I am not sure if any OOS admitted students were aware of this. Please read the article. If you are expecting any financial aid at all except Pell, FSEOG, Stafford, etc - you will not get it at the UCs. If you believe you are eligible for FA, please check your FA offer in the portal. Please post if anyone is offered any institutional FA so everyone can compare notes. Chances are it will be zero or just Pell
Interestingly the UC system expects to offer no FA but still enroll many more OOS kids and to raise more money to pay for enrolling for an increasing number subsidized instate students. This is possible in a few different ways:
a. They will enroll low stats but full pay OOS kids
that move + lowering stats to enroll more instate applicants wont be good for their rankings.
b. They will enroll more internationals who are full pay anyway
this might be difficult - the US govt only gives out so many student visas
c. They are dreaming and will be scrambling soon when OOS yields collapse to just full pay kids
this is quite likely. OOS kids’ parents have other choices.
Yes, because everyone knows fullpay kids are all dumb. 8-|
There’s no quota for student visas.
Other than illegal immigrants, OSS students have always been subject to the 25k OOS supplement, even if they were receiving FA. So it’s not like there were ever hordes of poor OOS students enrolled.
Have you not read, here on CC, how many students, OOS or international, have the grades and money to attend the UCs?
People who have had their “dream school” in their sights for a while won’t care about the costs.
@TomSrOfBoston Not necessarily “rich” if you ask me. They just prefer to pay for me since they have saved college money for me before I was even born. I’m very thankful for that, because I didn’t realize many people can’t go to their dream college because of tuition costs. I come from an “affluent” community, if you will, where the benefits outweigh the costs and no one talks about not having money, and everything comes easy to us. Disregard me if I seem like a total snot, but it is just the community where I am from.
I know many parents from Texas paying fullfare at UCB because they think some of the majors in engineering, economics etc are on par with any school in the nation and pay off on the long run. I am not so sure they are as willing for other UC schools since UT and A&M are comparable.
Most bright full pay OOS kids have other options. The UC's yield has never been great in that segment. I have a nephew at UCSD and his observation is that most OOS kids that go to UCSD are from middle class families attracted to the School of Biology or Engineering in particular. A UCSD will also be competing with the likes of USC, NYU, UVA, UMI, UNC, many Ivies and elites, many LACs and so on for the full pay kids. A super rich dad will probably send his son to a place like a USC instead of a UCSD so the kid can hang out with his own kind. UCSD's identity is studious Asian kids. Do you honestly expect many full pay non Asian kids to go to an academically intense but no social life school such as UCSD?
Yes there are no limits on F & J visas. I will, however, point out that many do not get their student visa approval by the time colleges start - maybe there are no official limits but USCIS can only handle so many visas, plus security checks and so on. This is not a spigot that can be turned on that easily. I know the USCIS from my own business needs in the past as well and you cant enroll many more internationals all of a sudden. So for all practical matters, yes this will be a bottleneck. The USCIS is involved so by definition it cant work as well as it supposed to.
The point is there were no OOS poor students, very few ultra-rich ones but many middle class OOS students. Those that wanted some FA but not a full ride. And were saying ok, we give the surcharge (which just went up) but we get some FA so ok this is worth it to go to a Berkeley. So those students will now have many to focus on other options. Not all OOS kids were full pay. That's a fallacy. Many had some FA and borrowed the rest.
Any school can be someone's dream school. For some the ivies are low reaches and the UCs are safeties. If they had the grades and the money to attend the UCs then... why were they not being admitted? And how many of them are filing SIRs? I am certain the adcoms would have selected them as well if they were as qualified as the admitted pool. By definition, if they were not admitted they were not as well qualified.
To pay 250k for a degree at a UCSD vs going to a higher ranked but colder UMI (and UMI actually gives OOS kids generous FA). What do you think a parent will say? You will lose some kids to increasingly difficult to justify financial calculations. At some point a dream school becomes less dreamy. To assume that removing all FA will have no repercussions is illogical.
If the UCs are only STATE schools, they should shut down admissions to OOS and International students. If not, then it is only because they want OOS dollars. So… no, there is more to that “instate” classification. To be honest, the small amount of FA a UCSD would give to the 50 odd middle income OOS kids would not cost them much but would generate higher applications, admissions and yield. Bear in mind the OOS pool has always had higher stats (SAT etc) than the instate pool since only those really motivated in say NY state to go to a Berkeley would apply. Most of the average OOS students would not apply to the UCs.
When you compete for global recognition and standing, you wish to attract the best students, wherever they are. Rankings are also determined by the quality of admitted students. The reason why the UCs have always wanted OOS applicants (besides the money) is because the OOS applicant pool has higher GPAs, SAT scores, are more motivated to ship themselves across the country and have higher on time graduation rates. This phenomenon is not unique to the UCs either. I went through the UCB stats and found that the admitted OOS pool had a 300 points higher SAT average. Would you like to lose that? Given how college rankings work - that will have a deleterious effect on the UC’s prestige.
I see no problem with this. The purpose of state universities is to serve the state’s population. Why, then, should we pay for out of state students to come to the UCs when there are plenty of qualified in state students trying to attend? OOS students are important for the money they bring, but the UCs don’t need them for enrollment numbers. The UCs aren’t cutting off OOS admissions, they are just requiring them to go full pay. OOS students will still come as UCs weren’t cheap for OOS before by any means.
Because… there aren’t that many qualified instate students in CA. Only the smarter OOS kids apply to the UCs, whereas you get the full spectrum instate. So the OOS pool is a self selecting higher stats pool. The only UC that breaks down applicant’s stats for instate and OOS is UC Berkeley. And I only need to point out the average ACT and SAT of the applicant pools to prove my point. Please see the link below:
The instate / OOS differential was big enough with the OOS levy (which is now even higher). To remove the little FA that was available to a few OOS kids makes them less competitive when other state schools like UMI (ranked higher by the way), UF woo them with FA AND merit scholarships.
Only 1 in 10 OOS kids offered admission to the UCSD join because most are unaware that they will not get good FA. If 90% of OOS admits refuse to join UCSD, obviously something breaks down between acceptance and SIR. Why even bother admitting middle class OOS kids then?
Finally, if the UCs were having funding issues, why would they still have wanted to spend money on FA for OOS kids till 2015? Its because they recognized that they need the OOS students for academic vibrancy, the higher stats and rankings. And many other state U’s have been chasing the brighter kids with FA and scholarships too.
If UC Berkeley admitted students purely on stats they would have enough qualified in state students to fill their seats many times over. However they use holistic admissions and accept transfer students to ensure that students from less privileged backgrounds have a chance to attend. These students tend to have lower stats and this is reflected in the report that you saw. The University of California charges high tuition for full pay instate students and even higher tuition for out of state students in order to fund the large number (approx 40% as I recall) of students who are poor enough to qualify for Pell grants. Every year there are full pay instate students who decide that they can’t pay $32,646 with an additional $2,580 for health insurance and they have to look for merit scholarships elsewhere, or hope that there there will be space in their desired major if they go to community college and transfer. If you don’t want to fund this arrangement you have the choice to go elsewhere.
@khanam California has almost 39 million people – it is by far the most populous state. There are plenty of qualified students in CA, for the UCs and for other schools. Your assumptions on this point are incorrect.
Also @khanam, where are you getting that OOS admits to Cal have a 300 point average higher SAT? The link you provided says the following for the average admit: 2124 for instate, 2171 for OOS and 2124 for international.
“Because… there aren’t that many qualified instate students in CA”
As an instate student who is well within the range of qualified applicants, I feel pretty insulted. I know plenty of students who are shooting for UCLA and UCB and much higher.
@LionsMum The average SAT score of the UC Berkeley instate “applicant” pool is a full 350 points lower than the OOS pool (1834 vs 2185). Same discrepancy with the ACTs. So no those stats imply that the OOS applicant pool is superior academically, primarily because it is self selecting. Only the academically motivated OOS kids apply to the UCs. I am comparing the applicant pools.
@anxiousenior1 there are not enough of you. that is the point i am making. not enough kids of your stats in CA.
@AlbionGirl No, the table I am referring to compares only freshman applicant pools. Total up the admits number in the 3 columns and it matches the freshman applicants number. There is a separate section for transfers. The point is other state universities attract OOS kids with merit scholarships and FA. For the UC system to have zero to give back to OOS kids is surprising given how much the OOS supplementals helped the UC system when the state of CA was financially destitute. Even now, the UC system is not being funded properly by the state of CA - 79.5% of the UC enrollments are instate, 14.1% international and only 6.4% are US OOS. The state of California funding is still nowhere near the levels it was prior to the crisis on the 2007-2010 era. So it is very hard to understand that with other universities such as UMI increasing funding to capture the brightest OOS kids, the UCs would go the other way.
@khanam Except you said admits. Look at your post #10. The admits scores are similar. And it is the admit scores that determine selectivity on the rankings.
@LionsMum I meant applicants. If you removed the OOS admits and filled the vacant spots with more instate students, that number would fall. I don’t believe there are enough high stats CA only students for the 1st rung UCs. My point is still valid on ACT scores comparison - 31 instate vs 33 OOS admitted. When u read through the forums you do not see too many OOS kids with average stats applying to the UCs. But you do see hordes of 1800-2000 SAT instate applicants.
And when you force the UCs to accept more 10,000 CA students (thats what they had to agree to the CA legislature), take away all FA from OOS students, and increase the supplemental on the OOS applicants - you will have a harder time maintaining the stats.