<p>Top LAC’s, while affording a solid education, do not have a research faculty. If every professor at Chicago taught fix or six to nine courses at year (akin to four to six semester length ones) then then there would be more money on the table. That is just not the case.</p>
<p>It is the case. The LAC I’m thinking of is about the size of the college at uChicago. Its endowment is 1/5th the size and it gives out more aid. By the way, this LAC is transparent about giving out 5% of its endowment each year as per the IRS guidelines. UChicago is not transparent. So research taken into account, etc, I still think UChicago is stingy - I’m not an alum, just a uChicago parent paying tuition.</p>
<p>Thanks to everyone who posted to this good discussion. I am very glad to know that some of you received competitive packages from UChicago; that’s good news. I also appreciate those of you who reported that Chicago offered much less aid than competitive schools, as we did. I also found some other threads on College Confidential in which students reported receiving disappointing packages from UChicago. I think it is worth a warning to potential applicants, that the sales pitch about financial aid currently being delivered by UChicago admissions may not match the reality. So heads up.</p>
<p>As a Chicago alum myself, with other 50 years of direct and family involvement in the university, I want Chicago to succeed as much as the alums and entering students who posted here. It’s in our interests, and in the interests of the larger academic community, for Chicago to succeed in its current expansion of the undergraduate college, and to capitalize on its growing reputation for the benefit of students, donors, faculty, and its long-term sustainability. </p>
<p>None of us wants to see top-quality admitted students walk away from Chicago because they can’t afford it.</p>
<p>About money and undergraduates: UChicago officials have said in their own publications and in the media that the university has made a conscious effort to strengthen its marketing, build new dorms, expand its undergraduate campus, and grow its college enrollment, in part because they think that undergraduates actually bring in more money to the university. This is a big change in the traditional accepted wisdom at Chicago that said that undergraduates are a drain on university resources. And the strategy is off to a great start. All of academia is watching to see if Chicago can pull this off.</p>
<p>But if the strategy depends in part on attracting applicants with promises that they will have their financial need met, and then undercalculating need when the package is actually offered, that calls the effort into question and threatens to backfire against the university in the long run.</p>
<p>I hope the UChicago can tune its expansion strategy and its financial approach so that it can manage the expansion for the long-term viability of the university for the greater good. College Confidential will continue to be a good place to track this, so stayed tuned here.</p>
<p>I’m also convinced, after reading all of these comments, that a market exists for a service that evaluates the relative final (after aid) price of various colleges, taking into account the financial circumstances of applicants, and perhaps evaluating the actual use of endowments and other university resources. I’ve read everything I can find on this and think the pieces are there for someone to put together. </p>
<p>Finally, I appreciate the efforts by some responders, especially college students, to sort out the differences between “making money” and “making profit,” between non-profit and for-profit models of enterprise. Keep asking these questions, and carry them into your work. Look into social enterprise and social entrepreneurship, and into networked and cooperative business models. We’re at an exciting time for these efforts, and your interests will help you contribute the movement. Thank you.</p>