this is a local post! shocking.
Apr. 4th, 2011 11:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bedlamsbardOh my god, just reading this is making me shudder in horror and be really, really glad that I'm not going through the undergrad admissions process right now. I mean, I didn't apply to the University of Washington at all when I was applying for university because I really wanted to go out of state, but that's mostly because I knew in the fall that I'd already gotten into Tulane and didn't have to line up the UW as a safety school.
(Quick overview, for those that don't want to read the article: The Univesity of Washington-Seattle cut in-state admissions in favor of taking more out-of-state students, the majority of whom have lower grades than the in-state students (although the article says they have higher SAT scores and went to harder schools, which, what, is this a critique of the higher education system or the secondary education system in Washington?), because out-of-state students have to pay higher tuition than in-state students. This is really fucking over a lot of Washington high school seniors, especially the Seattle area locals. The state schools in Washington have been taking a lot of hard hits budget-wise over the past couple years, which is one reason I'm really glad I'm not at a public university. I may have to pay more, but I don't have to worry about waking up one morning to find out that my major's been cut. (As has happened at a couple of state schools I know of. I think WSU or UW may have cut their anthro program? And CWU lumped a bunch of majors together to cut costs.)
I think my favorite part of that article is at the end, where they're worrying about how many Washington students are going out-of-state for university and how they'd prefer to keep them in-state to build Washington's higher education system. Yeah, you're doing real well at that, policy-makers in Olympia!)
Isn't that what a state school is for? To take, you know, IN-STATE STUDENTS? I understand the thought process and the logic behind the decision they made, but I have to admit that that seems really fucked up.
I'm not even going to get into another part of the article, where they're talking about raising tuition for certain degrees. You know, because engineering majors take more expensive classes! And they'll make more money when they graduate! As compared to history majors, you know, they won't achieve anything so they shouldn't have to pay as much. The value judgment there pisses me off. (Do other schools in the U.S. do that? Charge more for certain degrees? And, you know, most students don't figure out for a year or more what they're even going to major in, what about that, huh?)
I hope this isn't supposed to affect graduate school admissions, which is what I'll be dealing with this fall. This sort of thing is why I'm a lot antsier about going to a public university than I am a private one, costs or not. (And the good thing about Tulane is that we already hit rock-bottom five years ago; we can only go up from here! That's why we are actually adding things on instead of cutting them, since all the cuts happened after Katrina. You know, now I'm finally used to using my name in the third person to refer to something not me.)
(Quick overview, for those that don't want to read the article: The Univesity of Washington-Seattle cut in-state admissions in favor of taking more out-of-state students, the majority of whom have lower grades than the in-state students (although the article says they have higher SAT scores and went to harder schools, which, what, is this a critique of the higher education system or the secondary education system in Washington?), because out-of-state students have to pay higher tuition than in-state students. This is really fucking over a lot of Washington high school seniors, especially the Seattle area locals. The state schools in Washington have been taking a lot of hard hits budget-wise over the past couple years, which is one reason I'm really glad I'm not at a public university. I may have to pay more, but I don't have to worry about waking up one morning to find out that my major's been cut. (As has happened at a couple of state schools I know of. I think WSU or UW may have cut their anthro program? And CWU lumped a bunch of majors together to cut costs.)
I think my favorite part of that article is at the end, where they're worrying about how many Washington students are going out-of-state for university and how they'd prefer to keep them in-state to build Washington's higher education system. Yeah, you're doing real well at that, policy-makers in Olympia!)
Isn't that what a state school is for? To take, you know, IN-STATE STUDENTS? I understand the thought process and the logic behind the decision they made, but I have to admit that that seems really fucked up.
I'm not even going to get into another part of the article, where they're talking about raising tuition for certain degrees. You know, because engineering majors take more expensive classes! And they'll make more money when they graduate! As compared to history majors, you know, they won't achieve anything so they shouldn't have to pay as much. The value judgment there pisses me off. (Do other schools in the U.S. do that? Charge more for certain degrees? And, you know, most students don't figure out for a year or more what they're even going to major in, what about that, huh?)
I hope this isn't supposed to affect graduate school admissions, which is what I'll be dealing with this fall. This sort of thing is why I'm a lot antsier about going to a public university than I am a private one, costs or not. (And the good thing about Tulane is that we already hit rock-bottom five years ago; we can only go up from here! That's why we are actually adding things on instead of cutting them, since all the cuts happened after Katrina. You know, now I'm finally used to using my name in the third person to refer to something not me.)
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 05:54 pm (UTC)My university does this at the graduate/professional level — it costs more to get a JD or an MBA than a graduate degree in education or the humanities, for example. Undergraduates pay a flat tuition rate regardless of major, although there are extra fees (e.g., lab fees) associated with some courses.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 07:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 07:03 pm (UTC)The thing about graduate admissions at state schools is that the best programs are at the flagship campuses, which will if they must (as my state university campus is doing) go outside the state funding system to keep the illustrious programs and departments operating. And said programs and departments guarantee grad students their funding. It's the non-flagship campuses and the smaller programs and departments where state funding situations are going to come into play and make things dicey. At least, that's my read after nearly a year of being a grad student at a state school where the budget cuts to the system just keep piling up.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 07:19 pm (UTC)I feel like it's not going to matter as much for grad because it's more operated by the department, but still...I think the UW does have different charges for in-state and out-of-state? Eh, I don't know, they haven't said anything about grad. *flaps hands*
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 07:32 pm (UTC)Actually, I find that a lot of the more brilliant humanities people I know have had a deep fascination with science at one point or another--and that goes vice versa for the science people I know too.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 07:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-04 10:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-04-05 12:54 am (UTC)