Minnesota state universities' reciprocity agreements (Woodbury, Dakota: 2014, school, costs)

[Yvanung]

I knew Minnesota had reciprocity agreements with a number of neighboring jurisdictions, allowing its residents to pay in-state tuition at Minnesota state universities (pending exceptions) even though they are not Minnesota residents for tuition purposes:

• Manitoba
• North Dakota
• South Dakota
• Wisconsin

Now, I understand Minnesota did not sign a reciprocity agreement with Ontario because Ontario's population is concentrated hundreds of miles east from Minnesota (IIRC not even MI or NY signed a state-wide one with Ontario; Wayne State has one but it does not extend to all of Michigan public universities) but is there a reason why Iowa did not sign one such agreement?

[Ghengis]

Originally Posted by Yvanung

I knew Minnesota had reciprocity agreements with a number of neighboring jurisdictions, allowing its residents to pay in-state tuition at Minnesota state universities (pending exceptions) even though they are not Minnesota residents for tuition purposes:

• Manitoba
• North Dakota
• South Dakota
• Wisconsin

Now, I understand Minnesota did not sign a reciprocity agreement with Ontario because Ontario's population is concentrated hundreds of miles east from Minnesota (IIRC not even MI or NY signed a state-wide one with Ontario; Wayne State has one but it does not extend to all of Michigan public universities) but is there a reason why Iowa did not sign one such agreement?

I think the idea was to have these agreements with places that actually have "real" colleges

[Yvanung]

I also knew that the Twin Cities exurbs spanned a bit into northwestern Wisconsin however, so that could explain why Wisconsin even had an interest in signing a reciprocity agreement.

[WoodburyWoody]

My best guess would be that Iowa is a lower-population state but with two large Regents universities (Iowa State and U of Iowa) which already attract lots of out-of-state students already willing to pay out-of-state tuition and the third Regents university (Northern Iowa) which attracts so few that agreeing to reciprocity with Minnesota would cost ISU and UofI money while making no real difference at UNI.

Again, just a guess, but where there is money, follow it.

[pepe1]

To answer your question, you must first recognize that in-state tuition fees are not sufficient to cover the costs of operating a college or university. For every in-state resident who pays tuition, the state must pay a subsidy to offset the remainder of the cost of operation. Every state subsidizes their state colleges and universities to different levels - some states require students to bear a greater percentage of the cost of operating the school while other states pay a higher subsidy which require the student to bear less of the cost.


Tuition reciprocal agreements generally assume that the two states which enter the agreement will receive a economic benefit roughly equal to the costs incurred. To put that another way, it is assumed that the cost of out-of-state students accepted into a state is roughly equal to the benefit of in-state students who opt to enroll in the neighboring state (there are other reasons to have a tuition reciprocity agreement, such as when a particular region is underserved by in-state resources, but this point is irrelevant to the particular question you are asking).


In the case of Iowa, the Board of Regents believes that there would be a disproportionate number of out-of-state students relative to the number of in-state students who would take advantage of the reciprocal agreement - resulting in a negative economic impact to the State of Iowa.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by pepe1

To answer your question, you must first recognize that in-state tuition fees are not sufficient to cover the costs of operating a college or university. For every in-state resident who pays tuition, the state must pay a subsidy to offset the remainder of the cost of operation. Every state subsidizes their state colleges and universities to different levels - some states require students to bear a greater percentage of the cost of operating the school while other states pay a higher subsidy which require the student to bear less of the cost.


Tuition reciprocal agreements generally assume that the two states which enter the agreement will receive a economic benefit roughly equal to the costs incurred. To put that another way, it is assumed that the cost of out-of-state students accepted into a state is roughly equal to the benefit of in-state students who opt to enroll in the neighboring state (there are other reasons to have a tuition reciprocity agreement, such as when a particular region is underserved by in-state resources, but this point is irrelevant to the particular question you are asking).


In the case of Iowa, the Board of Regents believes that there would be a disproportionate number of out-of-state students relative to the number of in-state students who would take advantage of the reciprocal agreement - resulting in a negative economic impact to the State of Iowa.

Is this position of the Iowa Board of Regents a matter of public record or are you speculating? I ask because perhaps there is no agreement because Minnesota took the position you ascribe to Iowa. Thanks for an clarification.

[TimtheGuy]

Originally Posted by Yvanung

I knew Minnesota had reciprocity agreements with a number of neighboring jurisdictions, allowing its residents to pay in-state tuition at Minnesota state universities (pending exceptions) even though they are not Minnesota residents for tuition purposes:

• Manitoba
• North Dakota
• South Dakota
• Wisconsin

Now, I understand Minnesota did not sign a reciprocity agreement with Ontario because Ontario's population is concentrated hundreds of miles east from Minnesota (IIRC not even MI or NY signed a state-wide one with Ontario; Wayne State has one but it does not extend to all of Michigan public universities) but is there a reason why Iowa did not sign one such agreement?

because we drop too many Iowa jokes!

[Tipsy McStagger]

Originally Posted by WoodburyWoody

My best guess would be that Iowa is a lower-population state but with two large Regents universities (Iowa State and U of Iowa) which already attract lots of out-of-state students already willing to pay out-of-state tuition and the third Regents university (Northern Iowa) which attracts so few that agreeing to reciprocity with Minnesota would cost ISU and UofI money while making no real difference at UNI.

Again, just a guess, but where there is money, follow it.

This is precisely it. ISU and Iowa combined are approximately the same enrollment and scope as the UM and UW systems but in a state with around half the population of either. Iowa, as an example, has averaged somewhere between a fifth and a quarter of undergrads coming from the Chicago area alone and ISU attracts out of state engineering and ag students. Iowa also keeps their in state tuition rates much lower than MN or Wisky, which also gives them the ability to admit larger numbers of eligible residents. Iowa's acceptance rate is around 80% while UW is mid 60s and UM is about 45%.

Iowa and ISU also rely much more heavily on expensive out of state tuition. Figures from 2014-15.

In state tuition rates:
Iowa - $8k
UW - $10.5k
UM - $13.5k

Out of state:
Iowa - $27.5k
UW - $26.5k
UM - $21k

[kuan]

Originally Posted by Ghengis

I think the idea was to have these agreements with places that actually have "real" colleges

Doesn't explain the Dakotas though.