<p>I am dual enrolled at a satellite. The majority of the students here don't seem to take school very seriously. I am at the top of my courses and to be honest, I feel like I don't put that much effort into them. I also notice the parking lot is full of University of Michigan fundraiser license plates, instead of the satellite fundraiser plate that is available. If I had to assume, these people will be quick to tell people they "graduated from U of M" after college. The 4-year graduation rate at the satellites is an abysmal 10% and 16%, compared with 75% in Ann Arbor. I have also overheard classmates say they get to sit in the student section at football games in Ann Arbor. It just feels really odd, because the differences between Ann Arbor and the satellites are night and day, yet these students have an affiliation with and somehow identify with students in Ann Arbor.</p>
<p>Several if not many states have university “systems” that all have the same name. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin are two that come instantly to mind and I’m sure there are others so it’s not “odd” to have several locations of a university with the same name and a diploma that has the system name even if it feels “odd” to you. I believe that technically the diploma grantor IS University of Michigan and the campus and diploma are somewhere but subordinate to the university system name (University of Michigan).</p>
<p>I don’t follow the question. They are two distinct degrees. In fact, the respective campus under which the degree is granted is stipulated explicitly on the degree.</p>
<p>I understand that, but the satellite campus students buy the Ann Arbor fundraiser plates for their cars, they call themselves “Wolverines” or “students at U of M” and they root for the sports teams, even getting student section tickets for the games.</p>
<p>Well, even if they consider themselves Wolverines and say they went to “U of M,” it’s still not true. They’re hurting and lying to themselves, really. While most satellites are still excellent schools (regionally), it’s still not the same as the flagship. And as such, a degree from U of M in Ann Arbor is still very prestigious.</p>
<p>Don’t let it bother you too much. In the end, it’ll come back to haunt them because no matter where they say they went, their degree will reflect that it was at one of the satellites!!</p>
<p>The satellite campuses do not diminish the Michigan brand, not any more than the weaker UCs or UTs or UNCs etc…diminish the reputations or the Berkeley, Austin and Chapel Hill campuses.</p>
<p>Actually they are a member of the University of Michigan system and are called satellite campuses. But this is just not worth getting hung up on. As Alexandre says, the reputation of the Ann Arbor campus is “bigger” than the fact that there are satellite campuses. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I feel like the UC satellites identify by their location. Like you hear “Cal” and you know that’s UC-Berkley. Students at UCLA don’t say they go to Cal, they go to “UCLA” and they root for the Bruins. Students at UC in Santa Barbara say they go to “UC-Santa B”. It seems like students at Michigan’s satellites aren’t quick to offer their satellite location.</p>
<p>I don’t think they should get tickets to games, that’s BS.</p>
<p>“I don’t think they should get tickets to games, that’s BS.”</p>
<p>Why do you care so much?</p>
<p>If I was at UCLA I wouldn’t want Santa Barbara kids getting tickets to my basketball games.</p>
<p>Employers and grad schools definitely know the difference, so what difference does it make?</p>
<p>I attended U of M Dearborn and I don’t really understand the context of your question. In fact, you seem to be somewhat ignorant of the tepid connection between the two universities that actually exists. </p>
<p>For example, my German 101 class at Dearborn was taught by an instructor who taught the section at both Dearborn and Ann Arbor. The classes were so similarly structured that she actually offered our class the ability to take our midterm and final exams at her Ann Arbor section if it offered some type of proximity advantage. </p>
<p>I understand your frustration with the intellectual temperature of the student base at Dearborn. Indeed, you will not find as many high capacity or discerning students at Dearborn as you will at Ann Arbor. Nonetheless, there do exist some very bright students around campus, and so it is rather crass and insipid to reduce the entire profile of the student body as being beneath the “brand of the University of Michigan”.</p>
<p>A couple of things. First, the satellite campuses do not diminish the flagship’s stature and reputation the least bit. Everyone in the state of Michigan–I mean EVERYONE–knows the difference, and hardly anyone outside the state of Michigan has ever heard of UM-Dearborn or UM-Flint, nor would they give those schools a second thought if they were made aware of them.</p>
<p>Second, I wouldn’t get hung up on the low 4-year graduation rates at the satellites. These are primarily commuter schools with a very high percentage of part-time students, often people with jobs who are looking to upgrade their education but aren’t going to do it in 4 years. Also it’s not uncommon for full-time students to start at Dearborn or Flint and if they do well, transfer to Ann Arbor (or Michigan State or another 4-year “residential” college) to complete their degrees; those transfers all count against the satellites’ graduation rates. In part, then, the satellites are functioning like high-end community colleges for some of their students.</p>
<p>Third, I agree that the OP’s question is insulting and dismissive of the students and alumni of the satellite campuses. These schools are not academic powerhouses, but they serve a valuable purpose. They provide a quality education to thousands of students in major population centers in the state who, for personal, financial, or academic reasons are not in a position to go away to college, or simply prefer not to. And for the record, while I’m not sure I’ve ever met a UM-Flint grad (never having spent much time around Flint), every UM-Dearborn grad I’ve ever known was proud of their UM-Dearborn degree. I’ve never heard of a grad of one of the satellites trying to pass themselves off as an alum of the flagship; they have more self-respect than that, and in any event it wouldn’t work because sooner or later the truth will out and they’d end up looking foolish. I think this is just a figment of the OP’s imagination. The OP is reading way too much into the fact that a lot of students, faculty, and staff at the satellites are fans of Michigan Wolverines sports teams. But that’s also true of several million other Michigan residents who have no affiliation with any University of Michigan campus.</p>
<p>I don’t believe Flint has any sports other than clubs and Dearborn has some limited varsity sports (no football) and are Wolverines which is the reason they are included in student tickets for football in Ann Arbor. But really the OP is making a big deal about nothing for all the reasons bclintock has expressed. I personally do not know anyone either that attended Flint but I know enough that commuted to Dearborn two years and transferred to Ann Arbor as residential students for their final two years or took graduate degrees there while working. I think Dearborn might have recently built an apartment but the satellite campuses are absolutely commuter campuses and Dearborn runs a shuttle to the main campus. A good deal financially if you live in metro Detroit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe you’re wrong. Transfers don’t count against a school’s grad rate.</p>
<p>Again alopez, it doesn’t matter, the 6 year graduation rate at Dearborn is 50%…whether or not it includes transfers really doesn’t matter because of the reasons bclintock gave you. You’d have parse data that might not ever be available to determine who is full time with an intent to get a 4-year degree (assuming you are talking only about undergrads), whether they are working people taking classes a few at a time and half a dozen other reasons. What exactly is your beef about the existence of satellite campuses which really don’t impact the Ann Arbor students much if at all in the grand scheme of things? I’d hazard a guess that many kids in Ann Arbor don’t even know they exist…</p>
<p>MSU used to have one also, it was cut lose in the 70s and is now Oakland University. MSU’s med school moved to Grand Rapids and set up shop. Just about every public university in Michigan has a satellite operation happening somewhere in some form or another. Ferris “owns” Kendall in Grand Rapids. Even some junior colleges have satellite operations. What is your gripe other than the football tickets?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure they do. Look at UM-Dearborn’s 2012-13 Common Data Set. There’s no place for them to enter the number of students who transferred out. They’re just asked how many first-time, full-time, degree-seeking freshmen started in 2005 and in 2006, and of those, how many graduated 4, 5, and 6 years later? The 4-year graduation rate is just an average of these 4-year rates over a couple of years. Any first-time, full-time, degree-seeking freshmen who transferred to Ann Arbor, MSU, or any other college would count against UM-Dearborn’s 4-year grad rate. So would anyone who started full-time but then went to part-time and didn’t finish in 4 years–because they needed to work, for example, or because their family added a child, or any of a million other common scenarios you’ll find at any commuter-oriented urban institution. Nor does UM-Dearborn get credit in its graduation rate for any students who started at another institution (e.g., WCCC), transferred into UM-Dearborn, and graduated in 4 years.</p>
<p>By the way, even using these narrow and sort of screwy definitions, UM-Dearborn’s 4-year grad rate is more like 16% to 18%. Its 6-year grad rate is more like 50%, with most of those graduating in 5 years, not 6. I’ll bet a very large fraction of the other half are students who transfer to another 4-year institution. And that doesn’t begin to tell the story of the work UM-Dearborn is doing. Its entering freshman class usually has fewer than 800 full-time, degree-seeking students. But it typically enrolls well over 800 transfer students each year, and it awards over 1,200 undergraduate degrees each year. That tells me that at least two-thirds of the people graduating from UM-Dearborn either started at another school (often a community college), or were part-timers. So if roughly half the freshman class eventually transfers out and two-thirds of the graduating class did not enter as full-time, first-time freshmen, either because they entered as part-timers or because they transferred in from another school, that suggests the 4-year graduation rate–a statistic basically designed with a traditional 4-year residential college experience in mind–is almost totally irrelevant for a school like UM-Dearborn.</p>
The University of Michigan Board of Regents encourages the uniform branding of the satellite campuses with the main campus because it distinguishes them (and has allowed UM-Dearborn, in particular, to attract a higher caliber of student than other commuter campuses in Metro Detroit). Similarly, offering discounted football tickets is a relatively small perk that pays dividends both in attracting students and increasing engagement… those students you’re complaining about may not care about their studies, but they’re not caring in Maize and Blue as opposed to the more active disinterest you see in places like Oakland University or EMU… and is also a benefit afforded to university employees (including, iirc, of the health system). Far more beneficial than getting to take part in the Maize Rage at Crisler periodically, is the benefit of access to UM’s alumni network and library system, which for a serious student makes a branch campus worth it’s weight in gold compared to somewhere like GVSU or even Wayne State. Additionally, I’d note that they simply don’t make enough merchandise branded with Flint or Dearborn to allow alumni of those campuses to identify themselves independent of the general Michigan brand; a coworker whose daughter goes to Dearborn uses a “Michigan Dad” coffee mug not out of willful misrepresentation but because that is the mug they sell on Dearborn’s campus.
I offer a rejoinder: the satellite campuses offer some of the benefits of a Michigan education to an ultimately tiny fraction of the population, who can then do with that what they will. This has no impact on the reputation of the university. Very few people who are not students at the branch campuses going through a cultural cringe have given them or the specificities of their relationship with Ann Arbor any thought. People outside of the state have no idea what the satellite campuses are and are unlikely to distinguish them from Ann Arbor, especially if they are listed on a resume as “University of Michigan, Flint campus” or something, but so? If they excel, that does nothing to detract from the school… and if they fail, it has only as much impact as a poor worker from Ann Arbor.