Students may have delayed graduation by calendar due to taking time off school for some reason (e.g. working to earn money to pay for school). Or they may be taking reduced course loads (including part time status) because they need to work to earn money while attending school.
@Gator88NE I’m not sure you can compare FLorida and KY that way. Florida has that program where you can complete an AA in high school, plus the lottery fund - Bright Futures, is it? And what about the graduates of public schools in those two states, are Floridians somewhat better prepared for college and thus cost less in remedial classes?
How do those factor into what the colleges spend per student?
Good points, the dynamics are different in each state, so we can never do an apples to apples comparison. I picked UCF and USF, due to the significant tuition cost difference vs UK (and UA).
Florida does have an program that allows HS students, via Dual Enrollment, to complete the AA in HS. Many other states that allow DE, also have AA programs. However, the number of Florida HS students that graduate with AA is insignificant for our comparison.
Many in-coming freshman at UCF and USF would have some college credit, either from DE, IB, AICE or AP classes. How much more than UK freshman? I couldn’t guess.
The state of Florida does have a population that’s close to 5 times the size of Kentucky’s. Even after supplying students to UF and FSU, it has plenty for the other 10 public Universities. Due to low cost, and UCF/USF being strong in STEM, a lot of students will stay in-state.
So, not a perfect comparison.
What colleges spend per student, is a good proxy for the amount of resources given to each student, either in full time faculty (vs adjuncts), quality of faculty, class size, rock climbing walls, etc. The more you spend on each student, the better the results should be (but that’s not always the case). I listed it, since it helps make the case, that with about equal students, and putting aside resources (number and quality of faculty, class rooms, lazy rivers …), student cost is likely a major reason why UCF and USF have better graduation rates (IMHO).
If you look at the above College Navigator link, you’ll also see that the median debt of “completers” is lower at UCF/USF as compare to UK/UA, as well as the Federal Loan 3-year default rates.
@Gator88NE That excess credit hour surcharge seems like the dumbest thing a state could ever do. Why on earth would you want to limit the knowledge that someone can gain? And who picks what this limit to knowledge should be? I hope that philosophy does not infect the schools up here in the NE. We value education here and could not imagine us placing limits on what one could learn.
More to the OP point. There was a profile on the local news station about how New Hampshire does not offer adequate aid to its students there. They are finding that the brightest students are leaving the state to attend colleges elsewhere because of cost. NH fears that this is a potential brain drain and that once these students leave, they will relocate where they went to school and not return. I must say I would tend to agree. I think states are well served in retaining their brightest students. To let them leave en mass is short sighted. For UK to pull away funds from the brightest students does not make sense to me.
Do the 4 year and 6 year grad rates take into account students doing co-ops?
^ I believe they do.
Also, UK is NOT moving away from giving scholarships to its best students. There is no indication top scorers won’t be rewarded. The honors college will still offer scholarships (it’s trying to grow). And students who have financial need will receive financial aid provided they show the level required to get into the University.
The top third will still receive merit, but those not in the top 25-30% won’t; they’ll receive financial aid if they qualify but they won’t receive merit aid. The bar to get merit has been raised but that won’t affect top scorers.
I’d guess high achievers who come from wealthy families are more likely to leave anyway. They can afford to apply to, visit, attend colleges around the country and of course NH is surrounded by elite colleges. There’s a reason the flagships in New England (and mid-Atlantic) don’t attract as many top students as the ones in other parts of the country, IMO - very strong students have tons of good options right nearby.
@Gator88NE good points. I was just chatting with a student (here in Ohio) who got her AA in HS and it seemed like a fairly common thing - she also could have attended a Florida public for free - but my brunch anecdote is of course just that 
So that any one student does not take up more than his/her “fair share” of state-subsidized educational resources when there are many other students who could benefit both themselves and the overall economy and society from the opportunity to use such state-subsidized educational resources.
Given a choice of N undergraduate students taking 8 years’ worth of courses before graduating and 2**N* undergraduate students taking 4 years’ worth of courses before graduating, which makes more sense for the state to subsidize with reduced in-state tuition?
Such limitations on undergraduate study are generally based on the number of credits to complete a bachelor’s degree plus a small amount of overage.
A student who takes 8 semesters of school and 1 or 2 semesters of co-op will be counted as a 5 year graduate, not a 4 year graduate.
UCLA (which is on the quarter system, so 4 academic years = 12 quarters) once mentioned having a 12 quarter graduation rate of 81% at a time when its 4 year graduation rate was something around 70%.
I find it rather surprising given the amount of merit aid Alabama gives out that their median SAT and ACT scores are so close to UCF and USF. All of those 32+ ACT full tuition scholars at UA must be attending school with a bunch of kids with scoring in the low 20’s.
@Zinhead Yep, that can be seen in UA’s latest (2015-16) CDS. The middle 50% range is 22 to 31; at UK it’s 22 to 28, at UCF it’s 24 to 28.
You can also see it in the % of freshman who were in the bottom 50% of their high school graduating class.
UCF: 2%
UK: 13.7%
UA: 18.1%
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203370604577265350407194184
The state of Florida does limit want what someone can learn, it just wants to limit how much the state will greatly subsidize. Want to take more classes? Great, just pay the true value of the course.
The surcharge is a state rule. Each college/major also has it’s own “Progression to Graduation” Policy. Every student is expected to make satisfactory progress toward graduation each semester. It would include maintaining a cumulative 2.0 or better GPA. a 2.0 GPA each semester, successfully completing at least one course in the major each term, graduate in a timely fashion, etc…
^ ^
Seems like Florida and states with similar charges/restrictions like UW-Seattle don’t want to encourage Van Wilders who’d stay perpetual undergrads for 8 years despite having completed all graduation requirements 4 years ago or folks like Blutarsky from Animal House(“7 years of undergrad down the drain”) or an older college classmate who took 7.5 years to graduate.
State schools do it because they need to make room for the next set of citizens who want knowledge. I don’t think those who take 5 or 6 years (full time) to complete undergrad are having their knowledge limited. I couldn’t just keep going to high school even though I’m sure there was plenty left for me to learn when I graduated.
I went to school with a couple of career students. Their parents were paying the OOS tuition so didn’t benefit from a state subsidy, but they were taking up space at the school. Both switched majors a few times, both just really liked college. When they graduated, one went on to grad school and did well. The other worked at a department store, didn’t do much. Probably still be in college if her father would have continue to pay.
For those that may have missed it. In the original link in post #1, is another link to a blog posting done by the President and Provost of UK.
“Also, UK is NOT moving away from giving scholarships to its best students. There is no indication top scorers won’t be rewarded…The top third will still receive merit, but those not in the top 25-30% won’t…The bar to get merit has been raised but that won’t affect top scorers.”
@MYOS1634 Do you have a sense of the current reality - who is getting significant merit at UK currently? With respect, I think your assertion here is way off.
The top 25% scores at UK breaks at an ACT of 28. Essentially nobody is getting significant merit (full tuition or better) at UK without 31 ACT or higher for in-state kids or 33 ACT or higher for OOS. And some at those levels still miss out.
Their top scholarship is the Singletary scholarship (full ride). It is competitive and you need a 33 ACT to even apply. They only give around 50 (1% of incoming class) of these and their are plenty with 33+ that don’t make the cut.
The Patterson scholarship is the for NMF only (full-ride) and is an automatic award (not competitive). Safe assumption all these kids are 33+ ACT given their PSAT success. Think 100 kids a year, about 2% of the incoming class.
The Presidential scholarship (full tuition, no room or board) requires a 31+. Their are a lot of these given to a group of in-state kids who have been designated Governors Scholars (see post #16). The rest are going to OOS kids with tip top stats who miss the Singletary and the Patterson.
The above is where the current merit $ are going, and it is going to the top 1% OOS or top 5% in-state, not to the top 25%.
Their are a lot of kids in that ACT band of 28 to 31 in-state or 28 to 33 OOS who don’t get offered any merit. Statistically there are a lot more with scores in these bands than higher, as a 33+ ACT is top 1% nationally.
What are these kids (the 28 to 31 in-state or 28 to 33 OOS) getting now? Not much. In-state they get $1,500 off of a $25k sticker price. If they have the KEES lottery money an additional $2,500 a year off. Out of state they are getting $7k to $10k off of $40k sticker.
UK already has trouble attracting these kids. I see it every year at my son’s HS, good but not great students, even top 10 in their class but can’t quite pull out the 31 ACT and follow the money to a directional instead.
Your idea that now as they are going to be devoting significantly less $ to merit and shift to favor need awards, and that at the same time the top 25% begin to get meaningful merit aid they aren’t getting today, and the top scorers (I presume the 31+/33+) continue to be rewarded, sorry there is no way. They can’t, the numbers just aren’t going to work, not even close. And when they stop, those kids are going to go elsewhere. Watch the average ACT sink like a rock. You’ll never see it on the rise again.
I think this perception is shaped when you become used to dealing with private schools that give merit that is really just a discount off of sticker. The kids that are getting the big merit at the state flagships are a pretty elite group, with stats similar to kids at elite schools.
Pulling these numbers off College Board, rounding up, for 2016, OOS COA:
UK $39.7K
U of Iowa $41.7K
U of MN-TC $36.4K
U of W-Madison $47.5K
MIZZOU $36K
In state, not OOS, COA at UIUC $31K (higher for some colleges/majors)
Again @LOUKYDAD, UK would not have to give big piles of merit money to make UK a very attractive, competitive option for a kid from Chicago, who wants a big state flagship experience closer to home.
Really, we know people who are paying full freight for Iowa, & MIZZOU, not to mention destinations like ASU, CU-Boulder…why not UK?
If UK knocks off “only” $10K off the OOS sticker price, it’s suddenly competitive with UIUC AND the university is still getting more money from that OOS student than from a full pay in-state student from KY.
@Midwest67 If the universe of options were limited to Illinois and Kentucky, that would make more sense. But that isn’t the reality. I can’t understand the thinking of passing on Alabama, Ole Miss or Oklahoma to pay $100k more at UK over a four year period, even if it is a bit closer to home. It won’t happen in our house, and we are about an hour and a half from UK, versus six hours from Tuscaloosa.
If we are talking about students who don’t have the stats to get the big merit from Alabama, then these kids aren’t the ones getting the merit at UK either.
What I’m hearing from your posts is that you are deeply disappointed your high stat kid may not have a free or nearly free option at your state flagship, and you think this is a fatal mistake on the part of UK.
With free or nearly free options available elsewhere, you don’t think paying nearly full freight is worth it, for UK.
My perspective is UK probably knows exactly what it is doing re: it’s long term business plan. Whether that serves the citizens of Kentucky well, I can’t say.