UNC implements new out of state tuition plan

Parents Forum
21

<p>bluebayou</p>

<p>Any out of state student receiving a full scholarship which includes Moreheads and Robertsons among others will no longer be counted in the 18% cap of out of state students. This also means that out of state athletes on full scholarships won't be a part of the cap. </p>

<p>This effectively increases the number of out of state students because they can still admit up to 18% of the total from out of state. </p>

<p>From the article....</p>

<p><<Opponents of the tuition policy say the provision could allow schools to circumvent the 18 percent cap on out-of-state student enrollment.</p>

<p>But Moeser emphasized that the University will not enroll fewer students from North Carolina.</p>

<p>“No North Carolinian will be turned away who otherwise would have been admitted to this University,” Moeser said during the meeting.</p>

<p>The nonresidents on full scholarship will be admitted in addition to the University’s generally admitted class.</p>

<p>Because the students will be an unforeseen addition to UNC-CH’s enrollment plan, care must be taken not to overburden the University, Moeser said.</p>

<p>“This is absolutely critical that we not outgrow our capacity,” Moeser said. “This will be careful growth.>></p>

<p>It will be interesting to see how they handle the balancing act but I applaud their initiative. UVA, and Michigan, have significantly larger out of state populations and UNC's administration has been battling the legislature to get the increase for a number of reasons; increased revenue, and even more important from their point of view, the increased diversity should actually help them retain more of their top instate candidates who currently choose other schools because of their perception of lack of geographic diversity.</p>

22

<p>Yes. We are in-state NC and that's one of the reasons my son went to Tulane even though the scholarship from UNC would have made it cheaper than Tulane. (All other complications aside.) It isn't a perception of a lack of geographical diversity. It IS a lack of geograpical diversity. The numbers say it. He didn't want to look around himself and feel as if he was still in high school. (Sure got THAT wish, didn't he? heh)</p>

23

<p>Yes, I think hazmat and eadad have pretty much correctly stated what this will mean. And I agree with hazmat--that the writing is on the wall for an overall rise in tuition. (Did hazmat say that?) </p>

<p>Interestingly, the Robertson program has usually awarded many more OOS scholarships than in-state, in the past, I believe. Unlike the Morehead, I don't think it's in their mission statement, i.e., they don't have an obligation, (as does the Morehead), to award an equal number of scholarships to NC students. This year I think the Robertson Program did make a few more in-state awards, but still only 6 (I believe) at UNC, and maybe 3 at Duke. </p>

<p>Although this will certainly allow for more scholarships to be made overall--for all the scholarship committees--if that's what they choose to do, I will be interested to see how this change impacts the Morehead. This will certainly allow them to possibly return to awarding 60+ scholarships per year as they were able to do many years ago. I think they have dropped that in recent years to something closer to 40? because of budget issues. I suspect the Ram's Club will benefit greatly from this as well, since they fund many of the athletic scholarships.</p>

<p>And while eadad is correct that this will, in effect, bring in more out-of-state students and increase geographic diversity, it will not--at this point-- generate more income for the University. And it will still appear like an 18% cap on OOS. A bit convoluted, but there it is. I suspect this is partially done to pave the way to (eventually) raise that cap for real.</p>

24

<p>Does it mean that the basketball team can recruit 5 full scholarships (oos) for every 1 that they give out now?</p>

25

<p>Thanks for verifying and clarifying the issue of diversity citymomteacher. Being an out of state parent, I can only go with the things I gather in discussions with in staters, from my son at UNC and from what I read on CC. I always believed it was a real issue but you are the first parent to come out and say so. Thanks.</p>

<p>jack indeed has pointed out the one thing I didn't address; I knew it was the case and should have stated it in my earlier post. This move will NOT generate substantially more out of state revenue that a change in the cap would allow.</p>

<p>Granted, with the number of out of staters probably increasing as a result of this change, many of whom will be on partial scholarships, the revenue stream may see a slight increase. The real source of greatly increased revenues however, which would come about by way of a real increase in the cap is still a legislative issue. Perhaps this first, baby step, may help pave the way for a legislative change in the future. Many feel that the cap is one of the things that keeps UNC from climbing up in the rankings and believe on the other hand, that the increased revenue stream would go a long way to help offset the budget cuts that the legislature keeps imposing.</p>

<p>Chancellor Moeser has been faced with an unenviable task. Continuing budget cuts that go to the heart of his efforts to make UNC the top public school in the country and a legislature that turns a deaf ear to one of the best ways to help offset not only the revenue problem, but also would aid greatly in keeping more of the state's best students at home.</p>

<p>While I think that this change will enable the Morehead to begin to increase the number of winners, I don't think that the change will allow the Foundation to get back to the level of 60 annual winners quite yet.</p>

<p>The appoximate $14,000 tuition savings per out of state winner is certainly a windfall for the Foundation, but because the award includes (above and beyond tuition) room, board, a laptop, living stipend, and the summer travel (which in and of itself averages over $4000 per student per summer) the impact of the savings doesn't on initial view look like it could support 20 more winners right away. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.</p>

26

<p>All athletic scholarships are governed by NCAA limits set for each sport.
I think that basketball for all Div I schools is a total of 13 scholarship players at any time.</p>

27

<p>The NCAA allows each Division 1 Men's Basketball program 13 Scholarships and in Division 2, 10 are available. For Women's basketball 15 Scholarships are offered in Division 1 and 10 in Division 2."</p>

<p>Basketball is classed as a "head count" sport which means that the athletic scholarships that are offered are "full Ride .</p>

<p>This is different from the sports that are "equivalency sports". Not all athletic scholarships are full ride like football and basketball. For instance, in soccer (a UNC favorite) the NCAA allows each division 1 soccer program 9.9 scholarships for Men and 12 for Women. This means that coaches have to "share" their allocation between a larger number of players. </p>

<p>PS Hi, Mr M.!</p>

28

<p>eadad: Yes, you are correct that a substantial portion of Robertson and Morehead scholarship monies awarded includes living stipend, summer programs, study abroad, laptops, etc. Yes, that is a big portion of the awards. But...still...I'm not getting it. I don't see how (at this point) the revenues will be increased. Since the OOS scholarship students will be considered in-state, and therefore, no longer under the umbrella of that 18% cap, the 18% cap remains, and so the amount of OOS tuition monies stay the same also. Am I missing something? Probably. But even those on partial scholarships, it is the OOS tuition that the partial scholarships usually cover, no? So where is the slight increase coming from?</p>

<p>And as a NC parent with a student at UNC, I'm not sure I agree completely with the diversity issue. In a way, yes...but no more than any student in any state who feels like he or she must get away from home and have that 'far from home' experience. I know that sounds like the same thing, but I'm not sure it is. And many of the top scholars do, in fact, go on to UNC. Even if my own daughter had not received a scholarship, UNC moved way up in her list of schools after she spent a weekend there. She seriously began comparing UNC with the other schools to which she applied, and all it had to offer really impressed her (and us). And I do think a lot of top in-state students may do that as well, and begin to ask themselves..."now why is it I'm thinking of paying $40+K a year for such and such school instead of attending UNC? Hmm..."</p>

<p>But I think the diversity issue is not so much an issue of not having a chance to meet more OOS as it is just wanting to leave home. I think that's just par for the course for a lot of 18 year olds. Like I said, that may sound like the same thing, but I think there's a distinction. (I think.) </p>

<p>And UNC has lured many of those top scholars from the NC School of Science and Math by giving any School of Science and Math graduate full tuition, and many take them up on it. And...absolutely.. offering full scholarships to top in-state students greatly encourages them to stay as well!</p>

<p>As a NC taxpayer, I actually have no problem with raising taxes to help support our public schools and universities. But that's a whole other story. Right now, instead of raising taxes, NC has--unfortunately-- decided to get into the gambling business--instituting a lottery instead. I personally liked being in the only state on the Eastern Seaboard without one... </p>

<p>sokkermom: Yes, I think 5 to 1 is about right.</p>

29

<p>jack</p>

<p>Previously even out of state scholarship athletes counted against the cap, though because the university funded the scholarships, from what I have been told, they were NOT being subsidized at the out of state rate-granted it's really just an accounting issue but the fact remains those athletes weren't contributing out of state tuition money to the general fund. By removing them from the 18% cap, and there are probably between 30 and 75 if not more across all sports, those spaces can now go to revenue generating students at an out of state rate- that's where the slight amount additional revenue would come from.</p>

<p>By the way we are still on for parents' weekend. Can we still get together sometime for coffee, lunch, some iced tea (regular, or hard your choice LOL)whatever? PM me when you get the chance.</p>

30

<p>eadad: Okay, I see what you're saying. You're right--that would generate an increase. Still..the majority of those athletic scholarships are funded by the Rams Club, not the University itself. There's an interesting article that came out in February 2005 about this:
<a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2143862p-8525724c.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2143862p-8525724c.html&lt;/a>
I don't know if you can get into that link, but the Rams Club doesn't cover it all. They have a huge endowment, but they don't want to dip into too much of it. So, yes, according to this article, the athletics dept fills the gap by spending about $600,000 on scholarships. And the athletics dept now would like to raise student fees to help cover that. I don't know if that's ever occurred, though, but that's their hope/plan.</p>

<p>Anyway... We're are going to be there next weekend and would enjoy getting together. I'll send you a PM. Thanks.</p>