<p>"Reduce the influence, and schools will start to go their own ways".
UVA, William and Mary, and Michigan have out-of-state undergraduates comprise about a third of their student bodies. As these students (at least in Virginia) tend to be stronger students than those from in-state, they have helped these states' lure to employers.
Of course the state of Michigan is encountering such headwinds that the economic advantage of having U. Mich. there is less apparent. But the state is is served by having a substantial number of out-of-state students.
The University of Illinois recently attempted to get approval from the state legislature to accept a larger percentage of the incoming class from out-of-state in the hopes of strengthening the student body and becoming more of a national presence. They were shot down. Such parochialism will hurt the state over time, IMO.</p>
<p>Tarhunt,</p>
<p>I don't want to be too much of a self-aggrandizer, but I think it's clear that UCLA possesses the funds and institutions to do it as well.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't want to be too much of a self-aggrandizer, but I think it's clear that UCLA possesses the funds and institutions to do it as well.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Perhaps you're right. Perhaps California students, alone, can support UCLA with higher tuition, and perhaps UCLA has a number of wealthy alumni who will step up to the plate.</p>
<p>Bill Lockyer is the politician who sues the car makers for emitting carbon dioxide in cars. What he is saying now is that if we do not increase taxes in California like the Democrats want, then they should shut down funding to the UC; so if we do not want that to happen, we should increase taxes.</p>
<p>^ I agree with you, bomgeedad. He's using the UC system as a bargaining chip. The California State legislature needs reform. I suggest going back to no term limits, so we can finally have some qualified/experienced people running the state.</p>
<p>I cant possible see Berkeley even considering going private.....its the schools image as the top public university in the world. I think that the students and especially the staff would be outraged. Being out of state it would really affect me though, although I did hear that CA is thinking about allowing children of undocumented workers get instate tuition, which would really help me because then they would have to give all out of state students in state tuition. Anyway that is likely to happen especially with money so tight but I recently read that California spend around 3 billion a year on the whole UC system and spends 9.9 billion a year on prison and will soon be spending more on prisons than the CC, cal state, and UC's combined. It was unbelievable!</p>
<p>^^ Good point. Berkeley has that "public image" to maintain. Nevertheless, I can see Berkeley weathering this dilemma.</p>
<p>Here in Illinois, the funding for the public universities dropped a lot about 5 years ago. In a 2 year period, funding went from about 35% to below 25% of total funding. It hurt the students the most. Tuition increases for those years were unbelieveable. The state than passed a law not allowing public universities to increase tuition and fees for four years after a cohort started taking classes.
The three Universities of Illinois, Chicago, Springfield and Urbana-Champaign, picked a new presidented because he was good at getting private money. There is this campaign to raise $10 million or something like that. None of the schools need permission to increase OOS student population. UIUC just wanted to advertise more to OOSers.</p>
<p>Tarhunt,
I am curious why you think only Virginia, Berkeley and Texas are ready to go private but unlikely for Michigan ... considering Michigan has larger endowment than Virginia and Berkeley, and 35% OOS compared to less than 10% at Berkeley and Texas.</p>
<p>sorry, sofla, but OOS kids are still OOS for tuition purposes, regardless of their immigration status. All public colleges in Calif (UCs, Cal States and Jucos) provide in-state tuition rates to anyone who has attended for three years and graduated from a HS in California.</p>
<p>GoBlue:</p>
<p>I didn't do a whole lot of research into the actual numbers, which is why I was so wishy-washy about my guesses, but here are the factors I had in mind:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>In-state competition and local, public competition (that is, if tuition soars for in-state students, where else can they turn for a better value?)</p></li>
<li><p>Current degree of in-state funding. The larger the piece of pie the state currently picks up, the tougher it will be to forego it.</p></li>
<li><p>Current OOS tution charged. The higher the tuition, the more likely a school can charge substantially more to current and prospective students. It's a function of demand.</p></li>
<li><p>National/international reputation</p></li>
<li><p>Current admissions rate. The more people currently being turned away (as a percentage), the larger the pent up demand, even at a higher price.</p></li>
<li><p>Endowment size and size per student. Obviously, the more money being earned on an endowment, the better able to offset a loss of state revenue.</p></li>
<li><p>Wealthy alums who are willing to give.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Michigan has some weaknesses in these criteria. Michigan State is a good school, and the other public schools of the Big 10 might start to look pretty good if UM's tuition suddenly skyrockets. I could see Illinois bleeding off a lot of in-state students, for instance.</p>
<p>Michigan also charges only about $15,000 for OOS tuition, which might explain why its admissions rate is only 47%, but even 47% is well above the admissions rate at UVA and Berkeley, I believe. I also think (though I'm not at all sure) that UM gets substantially more money from the state than UVA and, possibly, Berkeley. My sense about reputation is that Berkeley is far and away the public school leader, with UVA having a great reputation (especially in the very populous NE) as more of a liberal arts school. Michigan has a good rep, but my gut tells me it's more tied to the Midwest than the reps for the other two.</p>
<p>As for wealthy alums, UVA has a lot of old money alums as well as a number of younger, wealthier sorts. All the schools turn out professionals in high-paying fields.</p>
<p>Frankly, I wouldn't have had Texas on the list if it hadn't been for the wealthy alums and the enormous population and regional pride in Texas (the state). I think UT can milk its alums and fill its school with wealthy Texans if need be. I'm not sure Michigan can do that as well.</p>
<p>But it's all subjective. I'm just guessing. Feel free to guess differently.</p>
<p>^ The only thing long term I see going against Michigan is the state's economy. </p>
<p>Michigan still has great prestige, and I assume plenty of wealthy alumni, and research grants to keep it funded. Keep in mind, Michigan has great professional schools.</p>
<p>blue bayou what I was saying was that there is talk out there of California passing legislation providing instate tuition for the children of "illegals" (if you call them that). If the state where to do that they would be bounded by a federal law passed a couple years ago to give instate tuition to OOS also. At the moment I don't think this is going to happen at all especially with the budget crunch.</p>
<p>I think for cal to go private it would definitely need to increase oos admissions. I think we could have a much stronger student body if it wasnt comprised almost entirely of CA students.</p>
<p>Also, it seems like everyone here is very poor so looking oos for rich people would definitely help with funding.</p>
<p>^ That is a positive I see as well. If not tied to state funding, Cal could admit more students from OOS.</p>
<p>A more diverse student body (geographic and physical) is important.</p>
<p>These numbers for public universities in the USNWR Top 50 might help people understand how much room various states have to work with in possibly increasing their IS and OOS tuitions:</p>
<p>In-State Tuition Rates<br>
$12,164 Penn State
$9,882 U Illinois UC
$9,723 U Michigan
$9,210 W & M
$8,500 U Virginia
$8,109 UC Davis
$7,630 U Texas
$7,010 UC S Barbara
$6,888 UCSD
$6,794 UC Irvine
$6,726 U Wisconsin
$6,654 UC Berkeley
$6,522 UCLA
$5,985 U Washington
$5,034 U North Carolina
$4,926 Georgia Tech
$3,206 U Florida</p>
<p>Out-of-State Tuition Rates<br>
$29,131 U Michigan
$27,515 U Virginia
$27,177 UC Davis
$26,725 W & M
$25,694 UC S Barbara
$25,478 UC Irvine
$25,372 UCSD
$25,338 UC Berkeley
$25,206 UCLA
$23,968 U Illinois UC
$22,712 Penn State
$21,283 U Washington
$20,726 U Wisconsin
$20,364 U Texas
$20,272 Georgia Tech
$19,682 U North Carolina
$17,791 U Florida</p>
<p>Here are the overall acceptance rates for these schools. The OOS rates are almost always lower and, in many cases a lot lower:</p>
<p>24% UC Berkeley
26% UCLA
32% W & M
34% U North Carolina
37% U Virginia
46% UCSD
47% U Michigan
48% U Florida
53% UC S Barbara
57% U Texas
58% U Wisconsin
58% Penn State
60% UC Irvine
65% U Illinois UC
68% U Washington
68% UC Davis
69% Georgia Tech</p>
<p>
[quote]
If the UC's went totally private, they'd be a huge consortium of highly ranked private colleges with a lot of money...</p>
<p>Does that sound like a BAD thing (regardless of what's actually happening)?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, it completely destroys the fundamental purpose of the UC system which is to provide an affordable education to California's students.</p>
<p>@ hawkette- I'm pretty sure the admit rate for OS at the UCs (or atleast Berkeley and UCLA) is higher than the in state. </p>
<p>Maybe like 2% higher than the instate acceptance rate. The OS application pool is obviously much more self-selective, so it isn't easier to get in OS, but the admit rate itself is higher.</p>
<p>honestly, i think the point many of you are missing is that no where in that article did it say "UC is going private due to possible state budget cuts." It says "the state may cut the UCs from their budget." That doesn't make them private. I highly doubt the state is just going to say "okay, you can just have the entire university--which we own entirely." There would have to be some sort of deal made ala' in virginia.</p>
<p>I've never seen the UC OOS admit published, but the numbers of OOS students are quite small anyway so I don't see them as being much of a financial salvation to the UCs. Also, I don't see the state welcoming more non-Californians in to foot the bill. The more likely result is more rationing of services among the UC colleges themselves and a bit more politicking going on amongst them about their share of the pie. But no matter how they slice it, state funding is a problem, is in general decline, and unlikely to be solved in Sacramento. Frankly, the leadership of the UCs need to much more proactive in addressing/solving these issues and their alums are going to have to step up. The guys at U Virginia aren't there yet, but their leadership clearly has shown the most foresight.</p>