<p>I say this beause the 1999 released point chart for UM gave 10 free points to an in-state resident, compared to 0 for out of state (although 2 were given to underrepresented states.)</p>
<p>10 points is big considering 100+ gets you in, 90-99 is a deferral, and under 90 is a rejection. So you could get a 99 and get deferred and actually almost accepted, but without the residency you'd have an 89 and get rejected. In 1999.</p>
<p>Do similar, even if to a lesser extent, policies get followed?</p>
<p>I know technically in-state residency helps, but a classics professor at michigan from my hometown in pa mentioned that it's becoming harder for qualified in-state students lately because of the huge volume of applicants from feeder schools. She isn't an adcom or anything, but i'm sure she has an idea of whats going in the admissions office.</p>
<p>Michigan is a state university. In other words, state residents pay taxes to support the university. As such, the university is obligated to give preference to in-state applicants. Michigan gave up the point system in 2003.</p>
<p>Admissions aren't made by an app-by-app basis. They are rated by readers on an app-by-app basis, that/s true. Each application is awarded one of 5 values (with additional plus or minus modifiers bringing the actual number of total values to 15), the highest being "High Admit Plus." This is described here:</p>
<p>They don't use a formula to rate you, however. That's changed. Readers use their own judgment, also which is talked about on that website.</p>
<p>That's your rating. When it comes to admitting, that's generally done in groups. So one week, they may decide to admit every pending applicant who was rated in the three high-admit categories (High Admit Plus, High Admit, High Admit Minus), but to defer everyone who fell into the next three groups down (the three "admit" categories) and to deny everyone below that. Just a hypothetical example.</p>
<p>For most state universities, state residency is the MOST important decision factor. Michigan does not go that far but Michigan residents significantly benefit from their residency.</p>
<p>One of the reasons why residents get advantage is because their yield rate is significantly higher.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One of the reasons why residents get advantage is because their yield rate is significantly higher.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I may not entirely understand your meaning, but mathematically the relationship is the opposite. Because Michigan residents yield at a higher rate, Michigan can accept fewer of them to meet their target than they would if they were nonresidents.</p>
<p>Let's say Michigan is aiming to admit 100 more students. If yield is 50%, they admit 200 kids to get those 100. If yield is 100%, they admit 100 kids only. What this illustrates is that if one group has a higher yield, students from that group will see fewer "admits per spot."</p>
<p>The reason residency helps instate candidates is that Michigan is committed to enrolling a relatively large number of state residents. They aim to have a class that's roughly 2/3 in-state, so that means there are many more spots for residents.</p>
<p>Getting back to the original argument, if instate yield were half the rate it is, they'd admit twice as many residents each year, thereby making state residents' chances that much better,</p>
<p>Michigan, just like any other schools, wants their yield rate to be higher. Because in-state applicants have significantly higher yield rate, it is more likely that Michigan can protect their yield rate by accepting more in-state students.</p>
<p>That's true, Michigan could do that if it wanted to boost its yield rate. However, Michigan isn't driven by that. It makes its decision about the residency mix based on other factors. The fact that it has a larger proportion of nonresidents than just about any other public school out there certainly suggests that it isn't yield-driven.</p>