This is why high stat kids are filling Auburn and Alabama engineering programs. Clark is right about transferring but when you’ve spent your scholastic life meeting and exceeding their admission requirements to the state engineering school and parents have paid state taxes the child’s entire life - deferment and rejection is a punch in the gut. Clark even told is at Connect with Tech they were creating a class profile that had nothing to do with academic stats (although they count) and they are playing the number games for rankings and OOS tuition for $. Make no mistake they are on it for business not the education of Georgia students.
My son wanted a certain college experience and that’s what made us look at the other big schools, although it does sacrifice $'s - if that is not a wise choice for you or that certain type of experience is not important to your child the 3/2 or 2/3 programs are available.
Auburn and Alabama aren’t rejecting in-state students who meet qualifications - GT is and they will tell you that. Did you read the article or just comment Bonehead?
Yes I read the article, and here are some more comments if you were looking for a more substantial conversation.
With financial support from states falling precipitously over the past decade, that puts a lot of financial pressure on state universities while also likely decreasing the degree to which they feel beholden to the taxpayers. After all, less and less of taxpayer money is going to universities every year, especially in red states. It seems inevitable, then, that one possible solution that it is likely more colleges will take is to admit more non-resident students.
I did my undergraduate work at a school with a relatively high percentage of non-resident students (something around 25% or so) and I did my graduate work at a school that was approximately 97% in-state students. I can definitely tell you that the cultural diversity and the diversity of life experiences, political persuasions, and outlooks on life was much greater at the former university. Personally, I felt my experience there was better for it. In other words, I think the GT representative’s argument that admitting more non-resident students serves the academic goals of the university carries at least some weight based on my own experiences.
I think there is probably a legitimate debate to be had about how many non-residents is too many (20%? 30%? 40%?) but I would argue that the ideal number is a lot closer to 40% than it is to 3%. I am not sure that there is a correct answer to the question, though.
Auburn and Alabama likely aren’t rejecting as many in-state students at least in part because, given the demographics of that state, there aren’t as many qualified in-state students as there are in Georgia. Meanwhile, the combined undergraduate enrollment at Alabama and Auburn is in the ballpark of 54,000 students. The combined undergraduate enrollment at UGA and GT is roughly 42,000. The two largest Alabama Universities have 28.5% more enrollment capacity than those in Georgia. So, when it comes to in-state rejections, GT isn’t doing itself any favors by enrolling more non-residents, but even if it was filled with 100% Georgia students, it would still be rejecting more in-state students, likely by a large margin, than Alabama or Auburn.
I don’t disagree with your statements but I find it wholly unfair that qualified students who did what they were told to do to get into their state school and were not admitted had to pay to go out of state - even free tuition at Alabama costs more due to higher room and board than in state Georgia Zell Miller.
Fortunately, kids are resilient - they find their fit, parents bank accounts not so much.
I mean, I can sympathize, but it’s not like the students were told “do this and you are guaranteed admission” or anything. Unless the school guarantees admissions for those who meet certain requirements, then they don’t really have an obligation to admit students who “did what they were told to do” by someone else. To me that just sounds like they got bad advice from whoever told them they were a shoo in.
I think maybe what needs to happen is that college admissions processes in general ought to be scrutinized. Personally, I think it is patently ridiculous how much emphasis (whether real or imagined) is placed on silly things like community service and extracurricular clubs at some schools. I don’t see how that should determine whether a kid goes to a good school. Perhaps what should happen instead is that, nationwide, there should be an effort to make admissions standards more transparent. There will, of course, always be subjectivity involved, but certainly we ought to at least be able to be frank about it.
I was surprised no one in that article pointed out that the out-of-state students (who pay a whole lot more to attend GT) are likely offsetting some of the costs for in-state students. Isn’t that one of the reasons many elite public schools (Berkeley, UCLA, etc.) admit so many out-of-state students?
From the article:
@threeofthree, aside from those special transfer programs Rick Clark describes here, what would you say are the best in-state alternatives for qualified Georgia STEM students denied admission to GT?
@LucieTheLakie - None really - those 3/2 or 2/3 programs are pretty much your only option. In state would be Georgia Polytechnic which is now part of Kennesaw State or University of North Georgia (very impressed with this school) has a 3/2 or 2/3 with Tech as well - I suppose you could go to UGA which said that they were committed to creating and growing a great engineering college but my son who was admitted to their honors college couldn’t get answers regarding their engineering while on tour - they desperately need to see how UA does it. I guess you could just take 2 year core courses at UGA and transfer but most Tech focused students aren’t crazy about UGA - if you have the $'s Emory has the 2/3 or 3/2 program as well and I think Hope will commit some $'s to private Georgia schools.
Bonehead - no one is guaranteed admission, however, it has only been within the last 7-8 years that it has become a random admit if exceeding previous admit stats or current application stats you are denied admission while lower, some much lower, stat kids are admitted.
I didn’t like Clark when he spoke at CWT breakfast - rereading the article, I like him even less.
As a Georgia resident, I can understand how people can be frustrated that Tech has become extremely difficult to get into.
However, that Zell Miller full ride can be applied to other schools in Georgia. The problem there is that there really is a dearth of excellent engineering options in this state other than Tech. Kennesaw State is improving, but it’s not really comparable, imo.
However, if money is SO tight that Zell Miller and Kennesaw are your ONLY options, it doesn’t suck.
Also, a thought just occurred to me-if your kid is a Zell Miller recipient, isn’t that the equivalent to a full pay kid from Tech’s point of view? Is the state of Georgia writing a check to Tech, just like an OOS kid with full pay parents? In which case, there’s no benefit to taking an OOS over a Zell kid from the school’s point of view.
Like it or not, Colleges and Universities are first and foremost businesses. If the University systems weren’t so hamstrung by their own state governments and citizens by constantly cutting funding, they wouldn’t have to turn to alternate resources for revenue. It’s effectively the OOS students who are supplying the margin to keep the doors open. It’s happening in every state, red or blue, that effectively short changed their higher education funding. It’s bad in California. Berkeley has frozen instate admissions to make room for more OOS, the result of multiple propositions where citizens cut their own tax obligations and now complain about the ramifications.
I do agree wholeheartedly that academic institutions could run MUCH more efficiently. The administrations are deeply stratified. It would be nice if they looked for savings there, but of course, they don’t.
Stratification is a small thing compared to the sheer number of superfluous administrators. That and the rec center arms race are the sources of a lot of the tuition problems we face these days (on top of state funding issues).
Maybe Georgia residents should lobby the state legislature to be able to use their Zell Miller scholarships (at least in part) out of state if they can’t gain admission to their own top schools when they have the requisite stats.
Again, I’d like to point out that the concept of “requisite stats” is fiction. Unless there are specific rules stating such (e.g. the 10% rule in Texas) then there are no stats that guarantee admission. Even if you have better stats than the previous year’s admitted class, that’s no guarantee, as the applicant pool may be stronger that year or there may be other factors taken into account (e.g. affirmative action type considerations).
I get that, @boneh3ad, but it’s clear a lot of strong, qualified GA students are getting passed over for OOS and international students with similar stats. And GT uses “holistic” admissions to justify those choices, as is their right, but the result is a lot of unhappy taxpayers.
If the state doesn’t want to go the NC route, where they limit the number of non-residents, they could consider offering other options for GA residents, like reaching a minimum stats threshold to be able to qualify to use the Zell Miller out of state. Or they could set aside more funding for GT so that they didn’t have to turn to other states for full-pay students.
All of that would require lobbying the state legislature, but maybe it’s time GA taxpayers did that. Of course, they better be willing to spend more in taxes if they really want to seen any of those changes actually implemented!
@MotherofDeagons -yes the state is writing a check for “in-state tuition” which is considerably less than OOS tuition.
@LucieTheLakie - when the state of GA gave UGA the go ahead to create a college of engineering because they wanted more federal funding $'s that engineering would bring them, GT threw a fit (that’s s mothers way of saying it) that they might have to share or put a ceiling on their research dollars - they felt only 1 engineering school in the state was needed and pretty much took their balls and left the playground when this was being voted on by the university system. Sadly, UGA has not been promoting their engineering school and when they couldn’t even answer questions asked by students - who would go there?
Oh yes - I think Georgia Southern might also have an engineering program as well.
There is a way to Tech it’s just not what I believe many students should have to do to get there. Not worth the trade off for my kid or many others who joined him at Auburn and he has many friends at Bama as well. Unfortunately the other schools didn’t offer the $'s to make it affordable.
They offer $$$ because they aren’t ranked as highly as GT. Those scholarships come from instate tax dollars and are designed to attract higher than average GPAs and test scores to drive up rankings. Higher rankings, more desirable, more OOS applicants and eventually, denying “qualified” instate applicants for better paying OOS students. Yet another way of gaming the ever increasingly odd business of college.
In some ways GT undergrad admissions issues feel like the ones facing UIUC. In UIUC’s case they made it clear it’s due to revenue concerns, while GT says they are simply looking for the best and most diverse group of students. I can’t help but feel UIUC’s is being a bit more honest. UIUC is already catching major flack (from the state legislature) over the decreasing amount of in-state students, I expect the same thing will happen in Georgia.
Georgia’s issue, as MotherofDragons explain, is a lack of respected in-state engineering programs, outside of GT. Combine that with generous in-state scholarships and a (growing) population of over 10 million folks, and GT’s reduction in in-state students becomes a real problem. Creating another “respected” (as in research funding, facilities and faculty) engineering program can take decades. GT has fought this for years, but the state has to move in this direction.
On state funding of the University System of Georgia:
State funding per student is down, but a major reason for this is the significant increase in students, from a bit more than 150,000 to close to 300,000. It’s almost doubled. This also doesn’t take into account state funding for the in-state merit scholarship program.
This is the same story in most states. At least in Georgia the state scholarships help balance out for the increasing high tuition rates.
Did GT need to significantly increase it’s OOS % due to financial issues? UGA didn’t, and GT has more sources of income (other than tuition) than UGA. Don’t forget that UGA is also a top 20 public University and outside of engineering, it’s has a very strong comprehensive program.
I don’t blame you for being upset @threeofthree. We didn’t get into GT (boo) but we haven’t been paying GA taxes for our son’s entire life (and he had competitive stats) so I can’t really complain. We are blessed to have a couple of good options in Florida.
@eyemgh The state of Alabama has one of the highest net positive migration of undergraduate students of any state (it exports about 3K students, but it takes in about 10.5K OOS students a year). The merit scholarships are not so much about rankings (though it does improve their rankings), as it is about recruiting qualified students, The state supports OOS recruitment, because it helps build up it’s higher education system (via tuition $), and because it hopes many of these students will stay in Alabama after graduation.
