UM Free Tuition for In-State Kids Whose Families Make Less Than $65K
if both parents are working you need to be averaging less than $32,500/each which is fairly low
Median HOUSEHOLD income in the USA is ~$55,000
Yes, the average is about $74K and the median is about $55K.
They aren't the same thing.
You still have to get accepted into the University and there's nothing in this policy that indicates a reduction of standards for candidates from modest financial means.
Very cool.
Fact is, private universities are able to offer much better scholarships, so this will help level the playing field. Both of my kids auditioned for and were accepted into UM's music school in the early 2000s but the scholarship and financial aid packages just weren't competitive with ones from privates that they also applied to. And whereas race was the controversial basis for Affirmative Action back in the day, now this strategy by UM redefines the problem as one of economic class, independent of race, given the staggering cost of higher education at a desirable university like Michigan.
You're seriously bitching that the Univeristy of Michigan is catering to in-state Michigan students?
Unless you want Michigan to become a private school, there will ALWAYS be some catering to in-state students. That is just reality.
Yes, funding from the State of Michigan only represents roughly 15% of the University's revenues, which is much lower than it used to be. Let's be clear though. If 15% of the University's budget disappeared, we would all be pretty angry.
As long as Umich takes public money from the State of Michigan, it needs to favor in-state students. That's just a political reality, or else say goodby to 15% of the budget.
It was your choice to attend an out of state school and pay the inflated tuition costs. If you were admitted to Michigan, it's highly likely you would have been admitted to whatever in state program you had where you grew up (or other more reasonably priced programs across the country)
Take accountability for the financial decisions YOU made, state schools will always take care of in state students primarily, it happens everywhere.
As someone who went to Michigan as an in-state student but now lives out of state with 2 kids, I've already had this discussion with my wife. I told them I'd love for our kids to go to Michigan, but IMO the out-of-state tuition is just not worth it. My Michigan degree has been great to me, but there are other good schools out there.
If either of our kids can get into Michigan, they will also be able to get into local state schools, which are also very good. Yeah, they aren't MICHIGAN good (Top 50 compared to Michigan's Top 20-25 ranking), but the tuition will be about 25% of what Michigan's would be.
Now the flip side of that is, I'm paying for it. As long as my kids go in-state, I'll pick up the tab. If they want to figure out some way to pay their own way, then they can go out of state and pay a 200K-300K for their degree. I suspect they will choose the free in-state option. I guess we'll find out in 10+ years, assuming we don't move back to Michigan before then.
but come on this university does not run from state funds
How much do they pay in property taxes? Oh yeah, zero.
How much does that add up to over the last 200 years?
If you claim yourself as a dependent instead of letting a parent once you're 18... Are you the head of a family making less than $65k? Everyone would be able to get free tuition...
Dependency (for financial aid purposes) does not work that way.
http://finaid.umich.edu/current-undergraduates/dependency-status/
Have to remember the child still has to qualify for admission - that will likely still be a big stumbling block to get over, but it does incentivise those children whose parents make less to work harder in school to meet those requirements.
where if you have a pulse and reside in the state of Ohio, you're in?
A lot of the potential problems with this are discussed in this thread. No such thing as a universally great idea.
Still, I like this. Especially in Michigan, a state that has been losing population. Kids in Detroit will get this. So will kids in the burbs whose dad worked for Chrysler but got laid off and took up lower paying work somewhere else.
I hope they can work things out to make it equitable for people right at the cutoff there. $65k is a significant bump over what I make, but I can tell you that with four kids if I were making that kind of money I wouldn't be overflowing with cash.
There are always problems with income cut-offs like this, but workarounds often pop up. And this is a very positive development even if they don't. The saying (cliche?) that you can't let perfect be the enemy of good applies here. The people who will fall into the "just missed it" bucket will be exactly where they were before this program existed.
All of that said, I hope they switch to a sliding scale at some point. I do understand the frustration of being ineligible for something like this by just a bit. I'm in that category right now with respect to a student loan repayment program.
EDIT: There is a sliding scale. See Gulo Blue's post above.
The money Michigan gets from the State is small and shrinking. I think it is less than 20% and maybe even in single digits now.
Direct money - yes.
...but this ignores the lack of payments to the state (see - no property taxes) and capital investments over 200 years.
I'd like to see them work on their internal cost structure more since that would benefit everyone. In-state tuition is going up 2.9% (~$400), out-of-state is going up 4.5% (~$2,050). Is that where the "free" tuition is coming from?
When I went to Michigan in the early-mid 80's, tuition was $1,364 per year for 12-18 credits for a Freshman or Sophmore in LS&A. By the time I graduated in the school of Engineering, tuition was $2,628 for Juniors and Seniors. Add in about $100 per year in fees. Textbooks were probably $200 - $300 per year.
Today, tuition for Freshman/Sophmores is $14,402 and for Juniors/Seniors is $16,218. That's a 10X increase in in-state tuition for entering Freshmen. In that same time, median household income is up only about 2.5X.
I have alum friends who are sending their out-of-state kids and paying the $45K/year Freshman tuition and while I'm happy their kids get a chance to experience Michigan, that's a quarter million dollar education by the time they're done.
There is no acceptable explanation for the disproportionate increase in tuition vs. inflation/median incomes/consumer price index, etc. It really is incredible that as a society we continue to feed the pig that is "higher education" and continue to support the soaring costs of college education. UM is mostly an exception (yet we all know somebody crippled by student loans) because it's such a competitive school and largely churns out grads ready to succeed in their field, but as a whole higher education has become a giant bubble of indentured servitude.
Love Mike Rowe's take on it all....On the Macro level, he's not wrong.
“We are lending money we don’t have to kids who can’t pay it back to train them for jobs that no longer exist. That’s nuts.”
AND
“That’s not me saying don’t go to college. I’m saying, to start your life [$150,000] in the hole, [$80,000] in the hole with your art history major…that’s why you’ve got a trillion dollars in debt. These kids can’t find a job that they’ve been trained for, and the expectation is, it should be waiting for me. It ain’t.”
Eh... I'd argue the problem is the slope of the income line, not the slope of the tuition line.
1) It's going up. Meaning that even adjusted for inflation, incomes are rising.
2) There is no fucking way income could ever chase tuition rates that far, that high, and that fast.
3) Income is not nearly as controllable as college tuition, and when you try, you generate inflation, thus depressing the income slope anyway. College tuition is a far more controllable variable, which given the difficulty in controlling tuition, should tell you something about trying to control the income slope.
1) Median incomes have been relatively flat since the 1970s. The small upward blip you see there in incomes is mostly attributable to gains among the top 5%.
2) Top 5% incomes almost mirror that curve
3) I agree - but both are a problem. Rising tuition and 40 years of stagnant wages.
That right there is median income. It's clearly been going upward. Not quickly, of course, but you would never see a rapid rise in median income relative to inflation, because a rapid rise in real income is almost always followed by inflation. You can't raise the median income by only raising the incomes above the median, it's impossible.
Assuming if you are upper class and/or the new out of state/in state tuition doesn't shock you, this isn't big news.
UM is following what all the top private schools are already doing and philosophically is the right thing to do, as a part of revamping the whole screwed up educational system.
The continuing reality is that the ability to get into and afford top schools for white males whose parents are married and bust their butts to makes end meet just got even tougher.
The cost for those over $65k/year just went up (somebody has to pay for this), admissions got tougher (more applicants) and the diversity pressures across many parameters is increasing.
This is just the new world we live in.
If I'm not mistaken the marital status of your parents doesn't matter, you have to combine their income regardless. But your point is still valid, this definitely makes it harder for your middle class white student to get into & afford a top school. Right or wrong, I'm not sure that many people see that as a problem though...
it is best for a student of a divorced parent to live with the parent who has less resources a majority of the year for FAFSA purposes. If the separated/divorced parents live together then it makes no difference.
A student can also benefit from FAFSA by getting married and becoming "independant" from their parent's resources.
that this was a thing 20 years ago. I know what I would have done differently. Good by the university to take this inititive. Let's see how it works out over the next 5 years.
I would have qualified for this for my entire time in school and the amount of money that would have saved me is easily the difference between putting down for a house somewhere in the area within a couple years of entering the workforce versus still living in the cheapest apartment I can find as I am right now.
Was supported by my single mother who was an elementary teacher while I went to Michigan.
Damn. Born about a decade too early.
Sounds like a great gesture by the University. Wish they had something like that when my kids went through. My rear end is still hurting from that expense.
For someone who is out of state, what is a year's tuition, currently? Just classes, no room/board, books, etc.
Also, I like that more and more Universities are doing this and states like New York, where I live. Yes, someone has to pay for it but if I have to pay an extra few hundred in taxes a year to make help it happen, then I think it's worth it.
In-state undergraduate tuition will increase by 2.9% to $14,826 for the most common lower-division rate. Comparable tuition for out-of-state undergraduates will be $47,476, an increase of 4.5%. Tuition for most graduate programs will increase by 4.1%.
YESSSSS. I love this. But the key is getting those kids enrolled. Stanford and some Ivies do something similar but the thing is they have very few low-income students at the school.
I would love to see Michigan take a major step forward and be one of the first to just offer free tuition to the entire student body. I think the university (+ with the state's help) could absolutely afford it. And I would actually donate to the university in that case and I think the alums would really respond. I have a strong appreciation for my U of M degree but I would truly love it if they did this (and I didn't have so much debt - I'll get negged for that last comment but I don't care).
The state has been aggresively CUTTING funding for a long time now. Don't look for the state government to be helping Michigan to do much of anything.
Michigan gets a TON of their money from tuition. There is no feasable way they could go tuition free without massive massive massive amounts of money from the government, both state and federal. And right now both of those governments are talking about CUTTING revenue, not raising it.
Endowment has gone up 3 billion in the last 5 years.... I think they could find a way without the state's help
What does Michigan have? 40K students? If you assume half are in-state, that is yearly tuition of over a billion dollars. You can't just cut a billion dollars in revenue and expect things to keep running smoothly.
I meant that the state should make it a higher priority because the university is an incredible resource. And the state of Michigan typically ranks at the bottom in funding for public education. They should treat it as an investment, something they can put money into to attract capital and talented students/employees to the state.
You can also attach caveats to it: students agree to give 15-20% of their annual income to the university for ten years after they graduate. Or out of students will get free tuition if they agree to live in the state for 5 years after they graduate, things like that.
I don't know why U of M costs so much but I would bet there's a good deal of waste and bloated costs involved. And I bet those would come down if the university actually had to tighten up rather than just raising tuition fees.
And look at that juicy endowment, which is just sitting there, never used for anything. I would even like to see the university start by just giving each kid one year of free tuition. That makes a huge difference.
I have no plans to ever donate to the university. But if the university did something like this, or just made a significant attempt to tackle the nation's exploding college cost problem, I would reconsider that stance. Let's be the leaders and best!
50% are from $300,000+/year families creating a very strange mix. You can't have "free tuition" (and they also do free room and board) without the upper income people not only paying near full boat costs but also many of them contributing to their endowment funds.
At UM, only 25% of the families are at $250,000 + and actually about that same 15% of families in that lower income.