<p>"3. Too many from the state of Michigan."</p>
<p>Esra, Michigan relies too much on out-of-state students. If Michigan is one of the best state universities in the country, it's also located in one of the worst states for college graduate population. The state of Michigan was ranked 37th out of 50 for the precentage of college graduates living in the state. So much for having a top-tier university. Most people LIVING in Michigan do not even attend U-M!</p>
<p>Alexandre, if you have so much "Michigan Pride" why don't you live in the state of Michigan and try to help the state's population? That's the problem I have with Michigan: too many of the best educated and those who possess human capitol are LEAVING the state. Michigan is not getting better. U-M will not receive more funding from the state if it continues to suffer. (By the way, I am a Michigan resident and Detroit is not a "horrible place to live." It's not a Chicago or New York City but it's certainly livable. Then again I am African American.)</p>
<p>I am not sure I follow. Most people who attend Harvard do not end up living in Massachusetts and most people who graduate from Yale do not end up living in Connecticut. Students who attend the University of Michigan do not owe anything to the state of Michigan. Those who get in-state tuition have paid enough to the state in form of state taxes and out of staters pay over $25,000 in tuition alone to attend the university. </p>
<p>I agree that the state will give less to the University over time, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The University realized that the state was a dead beat over 2 decades ago, which explains why Michigan's endowment has grown faster than that of any other university in the nation in that period. In a few years, Michigan will be financially independent and the state can keep its pathetic $300 million annualy contribution to Michigan's $4.5 billion budget.</p>
<p>Harvard = private school. Michigan = state school. Big difference. </p>
<p>Michigan has a big committment to the state. Just like they have a commitment to enroll more in-state students than out-of-state students. </p>
<p>"It's not just Michigan alone as a basket case, although we've got the worst cold right now," Austin said. Ohio, Indiana, western Pennsylvania and big chunks of Illinois and Wisconsin suffer from similar problems: loss of manufacturing jobs, rundown cities, brain drain of college graduates to other regions and low rates of entrepreneurship.</p>
<p>"We're going to lose some of our best and brightest from Michigan colleges to other states, because the economies in those states are producing more jobs than we are here," Anderson said. "Graduates in 2005 can expect a competitive job market where employers are going to be selective in who they hire and careful about how much they pay."</p>
<p>And this is just not a Michigan problem:</p>
<p>Brain Drain
Too many of our top students leave the stateand never return
Richard L. McCormick, President
As published in the Spring 05 issue of Rutgers Magazine</p>
<p>New Jerseys young people are high achievers. Our states fourth and eighth graders, for example, earn among the highest scores in reading on national assessments. Students in our fine public high schools lead all states in Advanced Placement exam scores. These talented students benefit from a public investment in primary and secondary schools that consistently ranks among the most generous in the nation. Unfortunately, our state does not match this level of support for higher education, and so New Jersey loses far too many of these students when it comes time for college. Consider these statistics: </p>
<p>More than 40 percent of New Jersey high school seniors leave to enroll in other states, more than double the national rate.</p>
<p>For every seven students New Jersey loses, only one student from another state comes to study at a New Jersey college or university.</p>
<p>More than 93 percent of New Jerseys brightest studentsthose who score above 1300 on the SATsend their scores (and therefore most likely apply) mainly to out-of-state schools.</p>
<p>** Why should we care that so many of our brightest students leave New Jersey for college? Because many of them never come backand thats not only bad for state pride but also bad for our state economy. ** The states that these talented young people adopt become more attractive to knowledge-driven industries, while we lose ground.</p>
<p>This brain drain needs to stop. New Jersey canand shouldexpect more.</p>
<p>tenisghs, Michigan no longer has any commitment to tha state. Michigan remains a top university today in spite of the state's attempts to destroy it. If the state of Michigan really cared for the University, it would give it $3 billion annually, not a pitiful and insulting $300 million. Like I said, Michigan's current operating budget is $4.5 billion and the state provides just $300 million (7%) of that. Pathetic if you ask me. I am not suggesting the University should become private or no longer offer discounted rates to in-staters, but I do believe that Michigan should not set aside more than 30% of its undergraduate seats to in-staters.</p>
<p>Too bad that will not happen. Michigan is a public school and under state law must admit a majority of its student body from the state. It's fair.</p>
<p>It's highly unrealistic to think the state will give Michigan $4.5 billion. That's probably more than half of the state's total budget for the fiscal year! And the state of Michigan has 15 other public universities to fund as well, including Michigan State and Wayne State University.</p>
<p>You are unbelievable.</p>
<p>From an anonymous Michigan resident:</p>
<p>"I'm well aware of tuition costs at UofM and I also know that for a Michigan resident it is still a bargain when compared to other schools with similar reputations. What offends me a bit about Alexandre's comments is that he figures since UofM is possibly capable of funding itself that it has a decreased obligation to the people of Michigan."</p>
<p>Responses from two Michigan anonymous residents:</p>
<p>First Post:</p>
<p>"Just the other day I was told that the majority of the U Hospitals transcription work has been outsourced overseas (possibly India). If that's true (and I'm not sure I could easily verify) it ****es me off. Granholm's been pushing Michigan suppliers first - she should make the state schools do it, too." </p>
<p>Second Post:
"Tenis, That guy Alexandre who wrote that is a MORON! He suggests that Michigan (the State) give the university 2/3 of its entire yearly operating budget ($3 billion). "</p>
<p>Another angry anonymous poster at Alexandre's remarks:</p>
<p>"Bulls**t. If UM didn't depend on the State of Michigan, then why does tuition keep increasing to cover the reduced funding from the State? I'd like to know where our amateur budget analyst gets his numbers. If the University isn't going to be state-supported, then what's the point of not going private, or of setting aside 30% of the undergraduate spots for in-staters?"</p>
<p>Tenishgs, we are all entitled to our opinions, although I do not see the purpose of sharing my thoughts with people who aren't members of this forum and as such, cannot neither read all of my posts to their entirety. </p>
<p>Personally, I don't see why you take such offense to my opinion. I believe that the university should pursue its own self-interest, and in so doing, provide its students with the best possible education. I love the fact that Michigan is public, but that does not mean that the university should do so to its own detriment. Obviously, I was being facetious when I suggested that the state should provide Michigan with $3 billion/year but at the same time, since that is unrealistic, I also maintain that it is equally as ridiculous that a university that is trying to maintain high standards should continue to enroll 15,000+ in-state students in a state that isn't that populated. A state university simply cannot receive enough money from the state to provide a high standard of education to so many students students.</p>
<p>umm, is there a communications/journalism dept? cuz i guess that that could be a weakness</p>
<p>We have a communication studies department, but no journalism department. Most people wanting to do journalism get an English major and get experience in journalism from the Michigan Daily.</p>
<p>It's in the university's best interest to admit the most highly qualified applicants that choose to apply. If Michigan has such a great reputation that tremendously-qualified students apply from all 50 states and a plethora of other countries, then those students should definitely be admitted and encouraged to attend.</p>
<p>A large amount of OOSers signifies that a university is considered prestigious and desirable. If that raises the selectivity, then tough ****! If you're going to call UM the "best" public school in Michigan, then its selectivity should reflect that. It's not like UM is the only school in michigan, you have, what, 15 other public universities, including MSU which is also well-respected.</p>
<p>UM fulfills its "commitment to the state" by 1) offering (drastically) discounted tuition rates for in-staters, and 2) admitting an in-state student over an out-of-state student, assuming that the two are equally qualified. If they did anything else to tip the scales towards in-staters, it would significally hurt the strength of the student body. </p>
<p>Yeah, it sucks for the state of Michigan that nobody wants to live in the state after they graduate from college. But how is that the university's fault? If UM is pumping out the best college graduates in the state, and those students leave to go elsewhere, then that means that the state is doing a bad job of being an attractive place to spend your life. If you alter the admissions policies of your university to change that trend, then you're not really solving any of your problems, you're just hurting the university. If the state really wanted to do something about it, then they'd assume control of the budget, admit only in-staters, and slowly watch UM slip out of the USNWR top 50, out of the top 100, and eventually lose its top-tier status.</p>
<p>Alexandre wrote: "Students who attend the University of Michigan do not owe anything to the state of Michigan."</p>
<p>That's a bit harsh. While I understand where you're coming from as an OSS who attended Michigan State and who no longer lives in the state (but visits frequently), I feel I owe at least a little something to the state (what exactly? I'm not quite sure). Maybe its something as small as talking up Michigan, business-wise, or as a good place to live (which I think it is, despite its economic doldrums right now). But the fact is, regardless of how much money you pay for that education, or even how you paid it -- either in taxes or in higher out/state fees-- fact is, you/I was attracted to, and benefited from, a school that was created and maintained by the good people of Michigan. If it wasnt for these people, this state, you wouldnt have gone there in the 1st place. And as a state university (as much as that may seem appalling to some Wolverines, that's what it is), it has a symbiotic relationship w/ its home state unlike a private --which is merely chartered by its home state.</p>
<p>Oh boy, so much to respond to!</p>
<p>First of all, there are people here (and elsewhere in the state) trying to get a handle on the "migration" problem. You can't fault people for not staying if the jobs aren't here. However, they is some thinking that young people move out of the state for awhile but come back when they're more settled down. I think we'll see more data on that. It's also not true that all young accomplished graduates are fleeing the state.</p>
<p>The lack of college education problem will not be solved by U-M. It's an important problem, but it's one that has to be tackled by schools with a mission of access and the resources to help those kinds of students attend & succeed at college. The reality is, Michigan applicants who don't get in to U-M because of space issues still go to college. They just do it elsewhere. They were going to go to college no matter what. If U-M took more instate students it would shift college enrollment--not increase it.</p>
<p>One problem is that in the past, thanks to good auto jobs, you could eschew a college education and still earn excellent money (with bonuses and overtime) in this state. There are autoworkers earning $80,000 and more with no more than a high school education. A lot of families felt a college education was superfluous--and in some sense, they were right. Things have changed, and attitudes may shift, too. But that may take awhile.</p>
<p>There is no state law that says that U-M has to admit a certain number of residents. There have been years when the appropriations bill has included that language. It doesn't right now. That doesn't mean that U-M is free to ignore Michigan residents. if it did, that language would go back into the appropriations bill next year and U-M would find itself in a heap of trouble with Lansing and with the press and the public.</p>
<p>Similarly, sometimes the appropriation bill has had language asking that state schools "buy local" whenever possible. I don't think that's in there right now. The State of Michigan itself has been in hot water for outsourcing some of its work to other states, so take that for what its worth when you demand Granholm "do something."</p>
<p>U-M does feel it owes something to the state of Michigan, and it is grateful for its support. Not all alums may feel that way, but I assure you the University values its status as a state school (even though it is frustrated at how state support is still $40 million lower than it was in 2003). It is not possible for the University to force its students to 'feel obligated' to the State. However, it works with the MEDC, the State, and Michigan companies to make sure students know of possible job prospects in the state, and it does its part to make Michigan (particularly SE Michigan) an appealing place to live.</p>
<p>Hoedown, have you thought of running for some sort of political office?! LOL You are so polished and diplomatic...well, compared to me anyway, which granted, doesn't mean much! hehe</p>
<p>hey alex!! i got into south quad! how are my fellow freshmen frm dubai progressing?</p>
<p>Congratulations on South Quad. Great dorm. The rest of the UAE freshmen are coming along nicely. There will be 9 of you this year...out of 19 who were admitted. I intend to get all of you guys together...after my honeymoon! Now that's dedication if I ever saw it! hehe</p>
<p>I'd give the nod to Cal over UM solely because of the strength in Engineering/Science. Student caliber is tilted decisively in Cal's favor, IMO.</p>
<p>Decisively? Do you have any data to back up your claims?</p>