U tuition should be fairer for residents

  • Article by: BOB BARRETT
  • Updated: January 8, 2013 - 7:54 PM

Other universities provide a much greater incentive to stay in one's home state.

  • 36
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
endothermJan. 8, 13 8:37 PM

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that out-of-state students (who still pay thousands more) are subsidizing tuition for in-state students? Without their extra contributions, tuition would rise even higher for residents. I'm not opposed to the idea of charging out-of-state students more while charging in-state students less, but I am sure that the university has carefully analyzed the numbers when deciding how much they can charge in their particular market. There is also the matter of the tuition reciprocity agreement between Minnesota and Wisconsin. Last year about 15% of the students at the U of M were from Wisconsin (and paying reduced rates) while only around 9% of the students at UW Madison were from Minnesota.

jimmybeeJan. 8, 13 9:31 PM

For many degree programs, Engineering being the one our son graduated from. We found that North Dakota State was a great school and a much better bang for the buck. It was more than $4000 cheaper per year and there was much more accessibility to the professors than the U based on what we heard from some of his friends who attended there.

erikj3Jan. 8, 1311:16 PM

There is no reason why the tuition of a public university should be $13,000. Unfortunately, at the U it seems like they care more about hiring administrators than they do about providing a decent education to kids at a fair price. I think it's long past time for some serious changes at the U.

colorado1111Jan. 9, 1312:18 AM

My U of M college graduate offspring benefitted from the lower college tuition offered to out of state students, got a fabulous education at the U while attending the family's alma mater, and has taken a job in Minneapolis that will contribute to the economy and pay taxes to the state of Minnesota. This seems like a win all around.

gofurnuttJan. 9, 1312:25 AM

Well, Nebraska Finaleeee Does Something Right!!! $6,980 For In State Residents....

aladdinsaneJan. 9, 1312:32 AM

@endotherm. It depends on the cost of educating a student. When I attended the U, my quarterly bill always included a statement that X% of the cost of my education was covered by the state (through taxes). I'm not sure what the cost of educating a U student in 2012-13 is, but it may be that non-residents are simply paying at cost rather than above cost. Whatever the case, the lower tuition for non-residents was a Bruininks administration policy enacted in 2008 (non-resident tuition roughly matched Wisconsin and Iowa before 2008) to entice better caliber students and improve the U's US News rank. If you check the past few years' rankings you'll see all of Bru's various rank-chasing policies have failed.

tmrichardsonJan. 9, 13 2:29 AM

The only accurate way to look at this is to look at actual cost of attendance for the average student, factoring in any financial aid they receive. Unfortunately I believe if you do this the U of MN still stands out in it's high rate of cost for MN residents. They offer very little aid to some very good students in comparison with surrounding states, the net effect of which is that many excellent students--A average students with strong high school curriculum background--many have college credits under their belt already--find the bottom line cost to attend the U of MN to be HIGHER than going to nearby states and attending as a non-resident. When it comes down to it, the cost to attend the U of MN is just too high, so much so that it's not competitive. The legislature has a role in this high cost of attendance--they have not kept pace with the amount nearby states provide per student in state aid--so the author here might want to look in the mirror at himself.

elmore1Jan. 9, 13 7:15 AM

The other thing that should be reviewed is where does the tuition go. What other programs are students subsidizing (minority scholorships, research, etc)? The U should disclose where the money is being spent to give students a clear understanding as they choose a school.

odinmanJan. 9, 13 8:33 AM

My son was accepted at the U and a few other in and out of state schools. He was seriously considering the U, but in trying to justify the tuition costs, he ultimately decided to attend the University of North Dakota as it has a very good reputation and was considerably cheaper than the U. We do not regret that decision at all. The U better get with it if it wants to remain competitive.

penzskiJan. 9, 1310:23 AM

Currently attending an out of state school, I find this argument very frustrating. For me the University of Minnesota always seemed so big and too close to home. I see the tuition costs at the UofM the way it should be for out of state students. Where I go I love the education but paying twice in state students when a mere 10-15% of the budget comes from the state seems out of whack and wrong, which is exactly what the representative is suggesting. I suggest the out of state students should pay differently based on how much of the school's budget comes from the state.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters