http://www.educatedquest.com/original-public-ivy-schools-30-years-later/
This article offers a somewhat narrow definition of public ivy, but it analyzes the issue of cost in ways relevant to an earlier discussion on public universities in general.
these stories are nonsense. I heard on a tv show years ago that in the 1890’s or so they thought everything that could be invented already was. (so close the patent offices…not sure if that really happened)
my point is michigan , miami university (ohio) etc are still places young folks head off to become adults. some will have awesome educations and social experiences and others will not. it is no different in 2015 than in 1975. and everything these schools have to offer are not in the past.
“some will have awesome educations and social experiences and others will not” - yes, absolutely true. The missing point is that these experiences and opportunities depend on student and not the place. D. pointed out that there are many college kids who just pass by all kind of opportunities. And, yes, she had an awesome time at Miami (OH) as well as having all of her goals achieved (and plus) and will always remember it as her best match for college, and as a cherry on the cake, it was tuition free for her. She liked Michigan a lot, but never applied there as we knew that Michigan will not offer her a Merit scholarship. Yes, not in a distance past at all, D. graduated from Miami in 2011.
The main point of the article is that many popular public universities are charging over $40K a year for their sticker price for out of state tuition, after many years of large tuition increases.
It should be noted that UNC-CH and UVa continue to meet 100% of the demonstrated need for all US students (however that does include substantial loans and work study).
The author states that a Public Ivy should charge non-residents significantly less than an Ivy. I question why that should be the case.
Nobody is forcing anybody to attend at the expensive (for specific student) place. My kid could have attended for $40k + easily, but wisely prompted to attend at school that offered full tuition Merit.
We are not living (yet!!) in society where one is forced to go to a certain college. Take advantage of the free choices that we still have.
His original article may have been relevant in 1985, when there was a significant price discrepancy for a lot of these schools. However, the landscape is completely different now than way back then. The concept of a “public ivy” is a bit outdated, as the ivy league is an athletic conference that happens to contain some good schools. Only half of the actual “ivies” are consistently ranked in the top 10.
I think the conversation needs to now just center around relative costs of the nation’s top universities. And the top state flagships have developed strong brands (and very good educations), possibly assisted by Mr. Quest, so why shouldn’t they charge market pricing? Each state system needs to attend to its own demons regarding state charter, admitting too many OOS students for higher tuition, and what it can charge in-state kids. However, if there is demand for OOS students, and the education is comparable or even better in some cases than top private schools, why shouldn’t they be allowed to compete price-wise with the schools that are most similar academically? State funding sucks these days in most states, so in order to keep up with the “Top Ten” they should be able to charge whatever.
Flagship U’s have a responsibility to their state citizens, but have no obligation to keep college affordable for OOS or international students interested in their brand name. That brand costed them money to build, and they should be able to charge market pricing for those who want it.
Thanks Mr. Obvious!!
The market for high end undergrad college is very different than in the good old days.
Public Ivies compete with top privates when it comes to OOS students. The public Ivies all continue to set their sticker price a little bit under the sticker price of their peer private schools. Which is exactly what anyone would do. Duh.
Tuition/fees at Cornell are $49k; Georgetown $48k; UVA and UM $44k; Cal $41k; Carolina $34k. Carolina more reflects the old pricing model. But Carolina also has the fewest OOS students.
What the net price is, as we all know, is a completely different animal.
In the good old days, the Public Ivies had a bigger price gap on sticker price as compared to elite privates. Policies on aid are also completely different now than way back when. Depending on your family’s situation, Public Ivies may be just as accessible to OOS-ers as in the olden days. Or they may be a lot more expensive. Its just a different market/model.
No thank you, Mr. Snarky…
I don’t understand why one would go out of state to attend a public school, even if a public ivy, by paying real ivy-like tuition. Why not enroll in the in-state honor program? If you are really good, probably you can get a full ride.
^ Let’s look at 3 contiguous flagship western state universities’ 4 year graduation rates according to USNWP:
U of Arizona - 40%
U of New Mexico - 15%
UT - Austin - 52% (same as U Michigan, BTW)
These are research I universities and I’m sure that it’s possible to get a fine education at each one of them. But I can’t help but wonder how these different outcomes might be manifest in the classroom experience.
@hzhao2004 - My D’16 will be attending an OOS Public U (maybe a private). Simply put… because she does not like Texas. We are Texan transplants. My husband and I,100% support her decision to attend an OOS U in the North/Midwest. She is not a Texan and until you live here you cannot possibly understand what that means. Our D’18 on the other hand is a Texan at heart and may well attend in-state. Another reason…not one State U in Texas offers the degree path that she would like…direct entry BS/DPT. We have saved in order to afford our kids the opportunity to attend the U of their choice regardless of it’s location. There are many many reasons why someone would choose to attend OOS.
If you think of undergraduate degrees as Veblen goods, I’m honestly surprised this education bubble hasn’t burst already. Going into debt for an education is a horrible Catch-22. Recent graduates are questioning the overall value of their degrees. Being “underwater” in your education might be a real possibility in the near future (i.e. owing more in student loans than your degree is worth).
(Full disclosure: I went to UMich on a full-ride merit scholarship.)
I’ve never read Moll’s original book on “the public Ivies,” but I had always assumed when he talked about these schools providing an outstanding educational experience at a low price, he was talking about the cost to in-state students. I have no idea what planet Mr. Quest lives on if he thinks it is somehow the obligation of these public institutions to provide a cut-rate price to OOS students. That’s just lunacy. So the Ivies with all their billions and relatively small numbers of students to education set a sticker price of, oh, around $60K, and the nation’s best public institutions with less endowment per student are supposed to come in at around half that price for OOS students? What’s this guy been smoking?
The experience may depend on whether one’s major is known as a “hard” major or an “easy”/“gut” major at each campus. Of course, a strong student is less likely to be in remedial or other low level courses that the weakest students at less selective schools may enroll in.
I don’t know where you got that figure for the University of Michigan. In its 2014-15 Common Data Set, Michigan reports a 4-year graduation rate of 75.6% for the cohort of degree-seeking undergraduates who entered in 2008, and a 6-year graduation rate of 91%. That 6-year graduation rate is similar to, e.g., the University of Chicago (93%), MIT (91%), Caltech (92%), and Cornell (93%).
Michigan’s 4-year graduation rate was 75.8% for the cohort that began in 2007; 72.9% for the cohort that began in 2006; and 72.0% for the cohort that began in 2005. These figures are all well above the 52% you cite. If you got that 52% figure from US News, then US News is just wildly wrong.
bclintonk, I believe your numbers, but the discrepancy between 4 and 6 years worries me. It is very common to see such discrepancies at decent publics (the graduation rates can be shocking at poor publics), but it is hard to get a handle on why. Is it lack of classes? Lack of guidance? Students not getting into the desired major? Stopping out to save money? So many factors go into why decent publics are so slow in graduating students. My concern is as a parent who is considering publics for my second child. Any savings could disappear if the degree takes 6 years rather than 4.
http://chronicle.com/items/biz/pdf/Employers%20Survey.pdf
Executives and hiring managers are more likely to have a favorable response to a nationally recognized “flagship” university as opposed to an elite college. College reputation ranks last on their list of considerations when hiring.
UVa is tied for highest 4 year graduation rates in this chart at 87 percent, Wm & M is at 83, and UNC is at 81. The service academies seem to do well also. http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/highest-grad-rate/page+2
I have stopped trusting US News and Report for unbiased reporting of statistics.