Any rational reason why an in-state applicant would choose an out-of-state public?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
61

<p>Population, US Census 2012 estimate:
California 38.0 million
Michigan 9.9 million
ratio: 3.84 to 1</p>

<p>California residents enrolling at Michigan as freshmen, Fall 2010: 297
Michigan residents enrolling at UC (all campuses) as freshmen, Fall 2010: 24
ratio: 12.38 to 1</p>

<p>Michigan residents enrolling as freshmen at California private colleges and universities, Fall 2010:
USC 16
Stanford 10
Caltech 5
Pomona 4
Claremont McKenna 1
Harvey Mudd 5
Scripps 0
Pitzer 0
Occidental 5</p>

<p>California residents enrolling as freshmen at Michigan private colleges and universities, Fall 2010:
Kalamazoo College 21
Hope 10</p>

<p>The private colleges are a different market segment than the one being discussed on this thread, namely OOS publics, but even if you add those figures to the public university figures, it’s a pretty unidirectional trade.</p>

62

<p>There are few rational reasons why a Michigan resident, particularly one from the middle-upper middle income group, would any choose university, public or private, in-state or out-of-state, over the University of Michigan. Lower income kids may receive very generous FA packages from some OOS universities while very gifted students may receive excellent scholarships, but the vast majority of students who get into Michigan will find it cheaper and better than most OOS or IS alternatives.</p>

63

<p>Generally speaking, most Michigan residents who would choose to attend Loyola or Miami of Ohio did not get into the University of Michigan.</p>

64

<p>It is true that there is difference between public and private. But considering the cost of oos at UMich and private in other state, they are pretty comparable. If we add up the numbers above, Californian attending school at Michigan to be 328, and Michigan students going to California is 70. It is not too far off the 4:1 ratio. Nevertheless, I would expect more students going to California than coming to Michigan due to the geographical reason. This may indicate UMich is really attractive to oos students disregarding the cost and location.</p>

65

<p>

</p>

<p>$31,000 a year if that is what IU costs is only $5,000 more than MSU. MSU is right around $25,000 for freshman this year and MSU does not meet need for in-state kids. Merit money can be difficult to come by unless a student fills a specific “need” </p>

<p>I’m guessing the business school is part of the reason. Ross is difficult to get into and Kelly has a pretty well known rep in the midwest especially in marketing and batchelors…perhaps more than Broad. I happen to know at least a handful of kids in the past 5-7 years who have headed for IU.
Bloomington is a pretty place, also.</p>

66

<p>

</p>

<p>With Loyola it’s partly location. Chicago’s an interesting and dynamic city that draws a lot of Michigan exiles; I read recently that more than half of the people migrating to Cook County (Chicago and suburbs) annually are from Michigan. And Loyola has a particularly attractive North Lakefront location with easy public transportation access to the North Side and downtown. Then, too, it’s a Jesuit university which matters to some people, and it’s not the University of Detroit. Finally, Loyola gives out quite a few hefty merit scholarships. So if you wanna have fun in the city for four years and your parents will pay for it, thinking they’re getting a bargain because of the merit award and believing they’re doing the right thing by sending you to a Catholic school . . . well, why not Loyola?</p>

<p>Miami U is a little bit similar in that it attracts a certain preppy/frat-boy type. It fancies itself a distinguished academic institution and was included in the original book about the “public Ivies,” but I think it’s actually a bit of a party school. Again, if Mom & Dad can afford it and you’re into that scene, why not?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, one big difference between Michigan and the private California schools I listed is that the private schools all meet 100% of need, while Michigan doesn’t meet full need for OOS students. Consequently, net of FA Michigan will actually be more expensive for many OOS students than an OOS private will be for a Michigan resident with financial need. Which makes the number of OOS students coming to Michigan all the more remarkable.</p>

67

<p>The University of California campuses offer lower tuition to in-state students, but none of the campuses has a music program that remotely compares to the University of Michigan’s School of Music. During orientation I heard an administrator say that 80% of the population of the School of Music, Theatre and Dance comes from out of state (and out of country). I know several students from California who chose U of M because of its conservatory-level programs combined with an outstanding college campus experience.</p>

68

<p>

As CelesteRoberts pointed out, a substantial number of highly talented musicians would be attending Jacobs at IU – even if admitted to UMich. It would depend on the specific performance avenue they were pursuing and studio teacher preference/instrument etc. IU also has a very fine opera program for vocalists. UMich is no doubt a power house in its own right for the school of music (my son choose UMich over Jacobs) but we’ve also seen quite a few West Michigan musicians choose IU based on instrument studio, etc. That really could account for a large number of those IU admits.</p>

<p>Also, in terms of cost, if one is above FAFSA fin aid in terms of earning level, it’s possible for IU to be “cheaper” than UMich. IU I believe still, and at very least used to in 2009, give automatic academic scholarships for students with the kind of GPA/ACT/SAT combo that would usually be required to just get in to UMich. So it’s rate for academic high achievers, even if they were attending for music, was substantially discounted and ergo competitive with Michigan full-pay/in-state rates.</p>

<p>This would be true also for those attracted to Kelly biz school.
Not to mention beautiful campus, cool little town; lots to love about IU Bloomington ;)</p>

<p>None of which takes away from UMich, which McSon loved first and best. </p>

<p>In answer to the OP’s question: The rational reasons would include fit and if the family is middle class, the possibility of competitive financial incentives based on merit. The third aspect would be program-specific.</p>

69

<p>I think IU draws moderately well from SW Michigan.</p>

70

<p>Just to be clear here, we’re not talking about large numbers of Michigan residents enrolling at IU or Purdue (59 and 69 enrolled freshmen from Michigan respectively in fall 2010). Purdue attracted about twice as many from Ohio (139) and about 8 times as many from Illinois (557) that same year. IU also attracted disproportionately more from Ohio (153) and Illinois (837) than from Michigan. So the other side of the coin is, why does Indiana export so few students (31 entering freshmen in 2010) to Michigan? </p>

<p>I have to conclude both Indianans and Michiganders are on the whole pretty content with their in-state options. That seems to be less true in Illinois and Ohio. The University of Illinois is in many ways a great research university, and it’s got one of the strongest engineering programs in the world, but after that its academic programs are a little spottier–most very good, few truly great. And back when I lived in Chicago, I used to hear complaints that it has a kind of “generic State U” feel to it. It’s also expensive, even for state residents. And after UIUC, the second-tier public options in Illinois are just not that strong. For any or a combination of those reasons, a higher percentage of Illinois students seek OOS public alternatives, or private alternatives, than do Michiganders.</p>

<p>To some extent that’s also true in Ohio. To give credit where credit is due, Ohio State aspires to greatness and has made impressive strides over the past couple of decades. But it still lives a bit in Michigan’s shadow academically (which rankles them to no end), and while most Ohioans are passionate about Buckeyes football, some are not so passionate about Ohio State academics. Consequently, on a per capita basis more Ohioans end up at private colleges and universities or OOS publics than do Michiganders.</p>

<p>In neither case does it reach New Jersey-like levels, however; there, the state motto seems to be “anywhere but Rutgers,” at least at the upper end of the academic achievement scale.</p>

<p>The odd thing is, both Illinois and Ohio State are probably better schools overall than either IU or Purdue–though both of the latter have some very distinguished programs, Purdue in engineering and IU in business and music (and basketball, of course). Yet Indianans seem more content to “stay home,” with relatively few attending top private colleges and universities, and relatively few leaving the state for OOS publics (e.g., only 31 enrolled freshmen at Michigan the the fall of 2010, 33 at Ohio State, 12 at Illinois, 8 at Wisconsin, all higher ranked than either Purdue or IU). Any explanation?</p>

71

<p>Do we know what the Indiana in-state acceptance rate is to their flagship? It could be that they’re just content to go to the flagship rather than looking beyond that. OTOH, in MI it’s quite well known that the odds of getting into Michigan are anything but assured even for top MI students. This could drive Michiganders to look at other options, including out of state, whereas those from Indiana have less desire to look. </p>

<p>I have no idea whether or not this is a possibility, just a thought…</p>

72

<p>

</p>

<p>Don’t know the in-state admit rate, but Purdue’s overall admit rate is 61% and Indiana U’s is 74%. So yes, it’s relatively easy to get in.</p>

<p>But my point wasn’t that more Michiganders leave the state—in fact, relatively few do. In Michigan that makes sense with such a highly respected flagship. But Ohio and Illinois both export far more students than Indiana does, despite having flagships that are overall ranked higher than either Purdue or IU. That’s what’s puzzling to me.</p>

73

<p>^ I think I may have answered my own question. If you combined Indiana University and Purdue, you’d have one heck of a university, with top 25 programs in most fields, and much higher than that in some. So my hypothesis is that Indiana residents know they can get a top-notch education in most STEM fields at Purdue, or a top-notch education in most humanities and social sciences fields at IU. Most will do one or the other, but not both. So why go out-of-state or private, when you can get a quality public education at a reasonable price in your own backyard? </p>

<p>IU and Purdue both get punished in the rankings for not being “complete” universities, and for having modest median SAT/ACT scores. The latter is an artifact of the fact that, as public universities, they admit and enroll large numbers of applicants, dipping pretty deep into the applicant pool to fill up the entering classes of two large public flagships in a medium-sized state (by population). But as sensible Midwesterners, Hoosiers aren’t easily swayed by rankings; they know a good value when they see one. So even most of the best and brightest Indiana residents are in the entering class of one school or the other, as all evidence suggests they neither attend private colleges and universities in large numbers, nor do they attend OOS publics in large numbers.</p>

<p>Here are the current US News rankings in some core fields of study, listing the higher-rated between the two schools. These are mostly graduate program rankings (except as noted), but they represent a reasonable proxy for perceived faculty strength in the field among other academics in the same field. </p>

<p>Biology: Indiana #34
Business (undergrad): Indiana #10
Chemistry: Purdue #21
Computer Science: Purdue #20
Earth Sciences: Purdue #39
Economics: Indiana #42, Purdue #42
Education: Indiana #19
Engineering (undergrad): Purdue #10
English: Indiana #22
History: Indiana #23
Math: Purdue #27
Physics: Indiana #40, Purdue #40
Political Science: Indiana #25
Psychology: Indiana #26
Public Affairs: Indiana #2
Sociology: Indiana #12
Statistics: Purdue #22</p>

<p>Interesting to note that in these disciplines, IU and Purdue do worst when they are competing head-to-head for primacy in the field (e.g., economics, physics).</p>

74

<p>^This may have changed, but I also believe in-state tuition rates, especially when combined with the automatic merit, would make IU a lot more attractive financially. I recall musing that had we lived in-state for IU, Jacobs would have been a no-brainier financially speaking, and recall thinking the school offered great value for the price.</p>

75

<p>

</p>

<p>Is there any way to know how many of these students attended private due to award offers vs. the ability to go OOS private because their parents could simply afford to send them there? Are any of the schools listed notorious for providing strong, alluring award offers?</p>

76

<p>^ Notre Dame, Northwestern, Penn, Cornell, Chicago, WUSTL, Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Georgetown, and Yale meet full need but offer little or no merit awards. Duke and Johns Hopkins meet full need and in addition offer a few big merit awards, but not many; these are mostly for show. Oberlin meets full need and in addition gives some substantial merit awards (I know one student who turned down a $17K merit award in the 2012-13 admissions cycle, but that still would have left net COA around $40K). Loyola gives quite a few merit awards in the $10K to $15K range but doesn’t meet full need. Case Western is known for generous merit awards for students it really wants, but it doesn’t meet full need. UISC gives quite generous merit awards to National Merit Scholars. I’m not sure about the rest but I’d assume that, like most colleges and universities, they give some merit awards but don’t meet full need.</p>

<p>As for how many students from Michigan attending these schools are doing so on FA or merit awards v. how many are full-pay, there’s no way to determine. You can probably get an approximate number by looking at the percentage of each school’s entering class that is full-pay; there’s no obvious reason to assume the percentage of Michiganders at that school who are full-pay would vary too much from that figure. At WUSTL, for example, 42% of students were determined to have financial need; that means 58% are full-pay. At Notre Dame, 49% are full-pay; at Northwestern, 53%. At Loyola only 26% are full-pay, though the school on average meets only 82% of need, meaning many students with need get “gapped” (i.e., they’re awarded less FA than they have calculated need).</p>