators desperately trying to make ends meet:

 

 

From a NYT article, "Proposed Law Would Limit International Enrollment at UC Schools":

 

 

A California lawmaker is proposing to limit the number of international and out-of-state students who can enroll at University of California campuses.

 

The 10 campuses that make up the UC system — including selective universities like Berkeley and the University of California, Los Angeles — would be prohibited from enrolling more than 10 percent of non-Californians as members of the freshman class. The proposed California Students First Act, which was introduced by Senator Michael J. Rubio, a Democrat from Shafter, Calif., would also cap undergraduate enrollment of nonresidents at 10 percent.

 

The measure, which was introduced last week, would ensure that California students had a “fair shot†at attending the public universities, Mr. Rubio said, “and not be turned away simply because a wealthy student from the East Coast or abroad shows up with a checkbook in hand.â€

 

In the fall of 2012, international and out-of-state students made up more than 23 percent of the freshman class on UC campuses, more than double the 11.5 percent of non-Californians who enrolled in 2009. In contrast, more California students are applying to these state universities, competing for seats on the UC system campuses.

 

The measure has a long way to go before it becomes a law. If it does, it has the potential to change who attends the University of California, Berkeley, and UCLA, two campuses that are “internationally renowned,†said Peter King, a spokesman for the university system. In 2010-11, UCLA had the sixth-largest international student population in the country, according to the Institute of International Education.

 

“The world wants to come there,†Mr. King said of UCLA and Berkeley.

 

Limiting the number of students who pay out-of-state and international tuition rates may also have a negative impact on revenue streams at the campuses.

 

“We’re now operating at 1997 levels of funding from the state, while serving 70,000 more students,†Mr. King said.

 

.......

 

 

and another NYT article about UDub, UIUC, et al.:

 

 

SEATTLE — This is the University of Washington’s new math: 18 percent of its freshmen come from abroad, most from China. Each pays tuition of $28,059, about three times as much as students from Washington State. And that, according to the dean of admissions, is how low-income Washingtonians — more than a quarter of the class — get a free ride.

 

With state financing slashed by more than half in the last three years, university officials decided to pull back on admissions offers to Washington residents, and increase them to students overseas.

 

That has rankled some local politicians and parents, a few of whom have even asked Michael K. Young, the university president, whether their children could get in if they paid nonresident tuition. “It does appeal to me a little,†he said.

 

There is a widespread belief in Washington that internationalization is the key to the future, and Mr. Young said he was not at all bothered that there were now more students from other countries than from other states. (Out-of-state students pay the same tuition as foreign students.)

 

“Is there any advantage to our taking a kid from California versus a kid from China?†he said. “You’d have to convince me, because the world isn’t divided the way it used to be.â€

 

.......

 

[Jaybee]

So you could look at it as the OOS student getting more of a tuition grant. Or you could consider that the cost to the college of educating an in state and out of state student of similar stats and ability ought to be the same.  and in both cases, a full ride means that the college absorbs the whole cost of the tuition (for whatever reason: high performance student, athlete or oboe player)

 

On the other hand, a student paying 50% of $26k pays $13k, while an OOS student paying 50% of a $40k pays $20. The OOS will pay more for their education, even though they received a higher grant measured in dollars. In fact the 50% discount OOS student is paying about 77% of the non-discounted in state rate.  I would presume that the cost per student to run the university is actually something between the $26k and $40k.  [Cost per student to run the uni being somewhat distinct from the cost to educate each student, btw. But that's a different issue.] 

 

As the parent of a student, it doesn't matter to me how much the scholarship grants are, so much as it matters what the final net price is relative to the perceived quality of the education. I'm looking for the best value for our dollars spent, not just following the biggest grant.

 

(I used figures for Ohio and non-Ohio residents from Miami University, just to have some numbers to dice.)

 

Yes, I guess I am looking at this from a different angle, not just how much, specifically $ amount, each student receives. But more that an in-state student can get a full ride with a little bit lower SAT score than an OOS student. UA's lesser scholarships are also to the in-state student's advantage. Yes, of course, the OOS student gets more if you only look at the $ amount. But in the end, the amount that has to be put out by the student/parents is what I am looking at as a parent. And if I don't have to put out any, I don't see that the OOS student is getting some huge advantage over my in-state student(s). I certainly don't think the U should give my kids cash so that their scholarships would equal the OOS scholarship. Other in-state students have those same advantages if they make good SAT scores, which several of my classmates did, as well as my sister, even though our school was not top-of-the-line, just because they applied themselves. My girls were offered some nice-looking scholarships from other schools; nice-looking, that is, until you looked at the "what's left to pay" part of the equation. 

 

On the topic of diversity, my in-state students have lived most of their lives overseas, so they do not suffer from lack of seeing how others live. It *is* a cultural exchange experience for them to go to school in-state, even though it is our *home* state. I lived my childhood in the same house where my mother still lives, and went to college less than an hour's drive away. I didn't commute, but there were lots of commuters. However, my little state school had an impressive and interesting international exchange program, so that even though the majority of students were local, there was diversity to be had if you were interested. I was interested, and was exposed to a varied and unusual world cultural environment during my university years. 

 

I don't have any awesome conclusions or anything, just meandering thoughts. I think this is an interesting topic, though, and wonder (but not enough to research it ;) ) what percentage of UA's scholarships come from other means than state taxes. They have a loyal and generally well-off alumni base that provides a lot of funds for the school, from what I understand. 

 

8, I hope your dil and new little grandbaby will be kept safe and healthy. 

[8filltheheart]

I've enjoyed reading everyone's perspectives. Interesting conversation. The entire instate/OOS issue is something that does impact us quite a bit since we move a lot and the rules and regulations are different in every state. We moved into our current house in Feb and ds applied to 2 instate schools. One accepted him as instate and another as OOS even though he definitely meets instate criteria. When he called and asked, he was told bc he had an out of state college transcript they automatically had to classify him as OOS. (Not sure where that rule came from, but it was a lot of paperwork to get his status changed.)

 

Thank you for all the well wishes for my dil. The procedure went well. Her cervix was really short and they said they were able to lengthen it and she has not had any contractions due to it (they were very concerned that it would put her into preterm labor.). She goes back in on Tues and if all is well, hopefully she will be able to resume her normal activities.

[Teachin'Mine]

So glad to hear DiL is doing well.  

 

Regarding the in-state/OOS, it must be better to be in-state as you went through the trouble of getting him re-classified. ;)

 

Hope your son gets great news on Saturday!

[8filltheheart]

So glad to hear DiL is doing well.  

 

Regarding the in-state/OOS, it must be better to be in-state as you went through the trouble of getting him re-classified. ;)

 

Hope your son gets great news on Saturday!

 

Only for the school.   It made no difference for ds. ;)  We were thinking more in terms of the funds the school has to allocate to other students.

 

[Vida Winter]

8Fill, glad to hear your dil is doing well and will keep her in my prayers for a quick recovery and smooth sailing the rest of the way.