<p>Chicago uses a need blind admissions system. The people who do the admitting are different from the folks who calculate FA. Here is the typical aid as a function of income table provided by the College that many use as a rough guideline as to what to expect. (Point of self-disclosure, S1 is full pay, no aid provided by the school.)</p>
<p>Office</a> of College Aid</p>
<p>While I certainly sympathize with your situation, I think its EXTREMELY obnoxious that you decided to title your thread "Avoid U. Chicago." Many people on this discussion board are either prospective, current, or past students and are quite fond of the university.</p>
<p>Actually, the University of Chicago is well known for its generous financial aid. Could it be that Chicago expects the 529 education fund of $70,000 to be used before awarding any aid? Whereas the other schools assume that the education fund will be proportionately used over four years?</p>
<p>UChicago and Northwestern offered my son nearly equal FA packages.</p>
<p>icy9ff8,</p>
<p>I don't think that Chicago expects the 529 $$s to be depleted before awarding FA. In fact, we were warned by the FA office that, if we use up all the 529 $$ before the end of 4 years, it won't alter future FA awards. The office awards aid based on the 'assumption' of equal depletion of 529 $$s over the four years.</p>
<p>rap_mom, no one is telling you you are wrong for going heavily into debt so that you can send your son to U. Chicago. And, certainly, there ARE people who will borrow heavily so that their offspring can attend this school.</p>
<p>You illustrate that, I know it, and the U Chicago knows it too.</p>
<p>For the consumer it's a choice. Sure. No argument.</p>
<p>But why are you apparently averse to the prospect of U Chicago pointing out to applicants: If you are not wealthy and not poor be aware that you will likely (I don't know, exactly, HOW likely) have to pay FAR more to send your child here than to other comparable schools? Some people seem to have received better needs-based FA than others. That's no great surprise, I suppose. But, like others who have posted here and elsewhere, many families in my situation (yours too, apparently) are informed AFTER their child is accepted by Chicago that they will have to incur extraordinary levels of debt if they want their child to attend.</p>
<p>What's wrong with being upfront and honest about this from the get go? One possibility is that such openness would not be consistent with the policy of revenue optimization as a high (maybe, even the highest) institutional priority. If such a policy is in effect it unarguably worked in your case, if not in mine.</p>
<p>Market models suggest that when prices go up the wealthy are disadvantaged least. Also, the greater the emphasis on price, the less the emphasis on merit as the most important factor determining who attends a college or university. </p>
<p>And therein lies the rub. If merit ISN'T the ultimately determining factor then maybe the high price wasn't justified after all.</p>
<p>I'm a current student and I don't receive any aid (also due to the fact that I'm an international student) </p>
<p>I agree tuition for this school is over priced and you can get almost an equal education elsewhere. My parents are no where near "wealthy" but I do consider myself well off and my family does make sacrifices for me to go here. I feel bad at times for having them pay so much for an education (that I could have also received elsewhere) and so I am planning on graduating in 3 years. Because of my situation, I am constantly money-conscious and have become more fixated on grades and landing a high-paying job upon graduation that I simply do not have the time to focus on what the "real" Uchicago education entails (or what they say it is, at least) That is not to say the education at UChic is not worth it. However, if you are accepted to a similar level of college which offers you better aid, I would advise against going here with huge loans. </p>
<p>I'm sure the OP's daughter will be successful wherever she goes. However, I don't feel its just to advise others to avoid this school-you've already made the decision not to have your daughter go here, you don't have to be bitter about it.</p>
<p>I found your posting rather interesting, japstudent.</p>
<p>Isn't it ironic that what I was originally warning against you (and your parents) seem, unwittingly, to have experienced.</p>
<p>U Chicago is a great university (otherwise, why would I have encouraged my daughter to apply) AND I SEE NO REASON WHY POOR OR WEALTHY APPLICANTS SHOULD AVOID IT.</p>
<p>See OP.</p>
<p>OK? I'll shut up now. Hope people found something useful in this thread. I know I did.</p>
<p>"If you are not wealthy and not poor be aware that you will likely (I don't know, exactly, HOW likely) have to pay FAR more to send your child here than to other comparable schools?" </p>
<p>Chicago_Dad,</p>
<p>If you look at the FA estimates of freshman aid, </p>
<p>Office</a> of College Aid</p>
<p>...it clearly states "This chart reflects income only and does not reflect family assets, home equity, family size, or the number of children attending college." Obviously, for someone with assets and home equity, aid will be less. Moreover, reading this thread and other threads make it clear that it isn't possible to predict what an individual's FA package will be in advance. Thus, it's not possible for Chicago to be upfront about a policy that really ISN'T a policy involving systematically expecting that, as you put it, "you will likely have to pay FAR more to send your child here than to other comparable schools." Just because your family got surprised by the (lack of an) FA package doesn't mean that this is something that could be known prior to filling out all the FA application materials. Clearly, some upper middle class families got MORE than they might have anticipated or packages comparable to other schools. </p>
<p>I do understand that you are terribly disappointed. But don't over-generalize based upon your singular experience.</p>
<p>My dad talked to a fin aid person at UChicago a couple of days ago, and my dad said that the fin aid officer said that they expect you to use 1/4 of what you have saved up per year (at least if it's in the studnets name, I'm not sure what happens if it's in the parents name). This means that just from the 70k, they're expecting you to pay 17.5k, plus, whatever they think you should pay from your income.</p>
<p>I guess that just proves that the world of fin aid can be pretty grim. They basically straight up admitted that you should have NOTHING left by the time you graduate.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I guess it does make sense if they expect you to use all the money you have saved up for this purpose. But this raises two questions:
1-how do they know that the money your saving is FOR COLLEGE? If I had been saving my entire life to buy a car/house/other big thing, is it relaly fair for them to demand that you spend your life's savings on something you weren't expecting to?
2-If I'm just going to be forced to spend my money, what incentive was there to save up for this? My dad gave me the impression that whatever we had not saved up, we would have received in the form of a grant. In your case, if you hadn't saved anything, that would have given you 70k to spend on other things the past 18 years of your Ds life!! This conclusion is so extreme that I have to belive I/my dad is misinterpreting something. But still, given this information, if I had a chance to relive the last 18 yeras of my life, I would have put a good portion of my money towards other things.</p>
<p>^My mom and I have been having the same discussion. What frustrated me was that when we called, we were told that we were expected to pay (of the EFC), 1/3 from future income (loans), 1/3 from current income, and 1/3 from savings. This would be 10k per year from each area . . . though we had ~2k in savings when I applied (less at this point). I mean, maybe its just me, but 2k is a lot less than the 40k I'd have to have just from savings - left me confused. <em>sigh</em> rant finished</p>
<p>"In your case, if you hadn't saved anything, that would have given you 70k to spend on other things the past 18 years of your Ds life!! "</p>
<p>To a certain extent that's true - although if you didn't save, you (your parents) will wind up having to cut back on your lifestyle and borrow more that if you had virtuously saved, like the OP has. We are currently in that situation; we assumed that our son would attend his dad's top 50 university, tuition free, and we would only be looking at room and board. Then he turned on the gas academically, and earned his acceptance. Being an academic, my husband did see the value of a University of Chicago education, so we are looking at a big old pile of debt. But all families are different, and what makes sense for one makes no sense at all for another. </p>
<p>I am glad that Chicago_Dad started this thread (although I am sad about the circumstances that prompted it), because it points out very clearly to the juniors and junior parents that financial aid varies, and if you must depend on it it's pretty important to not get attached to one school too much.</p>
<p>I agree with Chicago_Dad that it's unfortunate that colleges tend to employ an "everybody can afford us!!!oneoneone!!!!" rhetoric, and that people who assume that they can pay for it can be in for nasty surprises.</p>
<p>It's unfortunate that you can test drive a car to get a sense of its quality and value before you invest in it, you can visit a house and check out the basement, stairs, heating, plumbing, etc., but you really don't know what you're getting yourself into before you lay down the big bucks for an elite school.</p>
<p>To say that Chicago completely ignores students who are down on their luck, though, is a bit extreme. I know of a few students who came from extremely trying circumstances (money was only the beginning of their problems) and the University really stepped in to help out. Parents abandoning their children? Former drug addicts? Homelessness? I've heard many a tear-jerker story. CD, it sounds like your D has the resources to succeed and be happy in life. I'm sorry she won't be able to come here.</p>
<p>rap_mom, you keep making my points for me. U Chicago can have ALL my 529 money (that's what it's for, after all), and they can have ALL my savings. All $5,000. No problem. They are welcome. They can have a lot more money too.</p>
<p>But they want HALF of the equity in my house. They wanted the equity in your house too, as you pointed out.</p>
<p>MOST UNIVERSITIES DON'T DEMAND HALF THE EQUITY IN YOUR HOUSE WHEN IT IS ONLY ABOUT 200K (and painfully acquired over 25 years). In fact, NONE of the other top universities to which my daughter applied expected us to cash out pensions or take out a second mortgage (where you pay a bank interest so that U. Greedy can grab half your equity. NOW).</p>
<p>Get it?</p>
<p>Now U. Chicago is ENTITLED to demand whatever it wants. It just would be nice if they explained their policies up front before 18 year-olds (who are naive, admittedly, get burned).</p>
<p>But U Chicago doesn't do this. Let's be kind. The policy is sort of buried. Sort of half spelled out. Sort of vague. Guess my daughter didn't see it. She was too focused on academic achievement. Dumb.</p>
<p>She'll learn.</p>
<p>What was wrong with what your daugther did? There is nothign she coudl have done (presumably) to affect either your financial status or fiancial reward to the point that could have made her able to attend. Was she supposed to sit back and do nothing her entire 4 yeras of HS because if she were smart she would have realized that she couldnt have paid to go to a good school anyways? of course not. Even if she can't go to her dream school because of finances, you should still be proud of her for what she has done.</p>
<p>Dreaming to go to a good school like UChicago is not at all naive or stupid. In fact, id imagine that a lot of parents wish their kids would have such ambition.</p>
<p>GleasSpty: I have a feeling that Chicago_Dad's post had a hint of sarcasm attached. It is disappointing that someone can work extremely hard for 4 years to be able to attend their dream school and then not be able to attend because the university is greedy.</p>
<p>GleasSpty, you were accepted by U. Chicago, like my daughter, right?</p>
<p>Thanks for your post.</p>
<p>It actually helped me feel a lot better. A LOT better</p>
<p>And there is always this:
[quote]
In his paper "Estimating the Payoff to Attending a More Selective College," published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a school's selectivity, as measured by matriculants' average SAT scores, does not correlate with students' later income, once the abilities of the students upon entering college are taken into account. ...Says Krueger, Bendheim Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Princeton University: "It appears that student ambition, as reflected in the quality of the school to which he or she applies, is a better predictor of earning success than what college they ultimately choose or which college chooses them."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Princeton</a> - News - Elite Colleges Not Necessarily Best Ticket to High Earnings</p>
<p>While there may be current disappointment, in the long run it wil matter little.</p>
<p>idad: I doubt that Chicago_Dad's daughters reasons for coming to Chicago are necessarily centered around money. I don't think many Chicago matriculants even think of it as an ancillary reason for attending.</p>
<p>I understand that, but I believe it stands as a metaphor for success in all its many manifestations. Once student characteristics are considered, one school versus another adds little value, and one will likely (though not always) adapt quite readily to the campus culture one is in.</p>