UM is far larger compared to its instate student population, so it can admit far more OOS students without residents getting too upset. I think there is also more instate pressure for UT because comparable colleges are so far away!
“This has helped Michigan in USNews-type rankings, where the criteria can pose significant issues for schools like Texas.”
Michigan is academically stronger than Texas. With the way USNWR uses criteria that favor private schools, their rankings are off the mark anyway.
I’m not disputing that USNews is “off the mark”, I’m just saying Texas is more hamstrung by the state than Michigan. Without the state legislature policy, Texas could have higher revenues from tuition and higher SAT/ACT scores.
However, Texas may be fulfilling the mission of a state university better than Michigan.
If I were you, I would start looking hard at the University of Minnesota – it is outstanding in Engineering disciplines, a relative bargain compared to UT and Michigan, and much more likely to accept you. It might be a high match or low reach OOS, but those are better odds than Mich and UT, which are likely both reaches.
In addition, I’d go to the ABET web site and form a list of schools that are accredited, within your price range, and that seem to fit your preferences. There are probably some schools, likely to admit you, where you could receive financial aid or merit money.
Go ahead and apply to Michigan and Texas – the only way to have a 0% chance is to not apply – but do make sure you cover your bases with some other apps to schools more likely to admit you which you like and can afford and are ABET-accredited.
Michigan has 10 mil residents, and Texas has 28 million residents. Most probably UM has to look for kids from outside their state to fill their class. UT could have zero from OOS and would stiil be rejecting droves of qualified kids from Texas.
Right now only around 10% of HS senior apply to Umich. If they apply the same 7% auto admission policy, it can fill the freshmen class pretty much like UT Austin. By accepting more OOS, it increases revenue and competitiveness. UMich received little funding from the state government but they meet the needs of all in state students. UT Austin has around ~8000 freshmen from instate, Michigan has ~3200. It is proportionally similar when compare to the population.
“Right now only around 10% of HS senior apply to Umich.”
This is important to note. Michigan resident students know that there is no 7% rule and most will not apply knowing they will be ultimately rejected if they are not qualified. Texas fills its class automatically with a significant percentage of student who would never qualify to gain admittance to a school like Michigan. Texas really needs to get rid of that rule already. It’s so unfair that many excellent students from competitive high schools cannot gain admission to their state’s flagship school. If Texas would correct this measure, I honestly believe that they would rapidly become true peers of the other top elite public schools.
“However, Texas may be fulfilling the mission of a state university better than Michigan.”
Texas has plenty of state schools to fulfill their mission of educating their public, as does Michigan.
That is the Texas method of affirmative action. Kids from bad schools are not penalized for the quality of their school. Michigan takes a different, more merit based approach. Which fulfills the mission better is a matter of opinion because they are not the same.
Texas: To achieve excellence in the interrelated areas of undergraduate education, graduate education, research and public service, to preserve and promote the arts, benefit the state’s economy, serve the citizens through public programs and provides other public service and to transform lives for the benefit of society.
Michigan: To serve the people of Michigan and the world through preeminence in creating, communicating, preserving and applying knowledge, art, and academic values, and in developing leaders and citizens who will challenge the present and enrich the future.