<p>"As states cut back funds that would go toward educating in-state residents, public universities may increasingly turn to out-of-state residents to raise cash, experts say. State cutbacks have constrained the number of in-state students campuses enroll, leading some to admit more students who pay higher out-of-state tuition"</p>
<p>"At the University of Michigan, the percentage of out-of-state students was 40.1% for the class entering last fall, up from 34% in 2008"</p>
<p>That was the suspicion in Michigan last year. I am not at all surprised to see confirmation. There is also a push by some in the state to make UM a private school (can’t see that happening, but who knows?). It doesn’t bode well for our state’s students.</p>
<p>Our state’s students are leaving in droves after graduation. There is a tremendous brain drain in this state and until Michigan improves as a place for young people to succeed, I can’t see it stopping. Personally, I am glad that more students from OOS are being admitted. Perhaps some of them will want to stay here and help rebuild our economy.</p>
<p>Jobs, jobs, jobs! People follow the money. Michigan has limited career opportunities for college graduate. As long as that is the case, you are going to see young graduates leave the state. Once the Michigan economy has diversified, and it is doing so, you are going to see more young people remain.</p>
<p>Whether graduates remain in the state or leave is no business nor concern of the university. They’re need more money, and the easiest way to do that is to simply shift the ratio in favor of out-of-state students rather than in-state students. Though this trend continuing will cause Michigan to be even more so the “Ivy reject” school. </p>
<p>Further, while a lot of people leave Michigan, most still do stay within the Great Lakes area. It’s not as if everyone moves out to New York, California, or Texas.</p>
<p>Interesting article. However, just because the trend is linked (by the author of the article) to the cutback of funding in two different quotes, doesn’t mean that the trend of University of Michigan is dependent on the cutback. It’s possible but did a University of Michigan rep, or someone else say that the trend is because of the cutback. I’m sure it’s part of the reason but still.</p>
<p>Vladenschlutte, to an extent, most top universities that are not Ivy league schools qualify as “Ivy reject” schools. Schools such as Cal, Chicago, Duke, Emory, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, Michigan, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Rice, Tufts, Vanderbilt and WUSTL to name a few. Those schools will typically lose the cross admid battle with Ivies by a signifigant margin and, as such, are “Ivy reject” schools. However, the beauty about those schools is that they each have something unique and Michigan is no different. They are each sufficiently different to the Ivies that they will attract a different type of student than the ones who wish to attend Ivy League universities.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I am not trying to describe a school of lesser calibre when I say “Ivy Reject.” I mean Michigan will quite literally be a school focused on the East Coast “elites” who couldn’t get into any of their coveted Eastern schools, rather than a school focused on the best from Michigan and the Midwest. Sort of a “big fish in a small pond” becoming a “small fish in a big pond” situation.</p>
<p>Universities also provide support services that are primarily used by international students, e.g. ESL departments, staff to assist in adapting to a different culture, staff to support government reporting requirements, assistance in living arrangements during university hoildays (Thanksgiving, Christmas-New Years) when U.S. students would normally go home, etc. Basically, services that a U.S. student would not likely need.</p>