You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 5:01 p.m.

University of Michigan raises tuition 2.8 percent for in-state undergraduates

By Kellie Woodhouse

University of Michigan resident undergraduates next year will experience their second-lowest tuition increase in a decade.


University of Michigan Provost Phil Hanlon

The Ann Arbor school will raise resident undergraduate tuition and fees 2.8 percent next year, bringing the tab to nearly $13,000 for most freshmen and sophomores. The hike adds an additional $360 per year for most students.

However, resident tuition at the Stephen M. Ross School of Business will increase 4.7 percent for underclassmen and 6.2 percent for upperclassmen.

Tuition for non-residents will also increase, rising by 3.5 percent and reaching $39,122. The hike adds an additional $1,340 per year for must out-of-state students.

University Provost Phil Hanlon said that in an effort to increase diversity on campus, money raised by the increase will go directly to need-based aid for non-resident students.

"We’ve been increasingly concerned about the socioeconomic diversity of our non-resident students," Hanlon said.

Tuition for graduate students will increase an average of 3 percent.

Overall, the university expects tuition and fees to generate $1.16 billion in revenue.

The increase passed in a 5-3 vote by the Board of Regents Thursday. Board chair Denise Iitch, Laurence B. Deitch and Andrea Newman voted against the tuition increase.

“There’s one thing that remains consistent on this topic and that is that tuition continues to skyrocket and the burden on our students gets to be brutal,” Ilitch said. “At the end of the day, Michigan students continue to have to pay a constant premium to receive a Michigan education.”

On-campus housing rates will increase 3 percent, bringing the total to $9,752 for a year. Two percent of the increase, which amounts in total to $284 per student in a standard double, will go toward ongoing residence hall renovations.

Resident tuition has increased 63 percent in 10 years. In 2003-04, tuition and fees were $7,975 for lower-division residents. Next year, they'll be $12,994.

The 2.8 percent increase is second only to a 1.5 percent increase two years ago. Last year's increase was 6.7 percent. The largest increase in the past decade was 12.34 percent in 2005-06.

Meanwhile, the school's general fund will grow by $62.1 million, reaching a record high of $1.65 billion.

University-backed financial aid also is at an all-time high, increasing to $144.8 million.

U-M officials calculate that over the course of 11 years, state appropriations to the school have decreased by $178 million, after adjusting for inflation.

In the early 1990s, tuition and state appropriations contributed equal portions to the school's budget. Today, tuition accounts for roughly 70 percent of the budget, whereas state funds contribute 17 percent.

As tuition increases, so does the school's financial aid awards. Since 2007-2008, U-M backed financial aid has increased 46.1 percent and is projected at $144.8 million. Aid goes mostly to students from low- and moderate-income families.

“Resident students with financial need will pay less to attend their university than their peers did eight years ago,” U-M President Mary Sue Coleman said.

That's not true for mid- to low-income non-resident students, who have incurred price increases.

“(With) Non-residents’ (tution), we’ve got a long ways to go,” said Regent Julia Darlow.

Kellie Woodhouse covers higher education for Reach her at or 734-623-4602 and follow her on twitter.



Thu, Jun 27, 2013 : 3:23 a.m.

The rising cost of degrees is a problem. I think the university presidents and administrators are not understanding this view. It is time to accept that the cost of degree is at not normal price but simply inflated price. Every year there is a 1 to 3 percent increase. If this is the way to go, I think in 20 to 30 years from now these same degrees would be costing more than US$ 1 million or more. It is no wonder why USA has US$ 1trillion and more in student debt. A similar top education in China and India costs less than 1/4th of the tuition charged at UM-Ann Arbor. I am sure China and India will be richest countries in the world soon.


Sun, Jun 24, 2012 : 4:36 a.m.

Those nurses and other public employees keep getting raises and taxpayers pay for it while their children are priced out of an education. I guess public employees are just better than the rest of the citizens who pay their salaries.


Fri, Jun 22, 2012 : 10:52 a.m.

The reason the University exists is to teach MI students, that is what the state tax money is supposed to go for and why it was created. Between the massive (some of the highest in the United States) salaries for administrators and trying to force diversity to make some feel warm and fuzzy, the direction of this school is going way off course. It is not supposed to be life support for administrators and professors and a source of correcting social wrongs, it is supposed to be about teaching MI kids. Someone needs to give the people running things for this university a reality check bigtime.


Fri, Jun 22, 2012 : 12:50 a.m.

Nice if mom and dad work hard let them pay for their kid plus pay for mom and dads who lay around doing nothing kid. This is what is wrong with this country. Work hard and get punished. Be a slacker and get a freeibe.


Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 10:21 p.m.

This does not surprise me at all. UofM regents et al are totally out of touch with reality, the economy and the tough times many of us are facing. Reminds me of our mayor, most of city council and our city leaders.


Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 9:40 p.m.

This is a complicated issue, and the headline numebrs don't tell it all. First, in-state tuition plus state appropriations do not cover the cost of educating those students; currently they are subsidized by out-of state students to the tune of roughly $1000 per in-state student, or each out-of state student is paying a premium of about $2000 above the real costs. This seems unsustainable, and anything that's unsustainable will not be sustained in the long run. Yet I haven't heard any good plans for how to fix this situation. Side note: the admission standards are stricter for out-of state, UM is not trying to milk a cash cow by admitting less qualified, but wealthy out-of state students. Second, the financial aid piece. Any in-state student who meets admissions standards and cannot affor it, will receive financial aid at a level that should enable him or her to attend. This is not true for out-of state students. This imbalance is something the new budget proposal seeks to remedy. Finally, cost control: UM is doing a lot in this arena, mostly behind the scenes. Increasing the the teeth-to tail ratio, that is putting money into academic programs while cutting overhead. Unfortunately, there are opposing demands, like increased reporting and compliance requirements (stem cell reporting to the state as a case in point) that cost money, but among elite public universites, UM is among the leaders and consistently ranks near the top for value in higher education.


Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 9:38 p.m.

Seriously, UofM? You're telling me that I have to pay more tuition so that I can fund others to go to UofM...while I work my (rear end) off and can barely afford to keep myself in school!?!?!? I'm really getting sick of UofM's entitlement attitude.

Silly Sally

Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 9:24 p.m.

He, HEY! Ho, HO, Mary Sue Coleman has got to GO!!! (and some regents, too!)


Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 11:05 p.m.

I think this comment says it all. No attempt to discuss a complex issue involving budget, the mission of the University with respect to its various constituents, like studnets, the people of Michigan, etc. Just spewing bile is a terrific substitute.

Silly Sally

Thu, Jun 21, 2012 : 9:22 p.m.

I sure dislike how most of these dishonest regents and Mary Sue Coleman confuse the tuition increase by having it hide behind financial aid and shch. Then, they are charging some students more so they can lower the costs to others, for "diversity" sake. WHy not keep the costs low by prudent spending. How much of the tuition increase is to be used to pay for Mary Sue's legal fees for the kiddy porn case? Far too much for my liking. Imaging that, taxing students so she can live hig-on-the-hog and have her legal fees paid for doing a poor job of supervision. I'd have been fired ar at least demoted or not given a pay increase. But I work in the private sector, not eating from the public trough.