HOw are job placement rates at Stevens “way over 100%”???
Agree…
How can this be true?
I’m guessing you mean that many students had more than one job offer. But frankly…if every student takes one job, that is 100% job placement. You can’t get more than that.
Yes that’s what it meant. In one of the official presentation from the school to a private group i attended, it had something like 125%. However you interpreted it, you get the idea. And some kids did have more than 1 gigs going on at the same time.
^ Strange way to compute job placement rates. By that logic two kids, one with two jobs and the other with none = 100% job placement!
Need aware schools already practice enrollment management, as they call it by strategically accepting those who need financial aid so that the budget is met. 5 kids with full need met of about $10k apiece is a better deal for these schools than accepting a kid that needs $50k
Seems to me that by giving out fin aid to families making that level of income means fewer full need kids getting accepted
No point in speculating or relying on anecdotes when both schools have career surveys that include by-major breakdowns:
https://www.stevens.edu/directory/stevens-career-center/career-outcomes
https://career.berkeley.edu/Survey/Survey
It is possible to compute a placement rate of over 100% if one counts multiple offers to one person. Stevens however, as most schools, does not play this type of game in its outcomes reporting. In the official placement report, the highest reported number is 100%.
Back to OP premise - many might suspect with an income of $250k you don’t need aid. My situation is similar. I do not make $250k, but do make enough that my DS will not qualify for ‘need based’ aid at a public school. I live in California. One of my DS was accepted to UC Irvine. The COA is roughly $30k for in state. Even with an EFC under the $30k, my son was offered no aid.
I have one DS at Notre Dame. They offer some need based aid to families with income up to $250k. I am sure other private institutions, Stanford comes to mind, have similar higher ceilings for aid. With so many schools MSRP at $70k, can a family afford to spend almost 30% of their income on the kids education?
With two kids in college, especially with both in private colleges with high COAs, and good financial aid, it’s very possible, even probable that a family gets financial aid with family income at the $250k level.
In fact, colleges are recognizing that this demographic is one that should be offered aid, if students from such families are going to be able to attend private colleges. Several highly selective schools are starting initiatives targeting this population, expressedky saying that aid is possible, probable.
I thought these events would happen a lot sooner and at a much lower price point. The cost of college, specifically going away to college has ride astronomically. I never truly believed we’d reach $89k sticker prices, and some COAs exceed that now.
That there are fewer college added kids, that costs of retirement, particularly health care are so high, that our generation that has lived well want to continue to do so independently, means that college costs need to be scrutinized and considered. Hopefully, the large loan horror stories are having some impact.
Our generation has lived too well. Many have not saved for retirement, nor for college, but have instead grown accustomed to an unssustainable lifestyle. Even without helping their children attend college, many will remain working into their 70’s and 80’s, possibly never enjoying retirement.
Depending on where you live and how you have been able to save, and given the way tuition has gone up, Union’s move is smart. It also matches what many other private schools have done. (And most that have done it are working hard to make sure applicants know about it.)
Many schools have found that they have FP students and ones who need lots of FA but the distribution is increasingly missing the group in between.
I hardly consider Union a “lesser” school. Lesser known, maybe. But a student can get a great education there. I would not have been at all upset if my kid had ended up there.
Our parents’ generation have many who worked, still working out of financial necessity. I see it all of the time. Also, many working because they do not want to retire.
I think the upcoming generation, the Millennials, our kids, are supposed to be the first in this country that are not going to do as well as their parents. That’s a legacy we are leaving them. Overall, we’ve done well, comparatively for our own selves. Not so much for our children. Speaking collectively, that is.
I know plenty who are working for the social exposure, and several seniors who are doing so to make ends meet, but not to level I expect in the next 20 years. I saw it with my oldest daughter’s classmates’ families, and I’m seeing it again 7 years later with my youngest. I also see it with a significant percentage of clients when filing their taxes. They are geniunely surprised that a family earning $100,000 would be expected to come up with $15-20,000 each year. They’ve refinanced their homes several times, so still have $150,000 or more in mortgage debt, are only finding their 401k to the amount their companies match (which is almost nothing), and some are liquidating their retirement accounts for various reasons… And they don’t want to limit their kids’ college choices, so they don’t encourage them to apply where they’ll get large merit awards (or their kids aren’t quite good enough to qualify), nor will they suggest they commute to a community college or directional state college. There are certainly some who do, but most seem to do so because their kids didn’t get into the flagship or they themselves went to the directionals. Many of these families are not going to be able to afford to retire, and somehow think they will live off of social security. I suspect my children will be fine because they will save too - Oldest is paying her car off (purchased used from Hertz, with credit union loan) as quickly as she can and is contributing to 401k at full rate while living at home. She’s limiting her spending so she won’t have to cut spending and impact her lifestyle once she has to pay rent (if she was, we’d charge rent and save it for her security deposit and first/last). But I suspect you’re right, collectively our kids are not going to do well.
I think that if one decided to have children, in theory, they should be thinking about education cost from when the child was born. Meaning to start saving for college much earlier, and after 18 years they should have something. No one expects a family with an income of say, 100K or even 250K, to pay for college out of their regular paychecks. It’s hard for have an extra 20K - 70K per year sitting around just to pay for college, even with high income.
I also understand that not everyone can start saving if they didn’t make enough money to begin with. I am just saying the threshold the schools give out as to what income is qualified for FA, it’s probably based on the idea that the family has some saving for college, not that they have extra tens of thousands of dollars sitting around and therefore can “afford” it.
I don’t know if I believe this. I heard this before, but I’ve also heard it the other way around. The idea that millennials are spenders not savers, that they change jobs so often, that they are worse off than their parents, etc…I read some articles that this isn’t the case. But we don’t have data to know which is true, or truer? I just don’t know.
There are many families I know who will not have enough money to pay the top college COA costs when they make $250k a year.
The main reason for this is that people don’t live for paying for kids’ colleges alone. As you move up the income ladder, as you have children, you look for a good school district, a nice house, something not too onerous in the way of a commute. I know for us, and our many children, and grandparents that were on the edge of need, a large comfortable house, easy access to work, school district, Ans it tues for kids, safety, type of neighborhood were all high consideration factors. A lot of income and assets put towards this. Most people do not halve or otherwise reduce their income in making these life style choices. In fact, they tend to skirt towards the boundaries as everyday quality of life is very important.
Saving for retirement so that current lifestyle doesn’t take a huge nosedive is also very important
So, yes, I can see how families i. High income ranges feel they cannot afford to pay over $300k for college. Most CAN. Are able to do so. But it is often not a wise financial move to make. Or quality of life move for others still living at home.
For such families, it is galling that they have to reduce current and future standard of living to give their kids opportunities at certain schools whereas those who are low income can get this coveted at such schools through financial aid.
There is often the disconnect of the fact that if they were paying for private boarding school k-12, the costs of that would also be very high. But they are getting that as “freebie” part of living in their area (whether you use or not, have kids or not) in the way of public schools.
It is unfair to students whose parents won’t pay for these top schools and they are well qualified candidates. The sole reason that their parents are deemed able to pay but won’t, makes it impossible for those kids to get financial aid when it’s not something under their control and they are considered adults for most all others financial transactions. Even at 21 , your o finances count unless you meet certain conditions. Fin aid is based on parents ability to pay till age 24. Nice rule there for colleges. No idea how they are able to make this stipulation, but they can.
I think (or actually know) it’s completely possible not to be able to swing full pay at 250K income.
At 250K, in our metro , take home pay would be at about 158K
The Family Budget Calculator for the Economic Policy Institute estimates a baseline modest standard of living for a family of 4 in our metro as almost 100K per year. The housing allowance on that budget allows just over $1000 a month. That is a modest 2 bedroom apartment in a dicey area at best or you’re driving 90+ minutes.
Add 10K to housing for a 3 bedroom <2000 sq ft house at less than a 30 minute commute. Add 10K to employer supplied health insurance that is ever decreasing. Add 10K over on the taxes because your property taxes are above average on a modest 3 bedroom home in a safe community with decent schools/associated insurance/etc. Add in say 5K kid’s extracurriculars. Add 3K because your kid has food allergies and your food shopping is complicated.
We’re now at 138K. Your overage on your take home pay is about 20K.
This does not include savings for emergencies, retirement, college.
Now imagine you had your own heavy college debt because you weren’t mentored well and maybe have a struggling aging parent in the picture and couldn’t establish saving early enough for your own kids. It doesn’t take too long to get to where suddenly someone is taking out loans for their kid to attend a state school.
Anyway - this is not our situation. My kid had decent options and will graduate debt free. Crossing fingers for kid #2. But no, could not afford being full pay. I think people imaging those in this situation are living a champagne and caviar lifestyle while their kids are steered toward a cheap ill fitting college. I’m not saying there aren’t people out there making that choice. But I don’t think it’s as straight forward as some posters here like to portray it. I think the vast majority of parents are doing the best they can with the resources they have available to them. College pricing has FAR outpaced inflation.
Which colleges have a COA of $89,000 a year…now…for undergrad.
^^ I am curious too, unless they counted all the extra costs associated with transportation/visits if the school is far away?
I pay sticker price (OOS) for my freshman. But with all the visits, moving in-out, it would probably be another 10K (Just the parent weekend alone, cost us $2000 for air tickets and hotel room (still ended up not be able to go :-(. Thanksgiving ticket for her to be home is $1000 round trip). I still hope to keep it all under 75K. Thank goodness for 529 account and the decision we made when she was born 18 years ago to save for college, even when we were making no where near 100K combined income.
“For such families, it is galling that they have to reduce current and future standard of living to give their kids opportunities at certain schools whereas those who are low income can get this coveted at such schools through financial aid.”
Do you think these families would be willing to have lived a low income lifestyle for years in exchange for some financial aid that still wouldn’t make that “coveted” school affordable? This is called being out of touch.
COA at colleges typically does not include parent weekend visits. Or any other parent costs (like swag).