In-State and Local HS Grads Are Getting the Shaft from at Least Two of Ohio’s State Colleges

This story by Mary Beth Marklein in USA Today on Wednesday deserves a lot more visibility, especially in Ohio:

BURLINGTON, Vt. — For Virginia native Max Wilson, getting into the University of Vermont, his top choice, practically was easier than driving up to start his freshman year. Not only was he accepted early, he was admitted into the honors college, which landed him in a brand-new dorm — “an awesome perk,” he says.

Compare that with Steve Connor, whose family lives just 45 miles or so from campus, in East Montpelier. With his solid grades and extracurriculars, everyone thought he was a shoo-in. Yet Connor was one of 92 Vermont applicants placed on a waiting list, a first for the university. Only after weeks of uncertainty did he finally learn he was admitted for the fall.

….. But for many here, the idea that out-of-state students were admitted while in-state students languished on a wait list did not sit well. “Remember Vermonters,” an editorial in The Burlington Free Press implored.

To Connor, 18, it seemed almost a betrayal. “We’ve always been told in high school that this is our university,” he says.

It seems that many state-supported universities don’t agree. The excuses are:

• Money (of course) — The schools haven’t been getting the blank-check increases in state aid they became accustomed to, and can often bring more to the bottom line with an out-of-state admission.
• Attracting new residents — This is the belief that many out-of-state students will stay in the state when they enter the workforce. I’m quite unconvinced of the validity of this argument.
• Geographic diversity — The article claims that “selection criteria tend to be tougher for non-residents, which means they can raise a school’s academic profile.”

Tell that to Ohio high school kids. BizzyBlog has heard more than enough anecdotes to believe that The Ohio State University (OSU) and The University of Cincinnati (UC), in pursuit of building or enhancing national reputations, have fundamentally changed their admissions criteria to the point where very deserving in-state students, especially residents of the respective metro areas, are either being turned down or shunted off to satellite campuses.

In Columbus, it is not unusual to hear stories of kids who are in the top quarter of their high school class with stellar participation in extracurricular activities applying to attend OSU (undergraduate enrollment: over 37,000) and planning to live on campus. Oh yeah, they’re admitted — to the smaller, limited-residence Newark campus 40 miles to the east. What an insult. I’m told that most end up going elsewhere.

Meanwhile, UC, in pursuit of the aforementioned geographic diversity, appears to have abandoned its practice, rooted in its origins as a municipal university, of ensuring that qualified students from the city and county who apply are admitted.

A third Ohio situation is brought up in the USA Today piece, where Miami University in Oxford is mentioned as being “among a growing number of schools offering scholarships to high-ability out-of-state students.” This wouldn’t be so troubling if I didn’t also have the impression (based on admittedly incomplete knowledge) that Miami is consciously trying to minimize its in-state enrollment in pursuit of out-of-staters.

You could argue that these universities should be free to do what they want, but, as long as they are state-supported institutions, I disagree. So do a lot of state legislatures. USAT notes that many of them are on top of this problem, mandating out-of-state enrollment limits and other measures designed to ensure that qualified high school grads from in-state families have the access to the state university system their parents have been paying for.

Sad to say, Ohio’s General Assembly appears to be less than on the ball in this area. At least two of Ohio’s colleges, and perhaps many others, have been allowed to implement practices that I believe most of Ohio’s taxpayers would object to if they were more widely known. Ohio’s newspapers appear to be totally oblivious to the issue. It needs to be addressed. I agree with Steve Connor, the Vermonter mentioned above in the USAT piece, when he says that “A public university’s first loyalty and first priority should be good, well-rounded in-state students.” If these schools really don’t want the “burden” of educating local and in-state talent, they should stop pretending, turn down their state aid, and convince the legislature to allow them to go private.