U Kentucky shifting away from merit aid

Parent Cafe
121

The administration at UK has a lot more info than anyone on this board in terms of the impact of the decision to switch to more need based aid. The idea that some kids who would get merit aid today but won’t under the new system would go somewhere else isn’t really complicated. Its something the university presumably considered and determined its in the best interests of the university (and likely the Commonwealth as well). That one kid would pass without the merit aid doesn’t mean all kids similarly situated will.

At this point they have not (to my knowledge) provided details merit packages for 2020 and forward. Seems to me it makes sense to wait and see what those will be before attacking them and proclaiming doom and gloom for the university and Kentucky as a whole.

University may well be wrong in its assessment of the impact. At that point you make adjustments. Rather than 65/35, maybe it will be 50/50 by 2020 or even by 2022.

122

Some comments:

Missouri makes it very easy for OOS kids to get in-state tuition after one year. All they need is a summer job in Missouri that for a set number of hours (200?) to qualify. The university gives out one year partial scholarships to OOS students with the knowledge that they will qualify for in-state tuition after the freshman year. No merit is required.

http://registrar.missouri.edu/residency/

Iowa gives out significant merit based on test scores. ACT scores as low as a 25 can qualify.

https://admissions.uiowa.edu/finances/scholarships-first-year-students

MN-TC just increased thier OOS tuition and is working through merit packages. They do offer a “golden gopher” scholarship which is in state tuition.

UW Madison gives out very little merit aid.

All of these schools rank higher than UK.

123

UK has way too many scholarships to keep straight. 8-}

https://www.uky.edu/ubo/sites/www…/2015-16_Operating_and_Capital_Budget.pdf

Page 44 of the budget list the scholarships by type and $ budgeted.

UK increased the “General Funds” for scholarships from $88,980,200 in 2014 to 104,307,700 in 2015.

Of the $104 Million, $26 million was for graduate school scholarships, then the top categories are:

Diversity Scholarships: $16.8 M
President/Provost Scholarships: $15.9 M
Governors Scholars/
Governor’s School of the arts: $11.3 M
Bluegrass Spirit: $5.7 M
Singletary: $5.1 M
and so on…

One example, of how they can take a merit based scholarship, and turn it into a need-based scholarship, would be the Diversity Scholarships. These currently award $5K to $15K a year, and currently consider merit and holistic (diversity) factors. They could add a need-based factor into the consideration. It will be changed to a need based scholarship, that uses merit and holistic factors to determine who in the “need pool” is awarded the scholarship.

It would still consider merit and “diversity”, but now would be limited to those that have been determined to have financial need.

Going forward, any increases in the scholarship budget, could go toward need-based aid (they increased spending by $16 M in 2015).

UK likely will continue with the OOS scholarships (“see blue”, “Bluegrass Spirit”), since these are a tool to recruit OOS students ($$$). They may reduce the amounts from $7K/$8K a year, or increase the requirements (freeing up more $ for need-based aid), but I expect they will continue to offer these smaller OOS scholarships.

They could eliminate some of the smaller scholarship programs, like “Legacy” tuition scholarships ($1.5M) and move those funds to need-based scholarships.

Lots of ways for UK to make this change from spending 90% of it’s scholarship funds on merit based awards to spending 60%+ of it’s funds on need-based aid.

124

@Midwest67 @Zinhead

We are in the same boat: Chicago area and frustrated at not having a cost-competitive flagship option in-state or even nearby.

We are doubly frustrated that our S18 got much less love ($$$) rocking the ACT than if he had scored ever so slightly better on the PSAT (probably one more correct answer), or if we had lived in one of the 30 states where he would have met the lower NM cutoff.

One school that we are finding to be a reasonable-cost alternative much closer than Bama is Nebraska. Full-sticker is close to UM-TC, but there are good automatics that don’t require stratospheric stats, and I am not aware of any plans to raise tuition as drastically as UM-TC is planning.

COA for a 24/3.0 will be about $21K (tuition, fees, R&B; NOT travel, personal expenses, books).
A 34/3.5 will get you about the equivalent of full tuition (but is a fixed number and will not increase to offset tuition increases).

This was the one school on our radar where a student with good stats could easily get an offer that was similar to NM at that school.

It doesn’t have the academic reputation of UIUC, UW, or some of the other nearby flagships, but it is rated near UK, Bama, MIZZOU, OK, etc. Its ranking has improved in recent years, and I think that being in the B1G will help that to continue. OOS is now over 30%.

I just wanted to throw this on the table as another option for Chicago students who want a flagship that is not too far away, along with the usual suspects of UM-TC, Iowa and MIZZOU.

125

“MN-TC just increased thier OOS tuition and is working through merit packages.”

They told me they want their OOS sticker price to fall around the middle of the Big 10, as opposed to being the great bargain of the Big 10 as they have been for some time. Good for them; too bad for the OOS students I’ve been steering there for years!

126

Little dismayed by the many parents and occasional student in this thread dismaying that they may have one less college choice.

The lower income students this policy seeks to retain often don’t have those choices. Please remember that and have some empathy.

127

I don’t see very many people on this site trying to figure out how to send their kids to schools where they will be surrounded by low SES kids with low SES stats. What I see is empathy that only goes so far. These kinds of policies are fine for the schools other people send their kids to, just not my kid’s school.

Oh but my kid’s school meets full need - not me, right? If a school requires stats and expensive ECs to get in, then it virtually guarantees a student population that is going to tilt high SES. And all the full need schools do.

Whatever we start subsidizing, we get more of. Whatever we stop subsidizing, we get less of it. It isn’t complicated or any great mystery to understand what is going to happen at UK when they move this direction.

128

I get the impression that you think low income students aren’t as intelligent as those from upper income families. There are plenty of smart kids whose parents can’t afford to send them to residential college. I think our cc’s, commuter colleges, and state flagships are full of them.

If middle and upper income families avoid UK so they don’t have to mix with kids from low income families, then you’ll likely be subsidizing more low income kids to fill the seats. If you subsidize a higher education for more kids, it stands to reason that you’ll have a more highly educated populace. Higher education leads to better employment outcomes and less poverty. Who would be against that?

My kid attends a NYS university. If our governor is successful, they’ll be offering free tuition to low income kids. I fully support the move and am willing to pay more taxes for it to happen. Students will still have to academically qualify for the colleges they’re accepted to, so while the average income of the student body will drop, the stats won’t.

129

It’ ironic when the person complaining about merit aid received 100k+ of merit based aid.

130

I think UK is going to pay a price in terms of student body quality in making these changes. The changes are probably too much, too quickly.

UK tuition is quite high, at $11,320; subtract $1,600 from that to represent the average KEES scholarship based on grade-point and ACT and it remains $9720. There are just lots of schools that are giving out-of-state waivers and even scholarships for decent grade points and ACT scores of 28 or higher. If Kentucky doesn’t provide students with a 30 or higher on the ACT with merit aid, then these students are going to be able to select a number of SEC or other schools that will be cheaper, despite their OOS status.

I could make a strong argument that there should be zero need-based aid – that all aid should be based on merit (a large portion of which goes to the needy). I could make an equally strong argument that there should be zero merit aid. All I know is that any university which unilaterally makes drastic cuts in merit aid in today’s academic environment is going to suffer a decline in its academic reputation.

I posted upline that I had read or heard that Kentucky has the lowest out-migration rate of any state in the union. If true, and Kentucky is able to keep its best students from leaving the state without offering merit aid, then the state may be making a wise choice. Schools in some states offer generous scholarships to their best students because they feel that they have to in order to keep them from leaving the state; I know that’s the prevailing attitude in Mississippi.

Even though UK says they are shifting their aid budget to need-based aid, I predict a wealthy donor or a few wealthy donors will step forward and give new money to UK expressly for the purpose of merit aid.

131

UK does wants to grow the total amount of $ available for aid (that’s everyone’s plan), but donors are MUCH more likely to donate to need-based scholarships, than merit based scholarships.

Of course, money is fungible, more (donor) funds for need-based aid, means UK can shift more (institutional) funds to merit-based aid.

I also expect a lot of the need-based aid, to also be merit-based, especially scholarships that target URMs.

132

I am of the opinion that this can only hurt UK in the long run in terms of quality students and rankings. I just feel like there is an inherent drag that impacts students from lower income families that does not effect wealthy families. it just seems like wealthy family kids attend better schools, have higher educated parents which makes for a higher mental living environment, Higher educated social circles, etc. this all translates into a child being able to score better on test in school and standard tests. These wealthy families chase Merit aid. The lower income families chase any aid because they need the aid to make it work. By giving up merit aid, UK will not be attracting these wealthy families. How this helps or hurts the overall KY state, i am not sure but I doubt very much that it will raise the rankings and stats of UK. This is JMHO.

133

What is the definition of wealthy in this thread? Are you describing middle class families as wealthy or are truly wealthy, “can easily pay full price” families seeking out schools like UKY?

134

Who told you lower income kids drop out of college?

135

In looking at UK admissions statistics, it appears that 45 percent of admitted students have a GPA above 3.75 and 20 percent have an ACT above 30. It may be that they just don’t have the funds to support giving all of the students merit aid. However, 86 percent of admitted students have a GPA above a 3.0 and 66 percent have an ACT above 25 percent. It sounds like UK has a lot of middle-of-the-road students who have the potential to succeed if the state can keep them in for four years. If there is a smaller percentage of need, I can see where the university (and the state) would be financially better off aiding economically disadvantaged students. I can understand the frustration of parents of high-stat kids (we’re in the same boat in my state), but I do think a state has to do the right thing for the greater number of people. It appears that most Kentucky students stay in Kentucky. If most high-stat Kentucky kids plan to stay in state regardless of the amount of money they receive, why should the university spend money to keep kids they won’t be losing?

136

From the article linked in the OP:

“[UK leaders] found that their students become much more likely to drop out if they have $5,000 or more in unmet financial need.”

That doesn’t say all students with unmet need drop out. Only that they are much more likely to do so. That is the issue the university is trying to address.

137

@austinmshauri

First, you have to define what low income is. UK has neither the endowment nor the state funding to offer free tuition to all families earning under $125k/year.

138

I don’t think that increasing the amount of need based aid a college offers results in lower qualty students. Some universities only offer need based aid and it doesn’t seem to be hurting them any.

It’s unfortunate that some people equate low income with lack of intelligence. Not everyone uses test scores to determine intellectual prowess. However, if you do and you don’t want your child mingling with those you consider average, pay for them to go someplace else. If you can’t afford it, now you’re in the same boat as all the other families whose kids have good, but not tippy top stats, who have to be creative in funding their education. Welcome to a very large club.

The college isn’t discontinuing merit aid, they’re simply altering their distribution ratios, so some kids will still get merit. Freeing up dollars for more need based aid gives UK greater flexibility. More students with ACT scores < 30 can be offered scholarships, and the college can consider individual circumstances to determine the amount they want to offer. Kids with scores > 30 who have need will likely still apply because traveling in state is still cheaper than traveling OOS. Families who don’t qualify for need based aid will likely have other options. It’s not the college’s fault if they don’t like whatever those options turn out to be.

139

NMF DD says she won’t go to UK or other free ride schools. I like free ride. Could these schools keep the elite together to produce a high end reputation group and preserve the value? Recruiting employers would understand the college choice and value accordingly. Or, are the elite students lumped with the general student population?

140

@austinmshauri writes: The college isn’t discontinuing merit aid, they’re simply altering their distribution ratios, so some kids will still get merit

Yes. If UK had given us a full tuition scholarship only, and not a room & board stipend as well, it still would have been the best offer we had on the table.