<p>All the public ivy flagship schools have two different segments with different prices and yield characteristics.</p>
<p>In UVA’s case, it has a 60+% yield for in-state admits. That’s up in the Yale neighborhood – an outstanding price/quality proposition that’s hard for anyone to pass up. Which explains why so few VA kids enroll at places like Michigan or Berkeley or UCLA.</p>
<p>For OOS, UVA has a 27% yield. That’s better than any other state flagship I can find OOS data on. And very comparable to the private schools that UVA competes with for those OOS students (and high tuition dollars). Wake, for example, has a 29% yield. BC is 25%. Hopkins 32%. Northwestern 31%. Sorry East Coast – the data is very clear on this despite your anecdotal experience to the contrary. UVA does very well competing as a state school against private schools.</p>
<p>Why the study? UVA, like all state flagships, is under serious financial stress (although UVA is better off than almost all other public ivies). That’s what was behind the whole TS debacle. Both the board and TS agree on what the challenge is; the differences are in what to do about it. The report gives the board and TS some back-up/cover for whatever their suggested solution is. </p>
<p>The obvious solution is, as it always is, give us more money – more state funding, higher in-state tuition, higher OOS tuition, more spots for OOS students, higher salaries for professors, etc. etc. etc. Since UVA is a state school, there’s politics associated with those solutions. The report is a way to address those politics.</p>