<p>Michigan OOS costs are what the market will bear. They know your kid didn’t get into anywhere better (that was prob charging even more) and they have tens of thousands of talented applicants EAGER to pay. With that said, the price is more than fair and competitive with the top tier landscape. If you can’t afford it, stop trying to keep up with the Jones and keep your kid in state. Grown adults crying about this is pathetic. Last I checked more (elite) kids are applying than ever, so if you don’t like it, send your kid to Rutgers or PSU – your snowflake won’t be missed in Ann Arbor, at all.</p>
<p>@ rijofnovi
The problem is, with AP credits, one will start paying upperclassman tuition even in their sophomore year. To fulfill the core requirement for graduation, it is not likely to graduate any sooner even with those AP credits.</p>
<h2>“If you can’t afford it, stop trying to keep up with the Jones and keep your kid in state. Grown adults crying about this is pathetic. Last I checked more (elite) kids are applying than ever, so if you don’t like it, send your kid to Rutgers or PSU – your snowflake won’t be missed in Ann Arbor, at all.”</h2>
<p>What the hell is your problem?</p>
<p>billcsho: Then don’t use the AP credits. All of these expenses should have been considered before accepting admittance to the university. The facts are clearly stated as to costs. There are no surprises:</p>
<p>[Office</a> of Financial Aid: Cost of Attendance](<a href=“http://www.finaid.umich.edu/TopNav/AboutUMFinancialAid/CostofAttendance.aspx]Office”>http://www.finaid.umich.edu/TopNav/AboutUMFinancialAid/CostofAttendance.aspx)</p>
<p>Notice the comment:</p>
<ul>
<li>The distinction between Lower Division and Upper Division is based on the number of credit hours completed (including AP and transfer credits), not on the number of years you have attended.</li>
</ul>
<p>Right or they could charge 10% more and fix your cost for all four years.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem I’m just giving a sobbing adult a dose of reality. If your finances can’t handle an extra few grand – which was predictable – why the hell are you going to spend $60k on your kid’s education in the first place? Nobody forced you to send your kid to Michigan. And nobody prevented him from not doing well enough for merit awards. Sending your kid out of state or to private school should be more or less worry free. This is worse than that Suzy Lee Weiss cry baby because here is a grown adult arguing about what’s not fair. It’s just sad. OOS applicants should come from means or be expecting grants and scholarships. Nobody should be eating rice & beans to send their kid out of state for college when every state in the country has a formidable state college.</p>
<p>Michigan is full of in state students who got into more elite or exclusive private schools but their parents couldn’t afford it. Odds are your state doesn’t contain a state school as impressive as Michigan but it’s not the end of the world. Sounds like you’re living beyond your means and your kid is going to be under an immense amount of pressure knowing how his tuition is impacting the family finances.</p>
<p>@rjkofnovi
I am not saying it is a surprise to me as I am aware of this. It is just not logical to charge more because one has more AP credit. It may make sense if they charge more for 300 or 400 classes as one may argue they are more expensive due to smaller classes. But if you simply get more AP credit, how can they justify to charge you more than other students when you are not even in junior?</p>
<p>“Why should a STATE university do these things? It is not a private college – as much as OOS students and parents would like to be treated equally with in-state students, they are not residents of the state. It is right that the college charges more for OOS students and provides better aid to in-state students. Also right that it gives admission preference to in state students. Students who want to be treated equally across the board should apply instead to one of the private colleges listed in Alexandre’s post (I think Berkeley, UCLA, and UVA may be the only public universities on the list).”</p>
<p>Intparent, that would be perfectly reasonable if state funding were substantial enough to justify the number of in-state students. In the case of Michigan, the University receives less than $300 million from the state. That’s less than $20k per student. OOS students pay $30k more than in-state students. As such, the University is enrolling too many in-state students. Simple mathematics dictates that one of three things needs to happen:</p>
<ol>
<li>The state needs to provide the University with more funding</li>
<li>The University should charge in-state students higher tuition</li>
<li>The University should admit fewer in-state students </li>
</ol>
<p>As for financial aid, all universities, private or public, should strive to provide all students with need-based financial aid, regardless of residency status.</p>
<p>By the way, I never said that OOS students should be treated equally. I agree with the OOS tuition rate and with the IS tuition rate. But state funding should match the subsidies received by IS students, and as it stands, it does not.</p>
<p>Alexandre, thank you for the data on tuition at other comparable universities and the info on funding from the state of Michigan. That is the type of data that I am looking for so that I can understand this issue.</p>
<p>At the Admissions tour at the University of Pennsylvania, they told parents we are ‘helicopter parents’ and then said that they assign 5 advisers to each student: peer, faculty, residence hall, pre-major and major. Sounds like $$$ to me. My Dad dropped me at the curb with my suitcase and somehow I managed to get a degree 4 years later. </p>
<p>I do not see any evidence that universities are trying to reduce costs. It is just easier to raise the Information Technology Fee, $244, the Student Activity Fee, $85, or the Facilities Fee, $112.</p>
<p>All parents are played like marionettes, but especially out-of-state parents. I know people who go to a bank and sign any mortgage or car loan that is put in front of them. The banker has not structured the loan for your benefit. All those fees for making copies. They can be waived and the banker will still profit handsomely. </p>
<p>Banks and Universities are like Casinos. They never lose. But this current college financing model is becoming unstable and may oscillate out of control. Student debt is at an all time high and when a large number of students default because they can’t get jobs, it will be worse than the last financial crisis.</p>
<p>Michigan, to their credit, is now going to give instate tuition to all honorably discharged veterans. </p>
<p>[University</a> of Michigan approves in-state tuition for military, unauthorized immigrants](<a href=“http://www.annarbor.com/news/university-of-michigan-governing-board-passes-tuition-equality-for-military-unauthorized-immigrants/]University”>University of Michigan approves in-state tuition for military, unauthorized immigrants)</p>
<p>Perhaps this will help –</p>
<p>[U-M</a> Budget Update](<a href=“http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/budget/index.html]U-M”>http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/budget/index.html)
[url=<a href=“http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/budget/tutorial.html]U-M”>http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/budget/tutorial.html]U-M</a> Budget Update - Tutorial answers questions about U-M funding<a href=“%3E%20University%20of%20Michigan%20Funding:%20A%20Snapshot”>/url</a></p>
<p>Hate to break this to you OP, but life’s not fair, and OOS tuition is a luxury; and it’s a luxury that’s more affordable for some families than others.</p>
<p>A reality of life is that we can’t have our cake and eat it too Sometimes are in-state options aren’t UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, or Virginia; Sometimes they’re Kansas State or Bowling Green University. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with those schools, they’re just not as nice in certain respects as certain other schools. So, you have to make a choice of paying expensive OOS tuition, or going to a more affordable university. You chose the former, and must now deal with the consequences of raised tuition.</p>
<p>Now, what fiscally responsible parents do when examining their children’s college choices is see which college choices are actually affordable. Part of examining a college’s affordability means not depending on it having a set tuition over four years. Michigan’s tuition may be high, but realize that as a non-resident of Michigan, the university owes you nothing. You’re taking the spot of another qualified Michigan resident. The ability to do that comes at a premium you may not be able to (easily) afford.</p>
<p>Instead of complaining that tuition is too high, wouldn’t it be better to argue that in-state funding for the universities in your state is too low? In California, we’ve been able to build arguably the finest public system of higher education in the U.S., which was mostly funded by taxes. Other states can achieve a similar quality for their universities too. But there must be a desire from the residents in the state to do that. Even private universities can do this if they’re sufficiently subsidized (look up BYU’s tuition.)</p>
<p>In conclusion, you’re fighting the wrong fight OP. Your question shouldn’t be: why are colleges so expensive; it should be: how can we make colleges more affordable?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To be fair, never quite as bad as KSU or Bowling Green when U of Kansas and Ohio State are obvious options for someone qualified to attend Michigan. Further, a student qualified for Michigan is going to have many private school options that are both cheaper than M’s OOS and likely offer someone so academically accomplished some merit dough. The OP is prob some East Coast(?) Dad caught up in the hype of everyone sending their kid off to Michigan. I’ve heard the expression “we’d mortgage the house to send our kid to ____,” but I didn’t think anyone would actually put their family through so much to send their child to an OOS state school. Unless you’re well into 6-figures, OOS at M prob shouldn’t be on the menu for your kid.</p>
<p>“I didn’t think anyone would actually put their family through so much to send their child to an OOS state school.” I would replace the words “OOS state school” with “top global university”, then think about it. A parents greatest fulfullment can be in preparing their children for success in life. Though there is no direct relationship, many believe a top education is the best way to do this. </p>
<p>“Unless you’re well into 6-figures, OOS at M prob shouldn’t be on the menu for your kid.” Your balance sheet is just as important as your income statement. How much is available in college fund accounts, from years of saving or maybe inheiritance.</p>
<p>I think the funding from the state is only relevant if you look at other states as well. Here is another example, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities. The college website states:</p>
<p>“As a student at a land grant university, your tuition dollars pay for approximately 67 percent of the cost of instruction at the University. The state of Minnesota subsidizes the remaining portion, a benefit of approximately $4,277 a year to the average full-time student.”</p>
<p>So if Alexandre’s figures are right, the state of Michigan is already providing almost 4 times per in-state student more than Minnesota is, regardless of whether the student is a resident or not. </p>
<p>Your kid is not owed admission to this University. You pay a premium for access as an OOS resident – that is okay with me (and I am also an OOS resident). They accept OOS students over some in-state students who apply partly for financial reasons – it makes a lot of sense for them to charge more than they get per student from the state as a differential. OP, you act like it is your right to attend for the same cost as an in-state student (in state tuition plus the differential the state pays per student). It isn’t your right – the college turns down many in-state students who would love to attend and would likely do well at Michigan. Your kid likely got in BECAUSE you will pay a premium that makes the University money. If you didn’t understand that, you haven’t been paying attention to how public universities work these days. You have no leverage – you are not a voter or taxpayer in the state of Michigan. And that is as it should be.</p>
<p>"Michigan, to their credit, is now going to give instate tuition to all honorably discharged veterans. </p>
<p>University of Michigan approves in-state tuition for military, unauthorized immigrants"</p>
<p>Lol you are quick to point out the slight good but didn’t point out the horrible point of this article. What a disgrace to grant a break to ILLEGAL immigrants, you know, the ones who are here ILLEGALLY and as a group are the biggest tax dodgers of this country. But I have come to expect this given the ridiculous agenda of Mary Sue Coleman and the university. </p>
<p>If they are going to grant in state tuition to these leeches, maybe they should grant in state tuition to out of staters then, since legal out of staters contribute more to the state via tax dollars funneled to the state through federal budget than these leeches who primarily work undocumented, gets paid in cash and dodge taxes.</p>
<p>Funny. I don’t have a problem if Michigan gives in-state tuition to students who have lived in Michigan and graduated from Michigan high schools, and whose parents have paid taxes in the state for years, even if those students are not in the country legally. Many undocumented workers, after all, do pay taxes.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I don’t understand why Michigan should give resident tuition to veterans of the armed forces when those veterans have their own state universities. Certainly, Michigan residents who join the armed forces and are stationed overseas should still be able to attend college as Michigan residents after their military service. if there was a problem with that, as the article suggests, it surely needed to be fixed. But I cannot for the life of me I understand why the benefit of resident tuition at the University of Michigan needed to be extended to all veterans of the armed forces.</p>
<p>Too late to edit my earlier post. But I want to add, I do think veterans of our armed forces deserve some monetary benefits . But I think the way we should square accounts with our veterans is by ensuring that the federal government adequately funds the Veterans Administration, by beefing up the GI Bill, and by keeping the other promises that we have both made and implied to veterans of our armed services. Not by having a financially strapped state give them perks.</p>
<p>It was only a matter of time before bearcats was going to lash out against the illegal immigrants - I was only counting the minutes once the rjk post went up last night. It had goldenboy predictability.</p>