<p>If you have received any scholarship offers from umich......list it(them), LSA or Engineering, and brief stats, and when received....</p>
<p>Regents, 1500 nonrenewable
LSA, 10000 a year.
Received sometime in December
ACT 35, SAT 2400, Mich. GPA 4.0</p>
<p>List in-state or out-of-state too, because that makes a difference.</p>
<p>Engineering, 20,000/yr
Recieved at end of January
Mich GPA ~3.8, SAT 1530,2250 OOS from Florida</p>
<p>both of my scholarships are specific to in-staters.</p>
<p>Regents, $1500 (one-time)</p>
<p>33 ACT, 1400(1420)/2190 SAT, 4.0 GPA, in-state</p>
<p>LSA, 20,000/year
Michigan Scholar Award, 5000/year
Shipman nominee, 20000/year + 5000/year for 3 years</p>
<p>1540 old SAT, 2200 new SAT
4.0 GPA
OOS</p>
<p>regents 1500 one time
lsa 10000/year</p>
<p>in state
35 act
4.0 gpa</p>
<p>dsmo, when'd you receive it?</p>
<p>Not to offend anyone, but regents seems like a bull crap scholarship. A merit-based award to students who already get ridiculously discounted tuition? What about the MORE QUALIFIED out-of-staters who have to pay over twice as much to come here? It seems that the less-needy are getting this one.</p>
<p>Well, regents is only $1500, man, and, if it's any consolation, I haven't gotten one :P</p>
<p>While you're right chibears about the Regents scholarship being a "bullcrap scholarship" it's really not much at all. A one time award of 1500 dollars is not much at all in Michigan's tuition. There are many scholarships for OOS students but I wouldn't speak so quickly about OOS students being more qualified. How are they more qualified? Test scores/GPA/ECs? How can you qualify an essay that is great compared to an essay that is merely decent? </p>
<p>Also, if you're speaking mainly about quantitative stats, I would say that there are many strong in state students who would be offended by that comment. I know several students who have a perfect ACT/SAT or very high GPAs along with a multitude of great ECs and other "qualifications", all of whom are in at Michigan. You're an Honors student, how do you know the average OOS student's stats? Or are you claiming this purely on anecdotal evidence? </p>
<p>I am not saying there aren't highly qualified OOS students, just that there are an equal number, not percentage, of students in state who are very strong. Scholarships should be given based on the funder's personal requirements/wishes. If the Regents scholarship is backed by the Regents of U-M who are ELECTED BY THE CITIZENS OF MICHIGAN, then I think the scholarship should go to who they want it to go to: In state students. Again I must emphasize, $1500 would probbaly be enough for books for one year at U-M. Yes, they're really being generous to instate students. [/sarcasm]</p>
<p>EDIT: Why don't other state schools OF MICHIGAN's CALIBER do what you propose and give heavy scholarships to out of state students? I don't see UC-Berkeley or UCLA or UVa doing anything of the sort. Let me know when they do. Thanks.</p>
<p>Michigan is extremely generous with out-of-state scholarships anyway. I'm not sure why a one-time scholarship of $1500 for in-staters is a huge deal.</p>
<p>First off, regarding the relative qualifications of in-state and out-of-state students, there are undoubtedly a higher percentagive of qualified out-of-staters than in-staters because of posts by hoedown, who has more connections to UM admissions than anyone on these boards, says they would take more OOS students if it weren't for requests in Lansing. Whether this is true by the pure numbers, I don't know, but I'd probably say by pure numbers they're about equal. I know $1500 isn't a lot of help, but when we're talking about OOS'ers trying to pay that huge tuition bill, every penny counts, and out-of-staters clearly need it more. I'd be fine if they didn't discriminate or if it was just to help OOS'ers help with the ridiculously high tuition, but to have a merit scholarship only for in-staters? Come on. That's fine if the regents are elected by Michigan citizens, but I'm of the opinion that elected officials should carry out a duty they see as just, not just pleasing selfish individuals. Maybe I hold people in too high of a regard.</p>
<p>Michigan is a public school in the state of Michigan. Why the state of Michigan should care about kids from Illinois or why Cal should care for kids from New York is beyond me.</p>
<p>Exactly. UIC and UC-Berkeley aren't bending over backwards to do what you expect U-M to do.</p>
<p>I'm not saying Michigan is the only school that should pay more attention to out-of-staters.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Michigan is a public school in the state of Michigan. Why the state of Michigan should care about kids from Illinois or why Cal should care for kids from New York is beyond me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're kidding me, right dsmo? Why the state should care about other people isn't as much the question as why the university should. The university's duty is to educate anyone who's qualified and wants the education. That means out-of-staters should be just as important as in-staters. Your question is like asking why our country should care about the welfare of immigrants, I mean, they're not even from our country, right? As long as someone is a citizen, they matter and they should be treated as if they do. If you really think the university has an obligation to out-of-staters, you really need to rethink education as a non-discriminating institution.</p>
<p>the state of michigan gives Umich money, which means they are obligated to do certain things, like reserving 2/3 of the spots for in-state people, offering more scholarships to them, etc.
look at Michigan's economy. naturally, they need to try and keep as many good students and bright college grads as possible. to a certain degree, it is to the university's interest to be located in a nice, thriving environment, if said university is not Yale. is this a problem? i think not. every state tries to do that; not every state/school needs to. just because michigan happens to be one of the higher caliber public institutions in the country, and people are bending over backwards to try and get in, doesn't mean they have a duty to be more inclusive or impartial for out-of-staters. I mean, even a lot of private universities give preference to in-state people in terms of special scholarships and whatnot(like penn and duke, correct me if i'm wrong). it's life. either move to michigan, get financial aid, be rich, take out a loan, or go to your own state's university, which i'm sure would be more than glad to give you oodles of money, if you're qualified enough. </p>
<p>As for it being a university's duty to educate anyone who's qualified and who wants an education, I wonder how many institutions actually live up to that ideal.</p>
<p>Let's be clear that in no way does the state run the university. Yes, they give SOME funding, but that is decreasing all the time. I think nowadays it's down to something like 15% of the university's operating budget. This does not mean that the university is OBLIGATED to obey their requests, but it is simply in their best financial interests. I think you are vastly overexaggerating how much it is in the university's interests (other than financially) to admit more in-staters. The university sends out about 5000 workers into the workforce every year (my own estimate), 4000 of which stay in the state of Michigan (another guess on my part). I think this is even being a bit generous. These 4000 people per year do not so drastically affect the state they change the very environment of the school so that it's in a "nicer" state now. Especially when we consider that without discrimation, that 4000 number would only drop to maybe 3000. Such a change in admissions policy would likely have a pretty serious impact on the state of Michigan as a whole, but probably very little on the campus environment itself (except that it now has more qualified students because it does not discriminate geographically due to wishes of Lansing politicians). I don't think schools like Harvard and MIT are loving Massachusetts applicants because they're likely to stay there and make Massachusetts such a great place for the university, but simply because Mass appilcants are very qualified (look at Natl Merit cutoffs) and because they have so many applicants from massachusetts on account of proximity. I don't think universities can be taken too seriously until they assert this autonomy from the state, and then perhaps they can be seen more as a place for education rather than an economic tool of the state.</p>
<p>I won't go as far as saying that Michigan should be obligated to reserve spots for Michigan residents.</p>
<p>But as a major research university, Michigan plays a huge role in the state's economy. I don't think that Toyota came to build its research center in the Ann Arbor area just because it's a nice town.</p>
<p>Someone from Illinois is far less likely to remain in Michigan after graduating than someone from Michigan. Given the state's "brain drain," it's extremely important to try to keep college grads in-state. I don't care what you say, but I think that scholarship money should be used to keep top residents from heading out-of-state.</p>
<p>It's great for OOS kids to go to Michigan, but I don't see why the school should be bending over backwards to bring them here. Michigan will always have a deep enough applicant pool to build a strong class from. For the OOS students getting significant scholarships each year, I'm sure there would be a line around the block from well-qualified kids willing to pay full price.</p>