<p>Chibearfan, Michigan is not expenssive given the quality of education you get there. It is true that Harvard, Princeton, Stanford and MIT are slightly better, but they are also significantly more expenssive. If you take tuition and cost of living into consideration, we are talking about $7,000-$10,000/year more. Obviously, if you get in, you should go to one of those schools...but Michigan is cheaper than many of its peer institutions, such as Northwestern, Duke, Brown, Cornell, Penn, Johns Hopkins etc...</p>
<p>Another thing you must take into consideration is that 65% of Michigan students are in-staters. Those students only pay the university a third of what students going to private universities pay. So Michigan cannot afford giving too much money to out-of-staters.</p>
<p>well taking the stand of a prospective student who cannot afford a 35K a year school, which i am, I feel that merit scholarships should go to the most qualified students. no doubt about it. However, I believe those students who NEED the money from the donors of these scholarships, deserve them. It is completely up to the donors to determine whom they would like to award their financial assistance, and i am sure they look at awarding it to a needy candidate as a good deed and an act of a good someritan.</p>
<p>Alexandre, do u know why michigan has such a large difference in tuition for in/out of staters? why is there's so much?</p>
<p>I do not know why there is such a large gap. I guess it is mainly because Michigan needs the money. Private universities charge more than Michigan, and most of them do not offer nearly as good an education as does Michigan. All of Michigan's peers save Rice and UC-Berkeley are more expensive than Michigan. I really don't understand why people are complaining. </p>
<p>I personally do not believe in Merit awards...only in need based aid. I agree with the Ivies on that one. I hope Michigan soon goes that route. It cannot yet because Michigan is still not a "university of choice". But once it is, I hope it drops merit scholarships.</p>
<p>chibear, it's not true that ALL of them require need. I'm pretty sure the Shipman don't. Also, at the school/college level they may have some based on merit alone, but I'm not as familiar with those. As for loans, most aid packages already include them. It's not a matter of needy out-of-state students being unwilling to incur debt--they already are, even before trying to meet that gap, or before being awarded any merit aid. Many of them do take on additional loans, of course.</p>
<p>jarell, if you can bear someone else fielding the question, the reason U-M is so inexpensive for instaters is that the state helps to subsidize the cost. For out-of-staters, the tuition is (as Alexandre points out) pretty much in line with what any institution who doesn't get state support would charge.</p>
<p>Most public schools operate on that model--the state appropriates money so that the university can offer a subsidized rate of tuition to the citizens (taxpayers!) of the state.</p>
<p>I understand that hoedown and appreciate ur respnse.(I suppose u know a lil bit about umich haha). But what i was meaning to say is, for instance, i am from kanas and the tuition in state is around 4,000. out of state it is around 11,000 i believe. A 7000 dollar and manageable difference. Michigan is 8000 instate, and 26000 out of state. an 18,000 dollar difference. What i meant to ask is what is it that makes their's so much different?</p>
<p>Generally speaking, no college charges what it really costs to educate a student. Even privates are generally subsidizing their students via donations, endowment income, and so forth. Both Kansas and Michigan are charging nonresidents below the cost. Kansas is just, apparently, willing to lose more on the deal.</p>
<p>To some extent, of course, it costs more to give a Michigan education than a Kansas one. KS is a fine school and the state flagship, overall U-M is a more prestigious school than KS, and it pays more for faculty and has to provide more/higher quality resources for students. But that's not the only thing that is at work here.</p>
<p>We could also say that the tuition is high because that is what the market will bear. Because of its standing in the US (and worldwide) U-M has become a pretty desirable place to be. Michigan can charge that much and still turn away a lot of nonresidents who would pay that much. Yes, it's not cheap and people complain, but one could argue it's a relative bargain.</p>
<p>Politically, also, U-M is obligated to charge a hefty sum for nonresidents. The Michigan legislature has a love-hate relationship with U-M's residency mix. Loves the prestige, loves the influx of brainpower, hates that there are fewer places for residents. It's politically sensitive. U-Kansas can get away with subsidizing its nonresidents more because (a) there aren't that many of them and (b) the KS legislature probably doesn't care as much. The fact that U-M nonresidents pay a lot for the privilege of going there appeases the legislature somewhat, and keeps them from grousing about how taxpayer dollars are subsidizing the education of other states' children.</p>
<p>That's the not-so-short answer.</p>