<p>I see nothing wrong with selecting Rhodes over Yale. It is all about fit and where the student feels most comfortable. Size, location, campus atmosphere and culture and who knows what else. Four years is a long time to be somewhere where you exist or are at best semi happy.</p>
<p>We visited the Ivys prior to application time. After on campus visits both of mine refused to even consider an Ivy. Does not mean that the Ivys are not great schools - they just were not where my kids felt comfortable. They both ended up with big merit money at top 20 schools and were/are very happy with their choices. It is all about the right place for the right student. That is why I always advise people to visit the schools on their final list if at all possible. During the visit have the student spend an overnight in a dorm. Being with the students at 2 am in a dorm is the best way to see how they might fit in.</p>
<p>Certainly hope this thread returns to civility again. Many of the posters have a lot of valuable experiences to share. Very few seem to be know it alls - and everyone should remember what works for one may or may not work for another.</p>
<p>It was all the news about Yale's FA that led me to encourage a young man to apply to Princeton rather than Yale, which had been his goal. His needs were met and he is one very happy P student.
The Kipplingers newest edition of best value(so I've been told, need to find link), clearly lists P as #1, followed by Caltech. I apologize for not having article in front of me. I will say that Caltech has been generous with merit award to S, who would not otherwise have qualified for FA.</p>
<p>Obviously, the posts about "making it work" were from a person ignorant of the vagaries of need-based aid. The problem that is faced by families in the $75K range is that even the most generous need-based aid generally leaves them paying out a large chunk of money (maybe $15-25K) -- and many simply aren't prepared for that amount. Now, paying $25K annually to attend Yale is a good deal -- it's almost a 50% discount. But it is a lot of money to a family that may have only about $10K annually of discretionary income after all their other expenses are paid. Some are going to be willing to borrow the difference for the sake of the prestige or perceived quality of the school -- many are not. </p>
<p>The big problem, of course, is that the merit-aid schools are almost by definition a huge step down in prestige, though the objective difference in the quality of education may be none -- and in many cases an argument could be made that the personal attention afforded at the smaller, award-giving college really affords a higher quality of education to the individual, especially if there are extra perks that come along with the receipt of a name scholarship (research opportunities, etc.). </p>
<p>The Ivies all have so many qualified applicants that they end up each year with huge wait lists. On April 2nd their phones are ringing off the wall from disappointed students and parents who are making it clear that they want a coveted spot. Not much motivation for the schools to make adjustments in financial aid. Especially since many need-blind schools are not so need-blind when it comes to their waitlist; it's very likely that when the disappointed financial aid recipient turns down the school, their "spot" will be filled by a full payer from the waitlist.</p>
<p>Bookworm, Princeton is not going to be any better for the family in the $75K+ range. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that the families finances do not qualify them for the type of need-based aid that is going to make paying for college easy. </p>
<p>It isn't a matter of the school's reputation for generosity. It is a matter of the way all colleges determine financial "need" and the amount of need-based aid the family qualifies for. The gap between what the family is comfortable with paying and what the financial aid office says they ought to be able to pay can be considerable.</p>
<p>Even then, financial need can be calculated differently at different schools. A young man who was admitted to both Princeton and MIT found that there was a $7k difference in the annual package offered at the two schools. Over a period of four years, it came to $28k. He went to Princeton.</p>
<p>Curm: I have not made a study of how the finaid breaks down. But I would not be surprised if the folks who turn HYP down are in the $75-150k range depending on how many kids they have to put through college, how large a mortgage they have, and so forth.</p>
<p>cur, I am the poster who told the OP to PM you. Although many other CC parents travelled your route, you seemed the most determined to find the system to getting the Holy Grail for your D. And I think you did. I recommend you all the time since my knowledge of that part of the process is naught. Your D will have to get in line.</p>
<p>My expertise is more in the line of tippy boats, GAP years etc. Nice to know that my feeling about a high SAT was spot on. The SAT is a cheater's IQ test because students can take it several times and because itis possible to prepare for it. Can you raise a student with a 88% Verbal score to 99%?? Whew. Probably not. But can a 92% tester get to 97% ? Yup. Can a 95% PSAT tester get to 99%? Yup--and that 99% score makes a whole heap of difference in merit awards at good merit schools--from what I've seen on CC. </p>
<p>I noted the EvilRobot story in my earlier post marite--it is the Yale aid story which sticks in my mind. I thought Evil should have rolled the dice to get there--because I would have--but he didn't. He tried negotiating with them but they didn't budge and he went to Vandy. The money they wanted was too scary for him. And he's better than fine--living the life of Riley at Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>*Nice of the calvary to show up but why exactly did we all get our knuckles rapped? I must have missed something.</p>
<p>Calmom,
I remember reading somewhere recently [ sorry I can't put my finger on it right now] that since 2000[?] Princeton does not take home equity into account at all when figuring out financial aid packages while Yale and others still do. that I believe woud account for the difference in FA offered by Princeton vrs Yale that bookworm was referring to.</p>
<p>calmom - I am not sure that I agree with you about merit schools being a huge step down in prestige. Although not as well known, I don't think that Rice or WashU are a huge step down. They both have very good merit (non need) based programs that award from full tuition to a full ride.</p>
<p>agree with ST2 . Don't forget about the merit scholarships offered by the University of Chicago. [unfortuntely there aren't too many]. I don't think anyone who knows of Chicago could think it was a huge, let alone small step down as far as prestige is concerned.</p>
<p>
[quote]
- I am not sure that I agree with you about merit schools being a huge step down in prestige.
[/quote]
I'm not trying to bash any schools -- I personally don't care about prestige. But HYP are ranked by US News as 1,2 &3 -- Rice & WUSTL are excellent colleges, but not within the top 10. I think that the US News ranking list is useful chiefly for lining the bottom of a bird cage, but I do have to say it is probably the most useful proxy we've got for assessing the "prestige" value of the school.</p>
<p>To put it another way: if finances were not a factor, how many students would turn down Harvard for Rice or WUSTL? It generally doesn't happen -- those schools offer their merit awards precisely because without them, they have little chance of wooing their top prospects away from the Ivies. </p>
<p>Again - I think that in terms of objective quality of education that many, many lower-ranked, lower prestige colleges offer equal or even better educations when individual factors are taken to account. My personal views are more in line with Loren Pope's -- but I think that we need to honestly acknowledge that the Ivies have a certain luster that very few other colleges share. </p>
<p>Those who make the best choice financially are always going to face the naysayers like Garrity who simply are so blinded by prestige that they can't believe that anyone would turn down Yale for Rhodes. </p>
<p>What often ends up happening is NOT that the Ivy "makes it happen" in terms of financial aid, bu that the family "makes it happen" because of the prestige-- they are willing to sacrifice more for the sake of the degree.</p>
<p>calmom - you are possibly right about HYP - but since you refer to the US News list - WashU is tied with Cornell for 12th which is higher than Brown at 15. I know of quite a few kids who did turn down HYP for WashU, because they felt it was a better fit for them. After visiting, my kids had no interest in the Ivys - did not feel it was for them. So I can absolutely understand choosing Rhodes over Yale.</p>
<p>I hate lists like the Kiplinger list because they are averages which tell nothing whatsoever about the individual case. So somehow Yale becomes a "better value" than Rice, despite its significantly higher tuition, because some other people's kids get better financial aid. </p>
<p>What matters on an individual level, when it comes down to it, is their own financial aid package -- and they may fare better or worse depending largely on the way they fit into the college's financial aid policies. A given college (take your pick) may be the most generous on average to families with the most typical financial profiles -- or they may not be particularly generous but have their overall numbers skewed down because they are well-endowed and have generous policies toward very low-income students, but are stingy with the middle class applicants. None of that matters to a multiple-step-parent, self-employed farm-owning family trying to navigate the financial aid process. </p>
<p>In other words, I could look at charts all day long: but for me and my own,there was no question that Barnard was far and above the best financial choice. Does Barnard even appear on the Kiplinger list? No. But U of Chicago and NYU show up as #32 & #33. (NYU showing up at all is a big joke -- lets all have a hearty laugh over that one). </p>
<p>Interestingly enough, though -- of the 3 colleges listed on the Kiplinger report that offered aid to my daughter (Fordham is the 3rd), I would have been paying LESS than the amount shown by Kiplinger in their cost-after-need-based aid column [though I note that there is obviously a data error with Chicago - they simply don't have the aid figures shown]. In other words, I'm in a better-than-average category -- but that doesn't change the fact that the least expensive (to us) of the 3 still wanted $9K more annually than the non-listed college. </p>
<p>Those average cost figures don't tell you anything about aid policies; what they reflect is that average overall wealth of the student body - the higher that average, the less need-based aid, so the higher the average payout per student. My experience with financial aid tells me that the only figure really worth looking at is average student debt -- that tells you how each college is actually structuring its aid. Try using the arrows at the top of the page to re-order the Kiplinger report to first look at "average cost" and then look at "average indebtedness" and you will see what I mean. (That's the one where Princeton comes out on top - not average costs).</p>
<p>
[quote]
After visiting, my kids had no interest in the Ivys - did not feel it was for them.
[/quote]
That's because your kids weren't swayed by prestige. My son wasn't either, though I think my daughter's college list was a little more prestige-aware -- though certainly that was not the prime consideration.</p>
<p>I'd prefer talking about excellence than prestige. And on that count, there are a lot of schools that are comparable to HYP, and probably a better fit for some students, and better tout court in some fields. And some of them are generous with merit aid.</p>