@jym626 Since the state of CA funds only 12% of the UC budget while the federal govt. funds 16% - who is subsidizing whom? Plus the amount of state funds that used to support the UCs in 2002 (3.25 billion) are now down to 2.25 billion a year - your tax dollars are actually being diverted away from the UCs. That is the reason the UC’s themselves are screaming bloody murder. They need more state support, instead the state is starving them and forcing them to accept more subsidized instate students.
The Feds provide funds in every state. Doesn’t matter how much. If an OOS students family pays bupkes in taxes in a given state, why should the state give them a break on their tuition or other fees? (Rhetorical question).
Federal funds go to all state schools, not just UCs. Many other state schools offer little if any aid to OOS students as well despite these federal funds. Other states subsidize OOS tuition because they do not have the demand UCs do. The UCs do not need to subsidize tuition in order to draw students. Like you said, they are struggling to support in state enrollment as it is. How can they support more OOS students as well?
Also, California residents do still pay federal taxes. Much of that money likely still comes form CA residents if indirectly.
@Katecat27 please read the report - the state of CA is failing the UCs not the other way around. If the state of CA wishes the UCs to enroll 10,000 more instate students it needs to fund them for the increased intake and also catch up on what underfunding it has subjected the UCs to. The infrastructure is also creaking with lots of deferred maintenance, huge classes and fewer course offerings. In this circumstance I am taking issue with the state of CA not fulfilling its obligations as a sponsor and hence questioning its moral right to impose terms.
@jym626 If you think the UCs are only state supported, would you mind a tax hike to modernize the UCs, pay for the deferred maintenance and the increased instate intake? That expenditure has to come from somewhere - wont come only from supplements. The OOS yield should drop this year, check out the UCSD admissions thread where a young OOS kid just stormed out upset at finding out no FA while he is getting some at UW. As it is UCSD’s OOS yield was less than 10%, and this was before the hike in the supplement and the no FA for OOS policy. If it falls to 7% yield this year wont that mess their plans as well? Just see the wording of the regents board meeting in Nov or Dec 2015 - they are counting on increasing OOS enrollment WHILE increasing supplemental fee AND reducing OOS FA. Honestly, do you think that is mathematically possible? Sounds like the jedi mind trick the Brazilians tried to play unsuccessfully in the 80s. The only way to get this is to import more chinese HS students, not the OOS kids
OP, when you exaggerate so much, it cuts against your point. Large research universities are not “bound as slaves”. California is as big as many countries (both in terms of population and land size), even if it ONLY accepted in state students, there would be a cross pollination of students and ideas. Why aren’t you going off about other state schools? I get that you’d rather pay less for your kid to go to school here – everyone wants to pay less money for college. Not to mention that at UC, many of the grad schools (which make the UCs large research universities) charge almost as much for instate as out of state, and have since the late 90s. First it started with just the law and business schools, and now it’s grown. http://www.sfchronicle.com/education/article/UC-reclassifies-master-s-degrees-charges-6869454.php
And honestly, you are absolutely wrong if you don’t think there is a problem w/ FA for instate kids – many kids can’t afford a UC even w/ fin aid. My understanding is that you are not a CA resident, even though your kid may be soon. I don’t think you really know the landscape here. For the past 20 years, people have been predicting the end of the UC system because of the funding and guess what? Ever year, there are MORE applicants, from all over the country and all over the world. For whatever reason, students continue to want to go to school here, and I don’t think changing the OOS financial aid will change that at all.
@khanam
Clearly you have a chip on your shoulder due to the cost of your daughter’s tuition as likely you could say I do about not being able to afford my choice UC. We will never agree. I fully support this price hike for OOS. Until in state students can afford UCs with FA, OOS students should not be subsidized. I would support more of our tax dollars being diverted to support education.
My point remains:
-UCs do not need to subsidize OOS tuition because demand is high enough
-state schools’ first obligation is to serve in state residents
-UCs (or any state schools for that matter) have no obligation, moral or otherwise, to fund OOS students.
I wish the best for your daughter. I hope she finds a school that fits her and is affordable, may hat be a UC or not.
I am an american living overseas paying eye-wateringly hefty US federal & state income taxes and have no home state to take advantage of low in-state tuition rates for my kids. And I don’t have an axe to grind about it, like you.
You can throw out all the mathematical hyperbole you wish. The bottom line is supply and demand. The state can work on its budget challenges in any of a variety of ways, but subsidizing an OOS student who feels they are entitled to go to a UC school and that the state should want to help pay their way is not an option they want to consider at this point. Their game, their rules. The student has two choices- take it or leave it.
@jym626 at some point demand is no longer inelastic. it will break. if someone OOS needed some FA to justify going to a UC and the UCs did offer that in the past - it will now not be justifiable to attend when they compare other options. Other good state colleges do offer FA to OOS. Of the good ones, I think only the UCs dont offer any FA to OOS anymore. Cant confirm this but seems like that from hearing of GT, UAB, UF, UMI, UVA all offering some OOS aid (and some of those are ranked higher than and some are comparable to the UCs).
Last year the UCs generated 400 million in revenue on OOS only (not international) supplementals. The total aid offered to all OOS students last year was 38 million (or about 2,800 per OOS student enrolled per year). Consider this to be a marketing expense to keep the revenues flowing. So this year instead of giving back 38 million to the pot, the UCs will charge a higher supplemental and try to take 38 million more in supplementals - thats a 76 million swing - that has to have an impact on many middle income OOS kids decisions to attend the UCs - I absolutely expect OOS freshman enrollment to collapse this year, which will impact the actual collections targeted. Instead of collecting 438 million targeted from OOS - i think their collection will be somewhere in the mid 300s with successively lower numbers next year and so on as OOS freshman enrollment drops.
It wont matter to me personally beyond 2 terms because my daughter’s mom has moved to CA. But I am also very selfish in hoping that if she enrolls at a UC, she is surrounded by the brightest classmates with the highest stats and that the university is well funded to avoid classes of 500 kids. So if that happens with getting more bright FA needing OOS kids, so be it. If your kid is in, wouldn’t you want that too?
The state of CA has created a mess by underfunding the UC system for the past 8 years. Instead of worrying about people like me that want the UCs to spend 38 million for PR/Marketing, the attention of the UC parents/students should be on the state of CA’s UC funding shortfall of about 1.6 billion a year for the past 7-8 years. Just putting that in context. Please read the regents report - it is written from the perspective of the UC system. The UCs used to receive 5% of state funds in the 80s, now they are down to 2.5% despite enrolling a multiple of the students from those times.
I think the disconnect is that I am thinking from the perspective of the UCs and the CA residents are only thinking from the perspective of CA residents sending kids to the UCs and paying taxes. Someone here should ask the UCs where they stand without CA legislature pressure either. I don’t know if you are willing to acknowledge the state of the UCs as being financially troubled and that they have a right to seek remedies that might not be in the best interests of CA residents. Such as admitting OOS students and offering them FA.
@GMTplus7 How are you paying state taxes while living offshore? I lived as an expat in London, HK and Singapore before coming back after more than a decade. I did not have to pay any state taxes after ending residency in the US while I kept getting posted around. All I need to prove was that I had ended residency in the state.
My axe to grind is that once my daughter is in, I need the college to be super-spectacular so whatever helps that happen including OOS FA is fine by me.
No, I wouldn’t want a state to potentially worsen their financial situation in any way so my darling snowflake can have brilliant peers. Its not their job, nor their responsibility to provide my snowflake with what I want for them WRT peers, classmates, potential spouses or what have you. Perhaps those thinkers would be better off looking at private schools, where the coffers might be deeper and they can afford to throw $$$$$ at the brilliant peers who otherwise couldnt afford to attend. ANd/or those private schools might do what it sounds like the UC schools will be doing-- the “admit/deny” offer— acceptance without sufficient funds to attend. If the student really wants to attend, they will have to find funding elsewhere. Not from the great state of California.
@LionsMum Yes, my daughter will be instate. I am just a retired man with nothing else to do looking at the cost of college vs my time and wondering why everything including state schools are becoming so expensive. I understand that the state residents need to benefit from the state colleges as well but small things like OOS FA should not be removed since they help drive the traffic to the UCs as well. Honestly, I would have the same complaint about other state schools as well. And I would go off on them too if my daughter had applied to them and I had wondered what it would cost.
I am increasingly in the college should be free camp as I grow older. The struggle that kids and parents go through is becoming harder and harder to comprehend. I had not heard of the UCs not having enough cash for instate aid. So that does surprise me for sure. And I am also surprised that instate and OOS tuition for grad schools in the UCs is about the same. That I would love to know more about also. I will read the link you posted
“the CA residents are only thinking from the perspective of CA residents sending kids to the UCs
and paying taxes”
well yeah!! duh!
We are the ones who have been subsidizing your kids education!
What do we get out of it?
Believe me there are enough Calif students to fill every opening in the UC system.
"Such as admitting OOS students and offering them FA. "
HOW is offering OOS students FA supposed to help the UC systems’ bottom line??? It doesnt.
At many public U’s OOS students pay full freight. Now OOS they will have to do so if they want to get an education in Calif. .
Because Calif taxpayers, like ME, have put pressure on the UC administration to increase the # of in state students they accept, the FA for NON tax paying OOS students will go away.
Its about time.
What many long time Calif taxpayers are more concerned with is the high % of slots at the top UC’s that are now restricted to first generation students.
Because that leaves many kids of college educated, long time Calif parents out in the cold.
Does this all stem from the state govt having monetary issues? I’m trying to understand why this seems to be such an issue with oos kids? I know UNC (chapel hill) only admits 20% oos students and there doesn’t seem to be an issue. We’re in Fl and I don’t think our state schools have a limit. But I do know many, many, parents who feel their kids were not accepted to our in-state schools due to oos kids. So I can sympathize with parents and students feeling that each state school should serve their taxpayers. I had no idea of this issue until after my D applied to several UCs. My bad. But knowing what I know now there would be no way I want my S to consider a UC school.
To rephrase the question: if the state schools don’t have those limits, why don’t they set them? If they do, then what’s the problem?
What makes the California universities so different than other school? Why the big problem there?
I have not read or heard of other universities having such problems. Then again, since I’m new to this college process, I may not know much.
The UC’s are ranked way up there among many tip top private colleges and U’s.
Thus they are very desirable and lots of smart kids add them to their lists of colleges to apply to.
." And I am also surprised that instate and OOS tuition for grad schools in the UCs is about the same. "
Grad school education is not subsidized by Calif taxpayers.