<p>So…according to the ‘fatuous’ (I LIKE it, Stooge!) and somewhat vacuous CNN report, without checking the numbers on the UVA website, it’s STILL $21K in-state, $42K OOS.</p>
<p>As the late, great Paul Harvey used to say, “That’s NOT…true…val-ue!”</p>
<p>D is a rising soph OOS at UW-Madison, living in a house this fall with 5,6,7 others (God help us all!), and I doubt her costs out the door for the 2010-2011 school year will surpass $33K. And she just interviewed Thursday for a 10-15 hr/week job to defray some of that. THAT’S value to my way of thinking.</p>
<p>I disagree with the idea that Madison is not diverse. Is it as diverse as some schools like UCLA? No, it isn’t. But it’s unfair to say it isn’t diverse. There are people from all over the country and from all over the world that attend Madison. ~30% of the student body consists of out of state students. These people, and the people from Wisconsin, carry a diverse set of ideas and values with them that lend itself to a diverse and stimulating environment, both in academic and in non-academic ventures.</p>
<p>Before I attended Madison I attended UW-Oshkosh. 98% of the student body there is white, from Wisconsin, and usually conservative. A school like UW-O fits the definition of not being diverse, not Madison.</p>
<p>Look, for a top 30-40 school in the entire nation, UW’s undergrad population is not diverse. You can say that it manages to add diversity relative to the state’s very homogeneous population, but it’s still lagging compared to peers. </p>
<p>Before Madison, I was at a boarding school where 1/3 were black, 15% international, and almost 10% were foreign exchange students. It’s a different environment. You learn to feel extremely comfortable with people who struggle with English. You learn things about other cultures that are happening now, not history lectures explaining life as it was 100 years ago.</p>
<p>Madison shouldn’t be congratulating itself on being more diverse than UW-Oshkosh. It should have a strong enough applicant pool to attract a wide range of people who are academically prepared to attend. If it’s not attracting this diversity, then that should be a goal. We should be looking up to the Ivies and other strong publics–not comparing ourself to Oshkosh. </p>
<p>Just because WI isn’t diverse doesn’t mean UW shouldn’t be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A white, upper-middle class OOS student from Massachusetts or New Jersey is one kind of diversity; an AA, Hispanic/Native American or a Swiss international is a different kind of diversity. We lack in the latter.</p>
<p>It’s funny you make those points. First of all, my roommate from last semester was from China and he wasn’t the most fluent in English, so I’m quite aware of being around people who “struggle with English.” Secondly, I met a girl in one of my classes who is from Taiwan. We had some interesting discussions outside of class about current events from her native country. Hardly something in a history lecture that happened 100 years ago.</p>
<p>I will concede that Madison certainly doesn’t have a lot of black or hispanic students. This is the main reason why I said it isn’t as diverse as other schools. That doesn’t mean it isn’t diverse at all though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said Madison should be comparing itself to Oshkosh. My point is that people shouldn’t say that Madison isn’t diverse, because there are dozens of other schools like Oshkosh that actually AREN’T diverse. Madison shouldn’t be lumped into that group.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. But there are some of those kinds of students who attend Madison, even if they are fewer in number, and combined with the “first kind” of diversity as well as the abundancy of international students, I just don’t think it’s fair to call Madison not diverse.</p>
<p>We actually have a surprisingly high number of Hispanics. All the other numbers are miserable. Note that this is apparently incoming freshman stats; the registrar link above indicates that only about ~13% of bachelor degree recipients were internationals or minorities (not the 21% that these stats suggest).</p>
<p>Comparatively to some other Big Ten U.'s that draw more from urban areas, UW-Madison is fairly homogeneous. And they’re trying to change that by offering scholarships to minorities with stellar stats. The backlash of that, however, is that OOS Caucasians with lights out GPA, SAT & ACTs still won’t get anything & will pay the full ticket. Accept it for what it is.</p>
<p>Questions. Does the instate student population reflect the state population demographics? Remember that as a public institution UW has the mission to educate its residents. Do other states’ flagship schools reflect their populations? Is the population of CA for example really x% Asian? Consider the academic/socioeconomic status of instate applicants- is there a solid middle class in all ethnic groups- ie are all residents taking advantage of the precollege opportunities available to them? Are parents requiring their children’s school attendance everywhere? Statistics can be spun many ways.</p>
<p>jnm, I’m not sure it’s a zero sum game ie urm v non=urm. There is merit aid for all high quality students and there is also aid for under-rep minorities. My impression is that both buckets are too small.</p>
<p>Maybe there is someone else on the board who knows the $ amounts and how these programs work.</p>
<p>It’s great to see a positive discussion of this issue.</p>
<p>It’s very, very true that state colleges have never been able to maintain the diversity seen in the general population. Michigan is 14% black yet UMich is 8%. And yes–the UC system has an unusually high number of Asians. In that light, you could say that UW having 5% Hispanic student body when the state only has 5% is astounding. </p>
<p>But there’s only so much context you can put statistics into. Yes–the UW isn’t doing a shabby job relative to its state stats. But as you said: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn’t exposure to an array of cultures and people part of an education? When you’re in a situation like UW, sometimes that means “providing scholarships to minorities with stellar stats” at the expense of other OOS students or other forms of affirmative action–as jnm said. Or, we could encourage instate diversity with other forms of affirmative action for WI residents.</p>
<p>WI is a tough environment to artificially create diversity, especially when UW has other missions to carry through at the same time. But that doesn’t mean the state school should settle. I’m not saying we can match the diversity of a private college with no obligation to its state, but when the raw stats show that there’s no diversity, we should be trying to improve. We shouldn’t be saying that a 3% black student body is acceptable because WI has only 6% blacks. We’re a good school–we should be able to attract diverse OOS talent.</p>
<p>Bravo, justtotalk, bravo! I couldn’t have said it better myself. UW will never be considered a world class university at the undergraduate level until it has world class demographics – not just Wisconsin ones.</p>
<p>I really appreciate your willingness to focus on each of the actual issues that I have raised rather than get all defensive and write me off as a ■■■■■. Wis75, you might want to take a cue from the younger generation.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with you on all your points, but you certainly are thoughtful and articulate. You do UW proud.</p>
<p>And barrons, your points on U-Va versus UW when it comes to financial aid are a broken record. You talk about UW having just as many smart kids as U-Va and UNC; well, by your measure it also has just as many rich kids – more, in fact, since median family income at UW isn’t much lower than at U-Va and the cost of living in Wisconsin is lower. </p>
<p>U-Va and UNC are the only two state colleges in America that are both need blind AND guarantee to meet 100 percent of the financial need of all its undergraduate students. If you apply to U-Va and are admitted, you will get the money you need to attend – plain and simple. In contrast, UW charges less tuition but still, on average, barely meets 75 percent of a typical student’s financial need. This is pathetic for a school that insists that it’s (1) first class and (2) focused on improving diversity.</p>
<p>World class demographics=worldclass made-up hooey. It is about 19th on the list of 20 important things a university should have. Outstanding faculty, up to date facilities, great research opportunities, even great walkable shopping is as important as whether UW has more or fewer monority students given that it has a solid number already given the location and state demographics. I’m probably the only actual minority making any comments here. When you roll-in the heavy international grad student component UW feels very wordly and international. If there is one complaint about TA’s it’s that many are FOREIGN and their English might not be as good as one would like. For UW to overspend limited money to attract more OOS minorities than the relatively large amount they already spend is not good financial management.<br>
And it’s much easier to meet students’ need when 75% of your students have NONE. Those are the demographics of the truth. That big commitment is just big PR. And economic diversity is as important as just race in my book. Having a bunch of wealthy black kids around is hardly the road to much racial enlightenment.</p>
<p>Adding to some of the points made about economic diversity and financial aid: Despite the perception by some of Madison being a place with only students from more well to do or middle class families, there are students at Madison that aren’t from that background. I’m one of those such students. I grew up on a farm in Northern Wisconsin and neither of my parents have a college education. Needless to say, I wouldn’t be able to attend Madison without the aid they have given me. I’m not trying to sound my own horn here (hardly the venue for it anyways, given my nickname of numbers on an anonymous forum), but I guess you could point to me as an example of a student getting the aid he really needs to attend who also adds to “that other kind” of diversity.</p>
<p>Well said? Only if your views on diversity are flatly inconsistent with those of UW administrators and the vast majority of UW’s faculty – neither of which thinks UW has anywhere near a “solid number” of minorities, a position supported by the abysmal graduation rate of UW’s minority students – and is also inconsistent with the views of administrators running just about every major university in this country. </p>
<p>In any event, Barrons also offers no FACTS to support his views. The FACT is that UW isn’t appreciably more “economically diverse” than U-Va. The average undergraduate UW family earns more than 80k a year – hardly chump change in most parts of Wisconsin. The FACT is that UW has more OOS students than U-Va and offers them terrible financial aid while U-Va meets 100 percent of its students’ need, in state or OOS. Translation: you can only go to UW from OOS if your parents have money.</p>
<p>UW is far and away the wealthiest undergraduate institution in the state of Wisconsin. It’s not a bunch of poor kids scratching to make ends meet, if for no other reason because it doesn’t provide enough aid for those kids to go to the school in the first place. And with alums like barrons and wis75 advocating pulling the ladder up behind them this situation isn’t going to change. </p>
<p>Finally, on the issue of “wealthy blacks” overwhelming U-Va: barrons, I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is. Provide a link to some FACTS about the average family income of undergraduate African American students at U-Va. You opinion isn’t exactly unbiased, so you need to back it up.</p>
<p>This is false. I personally know someone who is an OOS student who has a terrific financial aid package from Madison that covers everything (her EFC is 0).</p>
<p>Sure. Here’s a link to an interview of Chancellor Martin on the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates where she explains how UW came up with the $80,000 cut-off for the surcharge. Now that I see it, I’m actually wrong; the average UW family makes MORE than 80k a year:</p>
<p>“WE LOOKED AT THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME IN THE STATE, WHICH IS $62,000. AND THEN WE LOOKED AT THE AVERAGE FAMILY INCOME FROM MADISON STUDENTS. FOR ALL STUDENTS IN AN[D] OUT OF STATE, THE AVERAGE IS $90,000.” </p>
<p>On the issue of adequacy of financial aid, here’s a link to Kiplinger’s ranking of “best value” public colleges. You’ll see that only two state schools – UNC and U-Va – meet 100 percent of the demonstrated need of their undergraduate students, while UW only meets 79 percent. You’ll also see from this that it’s actually cheaper for both in state and out of state students to attend U-Va than it is UW when aid is taken into account and that UW students graduate on average with more debt. </p>
<p>There is little question from all of this data that UW is not a school that’s overflowing with needy kids and that it’s not easy for needy kids to go there. The average student comes from a family with a near six-figure income and there’s a large gap in meeting the needs of UW’s lower income students. The average U-Va family makes even more money, to be sure, but they make it a lot easier for lower income students to attend as well. This does wonders to improve diversity, where UW is sorely lacking.</p>
<p>Interesting. I suspect the Martin’s numbers came from the 2007 study from the LaFollette study regarding the university becoming more exclusive. The 62k number sounds about right for instate. They found the instate family incomes have not kept pace with out of state family incomes by a large degree, which are now significantly higher.</p>
<p>Stooge, 62 is the average family income for the entire state of Wisconsin, not just UW. According to the interview the average in state student at UW itself comes from a family making 72. Obviously the average out of state student comes from a family earning well over 100 thousand for the total to come in at 90.</p>
<p>72 isn’t rich by any means, but it’s not poor either, especially in a state like Wisconsin where the cost of living is relatively low. But the broader point is that these numbers and the financial aid numbers demonstrate just how inaccurate it is to suggest, as barrons so often does, that UW is full of working class and low income students and that UW’s lower tuition by definition makes it a better bargain than the top tier state schools. Generally speaking the average UW family is just as well off as the average family at every other major flagship university in this country. And with its better aid program U-Va makes it much easier than UW for needy students to attend, whether from in or out of state, and regardless of the higher tuition. If you want to go to UW from out of state, you’d better be prepared to pay full freight.</p>
<p>Without question the typical U-Va family makes more money than the typical UW family, but the cost of living in Northern Virginia especially is much higher than anywhere in Wisconsin.</p>
<p>Say you have an overflowing bucket of FA for needy students. Which students do you choose? Students who need some aid? 100% aid? Those with the best grades and test scores? If the latter than other schools may have a smaller group to satisfy than UW, which historically has admitted greater numbers of students with mid level scores (which I’m fine with btw). UVA and U Mich suscribe more completely to a “talented tenth” concept than the UW.</p>
<p>If a school can provide 75% aid to 8k students, that is different than providing the same level of aid to say, 20k students.</p>
<p>So the Madison Initiative is supposed to help by setting aside some of the extra tution surcharge for scholarships. So is the Great People fund raising program. We’ll see how it goes.</p>
<p>If a school is a big enough draw to attract top students without having to offer merit aid and has enough of a financial aid budget to be need blind in admissions and meet 100% of demonstrated need, then you don’t have to worry about having to make the choices that you’ve just outlined. UW isn’t there yet.</p>