<p>MADad - sorry, I had missed that in your post. That’s great that your daughter got enough merit aid to make the net cost less than UMass’ 16k per year. She did well!!!</p>
<p>UMass offers a number of scholarships, although most are “only” tuiton waivers worth about $5200 per year, and function to spread the scholarship largesse around rather than concentrate awards on a smaller number of stars. Example: the Adams scholarships, tuition waivers awarded to ALL public school students who are in the top 25% of their class as measured by their standardized MCAS scores. </p>
<p>As a policy that looks like a choice to spread the award dollars around rather than - as U Delaware did a few years ago - concentrate award money. I think that’s a wiser use of enticement money, and is just a policy choice. It certainly isn’t - as you called it doing “nothing” to entice top students. </p>
<p>Chelsea- so, are you as satisfied with UMass as it is as the OP makes you out to be?</p>
<p>OP - why are you so down on Umass? You seem to want to ignore rankings that indicate it’s better than you think it is.</p>
Actually, a tuition waver is worth only $1714 per year for in-state students.</p>
<p>This is another example of the stupid politics played with UMass - tuition hasn’t been raised in years if not decades, because for some reason the hacks in the legislature feel is important not to raise it. Meanwhile, the “fees”, about 80% of which is the “curriculum fee” (smells like “tuition”, tastes like “tuition”…) have hit $10K per year.</p>
<p>My S has the Adams scholarship, it was a little disappointing when this reality set in.</p>
<p>You hit the nail on the head. UMass has $1700 in tuition and around 6K in fees.</p>
<p>At UConn, the numbers are roughly reversed.</p>
<p>The Adams scholarship was a shrewd bit of politicking by presidential wanna-be Mitt Romney–sounds great on paper, until you look at the numbers.</p>
<p>Yes I agree; UMass is a very good research university and has particularly strong undergraduate and graduate programs in the hard sciences, engineering, computer science, business and linguistics. But the liberal arts and social science programs are definitely lacking compared to other “higher-ranked” universities. </p>
<p>My brother is an Econ student at Chicago (admittedly the best for Econ) and there is absolutely no comparison between Chicago (or for that matter, Michigan, Wisconsin, UCLA, UT Austin) and UMass Economics. Furthermore, UMass lacks in location and academic resources as well as certain opportunities at the undergraduate level. For example, a few of my friends at WPI who are sophomore engineering majors are paid Tutors (undergrarduate “TA”'s) for engineering courses. And at WPI, it is possible to graduate in three years as an Engineering majors, something I would imagine would be much more difficult at UMass. But without doubt UMass is a great research institution that prepares students for great careers and graduate schools and it isn’t third tier.</p>
Doesn’t really matter all that much what you call it, you have to pay them both anyway. When you add them together UMass is not the most expensive public school in the northeast. And room+board is a relative bargain, around $2500 cheaper than UConn for example. For out of state, UMass OOS is well over $5K cheaper than UConn.</p>
<p>Yes it is possible. Summer courses don’t include scholarship so they are out of consideration. Two of my friends are doing it. I could have done it as well if I hadn’t switched majors so 3 1/2 for me or 4 with co-op.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UC Berkeley does it (top 5 in every academic discipline at the graduate level and top-notch undergrad programs as well), although they have some problems of their own. So does Michigan. And both are better for every academic discipline (including those UMass excels at) than UMass. Not to say UMass is bad. Harvard and Princeton are also pretty damn good at everything they do (including financial aid) but getting into them is pretty damn hard.</p>
<p>Yes it isn’t the most expensive. But in Georgia, for example, the HOPE scholarship means no tuition at UGA and Georgia Tech for those with above 3.0 HS GPA. Much better than the Adams and Dean/Director “Honors” scholarships. That is a deal that one couldn’t turn down (except for Harvard, MIT, et.al.)</p>
<p>The problem with calling it ‘tuition’, ‘fees’ , whatever is that students who excel in state testing can receive free ‘tuition’ at any state college or university.</p>
<p>The joke’s on them when they find out about the strange cost structure that the MA college system uses, calling most of the costs “fees”,the scholarship covering only the very small “tuition”.</p>
<p>Very true. I used to wonder why people bothered to apply anywhere else when they could go to UMass for “free” with the Adam’s scholarship and I am beginning to realize why. UMass is still doing its job very well for making a high quality accessible to many students (not too selective or expensive). It seems unfortunately that people want to be rewarded with something “exclusive” for having worked hard. In a way I am thankful UMass isn’t that exclusive to exclude many hard working and talented students.</p>
<p>It isn’t a bad deal but considering that Massachusetts is applauded as the nation’s capital for higher education, something better remains expected from our chronically underfunded flagship public university. And it is largely non-Massachusetts residents who take advantage of our truly elite universities like Harvard and MIT.</p>
<p>"OP - why are you so down on Umass? You seem to want to ignore rankings that indicate it’s better than you think it is. "</p>
<p>And UMass boosters want to ignore rankings where UMass scores very low. </p>
<p>Anyone who has visited other state flagships outside of trhe Northeast will see the difference in campus appearance and resources. Even Indiana University, which is ranked only slightly higher than UMass, pales in comparison in national reputation and resources available to students.</p>
<p>Am I satisfied with UMass? Good question. First, it is my S who goes to UMass. Let me say this loud and clear. UMass does have issues with funding and last I looked so do many colleges right now. This idea floating around that UMass doesn’t have resources is flat out wrong. Anyone who has gone to UMass or has a student there knows that there is a wealth of resources available to students. Do the resources compare to Berkley or Michigan or Wisconsin? I have no idea. Do I wish that the English department wasn’t slashed as the Globe story pointed out. Yes. I would like my S to have more available to him. Does it mean they have a poor English Dept. Not at all. The information is out there for anyone who wants to look for it, but UMass has a lot going it and I suspect it will get even better. They have added a law school to the Dartmouth campus and there is a large expansion to the Comm. Col. at Amherst breaking ground and I think another science building is in the works. It’s not like they are running in place. And yes, there is very little difference between the schools ranked 50-125 or 25-75 or 60-200. These rankings from one magazine is a gimmick that colleges use to tout their status.</p>
<p>“And yes, there is very little difference between the schools ranked 50-125 or 25-75 or 60-200. These rankings from one magazine is a gimmick that colleges use to tout their status.”</p>
<p>Again, with this attitude UMass will remain a “good enough” school for students who can’t afford go any place else. BTW, the new law school at UMass Dartmouth is an unaccredited private school that UMass acquired recently. It had a 6% Mass Bar exam pass rate recently. Even UNH, in fiscally stingy New Hampshire, managed to acquire Franklin Pierce Law Center as its law school. FP is fully accredited and regionally respected. Another example of the “it’s good enough” for Massachusetts students attitude.</p>
<p>Exactly what is your point attacking UMass one thread after another? How about backing up anything you have to say with some facts. How is UMass acquiring a law school a bad thing? Your arguement makes no sense. It is as though you just want to prattle on and on with anything your perceive as negative.</p>
<p>And this is the second time you stated “good enough” as though you are speaking for us. Please don’t. That is how you perceive UMass. I find UMass to be a fine school.</p>
You contradict yourself - if UMass truly paled in comparison to Indiana, Indiana’s ranking would be much higher, not “only slightly higher”.</p>
<p>I would like to hear what your solution is. Harvard and MIT (and other good privates) aren’t going away. The politically connected private colleges in the Boston area will not allow massive new funding from the state. So what can UMass do to improve?</p>
<p>What did University of Michigan do? They hardly rely on their practically bankrupt state. They have an $8 billion endowment. U Mass must fundraise and get their alumni to donate. Unfortunately, like most schools, they lack billionaire alumni.</p>
<p>University of Michigan’s main competition within the state is Michigan State, another public school. There is no competition to speak of from private schools. Calvin College? Hope? Albion? Whoever even heard of these schools. </p>
<p>The top-rated private in Michigan (Calvin) has SAT scores only 60 points higher than UMass. stateuniversity.com lists only 4 private schools in Michigan (population 10,000,000) with a rating of 90 or higher, the other 4 are public; whereas Massachusetts (population 6,500,000) has 18 private and 2 public.</p>
<p>The 2nd ranked public (4th overall) in Michigan, according to that site, is Michigan State, whose students have virtually the same test scores as UMass Amherst, which is ranked #20</p>
<p>UM didn’t/doesn’t have to do anything, really - there is no other competition for the top students (and future wealthy alumni/ae) within the state.</p>
<p>UMass has been an excellent choice for our family. My S is not MIT caliber, but a bright student, and as a family we could not afford to be full pay at a highly ranked private.</p>
<p>UMass has a highly ranked engineering program, and we could not see paying over twice the amount for a comparable education. Should UMass’ goal be to enroll the highest achievers that would get full pay scholarships at top schools? Or educate the tons of bright kids who can’t afford 50K a year?</p>
<p>I didn’t see that a school such as Michigan had significantly more to offer to warrant paying the exorbitant OOS fees, at least as far as the engineering program.</p>
<p>Today’s Globe had an interesting take on the situation, the columnist in the Metro section. UMass does not have a bevy of PhD educators beating down the door to lead UMass. What UMass needs is a savvy, connected leader that can get UMass the funding it needs to grow. In spite of an indifferent legislature.</p>