<p>It really depends on what the worst case scenarios can be and how likely they are, as to what the choices are to make. In our case, if we just had the one child or maybe even two children, we wouldn’t be in such tight financial straits. Had we been unemployed and not in flush financial shape when S1 was making his choices, we probably would have been less cavalier about what the financial implications were for a top cost choice. That things went downhill in terms of the economy, employment, investments really hurt us terribly, not to mention having the other kids going to college. Now we know.</p>
<p>@ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad: If the OP’s D has an LAC as her #1 choice, then I think it’s reasonable to assume that she wants the attributes of a small LAC. I’m all for the larger schools for those who actually desire their positive attributes, but I’m a little tired of refuting the rose-colored idea that honors college = LAC. They’re not the same thing. Certainly, an honors college might help an “LAC kid” adapt to a larger setting, but it’s important to recognize this as an educational compromise, not a perfect substitute.</p>
<p>I completely understand that finances may dictate that the OP’s D attend a cheaper school, which may or may not mean a larger public university. And that’s a reasonable, necessary financial compromise. But it’s still a compromise.</p>
<p>I think that state U honors colleges can be made academically challenging for any level, I really do. But an honors college doesn’t give you the feeling of walking across campus and knowing a quarter or half of the people you pass by name–that’s a social intimacy, and a luxury, unique to LACs. An honors college, at least all of those that I’ve investigated (quite a few, during my own college search for an LAC substitute), can’t give you the same wide-ranging access to tiny classes–some small classes, absolutely, but 16 or 20 students make a different discussion seminar than 8 or 12 students.</p>
<p>@Keilexandra: At some point, practical issues of finance come into play for most folks. Sure, LACs and universities are different entities, but both offer great educations, and neither is “better” in the abstract - certainly not academically.</p>
<p>So, just how much is an idyllic lifestyle experience worth above and beyond a quality education? I’d need to see a really strong argument from my son or daughter to justify boatloads of extra money.</p>
<p>Keilexandra:</p>
<p>My comments were in response to to the following statement -
which I think isn’t a valid generalization. It’s generalizing LACs, generalizing state universities, generalizing the major, and generalizing the student. I gave a couple of examples of state schools in the OP’s state (UCLA/UCB) where there’s a good chance the admission criteria is more selective than the LAC (I don’t know the LAC being referred to) and there are plenty of student peers, well qualified profs, opportunities, etc. Some people prefer smaller schools to bigger ones and vice versa - I’m not commenting on preferences - just the statement that somehow a LAC is “MUCH better” educationally than a state school. UCLA/UCB were just some examples but one could substitute UCI and many other state schools in California where a motivated student can receive an excellent eduction in their history major.</p>
<p>Especially boatloads of money that you can’t afford. In any case, the OP states that D was unlikely to be accepted at U of Washington because of marginal stats.</p>
<p><a href=“I%20don’t%20know%20the%20LAC%20being%20referred%20to”>quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The OP noted the LAC was in the northwest…the only school that immediately comes to mind is Reed. I would agree with you that if it’s not too late, and if this student can get admitted, UCLA or UCB offer everything and then some that Reed does (just my opinion). And of course, for an in-state resident, tuition + expenses will be considerably less.</p>
<p>There are lots of LACs in the northwest - if UC Irvine was a reach, then Reed would have been an uber-reach for her. It’s way too late to apply to any other UC at this point for fall 2011. It sounds like SJSU and SFSU are matches and might be reasonable alternatives.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>Just be sure to account for the possibility one may need 5-6 years to graduate from UCB and UCLA due to critical required courses not being offered in certain semesters or even years. </p>
<p>That was a warning given by the admissions staff to several high school classmates years ago when they visited after being admitted OOS. The fact the admissions staff themselves told prospective students that they should plan on graduating in 5-6 years was an eye opener to many of them…and this was well-before the recent/current economic meltdown and California budget problems.</p>
<p>JC40 - From the OP -
- so UCLA/UCB are out apparently but she has some other decisions still coming in. </p>
<p>OP - If the only state schools she ended up being accepted to (probably because of not applying to others) are the local SJSU/SFS then a compromise for her, if you can reasonably afford it, is to live in campus in the dorm - at least for the first year. This will still allow her to live away from home even if it’s only 30 minutes away. It can still be the ‘going away to college’ and living away from home experience even though it’s not far away - especially if the parents respect her independence and don’t try to ‘drop in’ or something. Really, whether she’s 30 minutes away or a 3 hour plane flight away the experience in this regard can be the same but it has the added benefit of convenience for when she does want to visit home or you need to drop something by.</p>
<p>Edit - cross posted with the above two.</p>
<p>
This doesn’t seem to be the case according to anyone I’ve heard of who’s actually attended/ing these 2 UCs. Most can graduate in 4 years (or less) if they have a mind to. Was that warning from admissions staff of UCLA/UCB or admissions staff of a CSU?</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>It was an issue with several colleagues and cousins who are from California and/or attended those schools. This was especially a serious problem with those in STEM fields where major courses had to be taken in a specified sequence. It was a reason why most I knew finished in 5 years…or if they were lucky…4.5 years. </p>
<p>Moreover, why would the admissions staff of UCB and UCLA be warning prospective students like my high school classmates and their parents about having to plan on graduating in 5-6 years if it wasn’t a serious issue with both schools?</p>
<p>If stats are a stretch for UW- can’t really imagine many NW- lacs, where they would be a sure thing.</p>
<p>This article had good points regarding tuition costs I thought
[SPU</a>, a small private school, adjusts to changing economy](<a href=“http://www.seattlepi.com/local/432020_spu17.html]SPU”>http://www.seattlepi.com/local/432020_spu17.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@MisterK: I pay less than my state U’s sticker price at my LAC. Did finances play a role in my college search? Is that even a question? :rolleyes: And yes, I was prepared to compromise and attend the state U if finances dictated it.</p>
<p>LACs and universities are equal in abstract, but one is usually “better” (academically, socially, whatever floats your preference boat) than the other in concrete, specific examples–e.g. for a particular person who is actually going to college.</p>
<p>Nor is the LAC always more expensive than a university, especially if the comparative university is private or OOS public.</p>
<p>Northwestern LACs… Lewis & Clark? Willamette? Whitman? Though I think the last one is too selective for OP’s given range, it might be possible through holistic evaluation and the ED bump.</p>
<p>cobrat - I’m just relating what I’ve been told and have seen of people who attend/ed UCLA (including my own D - a CS major - graduated in 4 years - but I realize for CS/engineering many take an extra quarter), pretty much every roommate/friend my D had there in various majors, and what I’ve seen related by people who have direct experience with them. Of course, if one changes majors a couple of times, takes a lighter load, or chooses to pursue additional courses it could well take longer. </p>
<p>That’s why I was interested in what you said about what the admissions staff said. It really doesn’t sound right. For many majors (including history), given the AP credits most have, it’d be hard to stretch to 5-6 years without dropping below the number of courses required to be considered a full time student. If it’s a real issue I wonder how they handle this as well as the financial implications of having to attend longer. I don’t know why people would choose to attend them OOS if there’s even a reasonable chance it’d take 5-6 years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Regarding the high school friends and the parents who related what the admissions staff said about expecting to graduate in 5-6 years, they didn’t. This bit of news was a major factor for them to opt for LACs or smaller private universities. There was no way they’d be willing to pay close to private school prices and risking graduating in 5-6 years from a large state flagship…however as elite as UCB or UCLA when they could go to a private LAC or university and graduate in 4. </p>
<p>The ones who did attend and took 4.5-5 years were all in-state residents who were mostly STEM majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Also paid less than state/city sticker price when the near-full ride scholarship was factored in. Moreover, considering the wide prestige/quality gap between my LAC and the state/city flagships available…it was no contest…especially considering none of them offered a strong East Asian Studies program…and most state/city campuses didn’t even have one at the time.</p>
<p>@Keilexandra: Congrats on finding a cost-effective school that’s perfect for you. From my perspective as a parent, I’d be very willing to pay more for “better academically,” but not likely for “better socially, or whatever floats your preference boat.” In the latter situation, I’d be more inclined to use that as a starting point for a discussion about the realities of life.</p>
<p>@ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad: Whatever the truth of the UC situation, it’s a concern from afar; I’ve heard exactly what cobrat is describing. We’ve reluctantly dropped UCB from our HS junior son’s list, despite its excellent CS/Math program.</p>
<p>We’re out of state (but with lots of contacts in CA), and we feel that the CA government’s bubble problem is going to burst badly - and that OOS students will be in the front row. We’re not willing to gamble his college experience on that. For OOS state schools, we’re only considering states that are being responsibly managed.</p>
<p>Our S is having no problem graduating in 4 years. We have had a lot of contact with his friends and the UC’s have not been a problem. We are confident that UC Davis will be able to get him out in 4 years or less as well as UCLA, UCB. UCSD.</p>
<p>While I follow the reasoning of many on this thread, I think it is also worth pointing out that until you file your 2010 IRS 1040 as well as your FAFSA, nothing is final on your financial aid possibilities. I would advise you to wait until you file those and get responses from the college. And if it is still not what you need, you can write an appeal. And if that does not work, you have the many replies already posted. Good luck to you–and remember that it is the education and not the college that will have teh greatest lasting impact on your daughter!</p>
<p>Keil, you are a terrific kid and it’s fantastic that your finances worked out, but I think you are giving the OP terrible advice and likely piling on more guilt than is necessary.</p>
<p>There are loads of LAC’s where a student interested in history will find an INFERIOR experience to that of a large State U. The professor of Renaissance Studies is out on maternity leave for your entire junior year. The professor of Modern European history is on an exchange program in Prague for your entire sophomore year. Your thesis advisor doesn’t get tenure and so takes another job halfway across the country for your senior year and there’s nobody else in the department who knows anything about your topic. And you’re interested in an interdisciplinary topic with the music department but the senior seminars are only open to concentrators, which you are not, since the department is so small.</p>
<p>You would sure need to enjoy that walk across campus every morning knowing everyone’s name to compensate.</p>
<p>Fact is, OP’s D is likely not comparing Swarthmore to U New Hampshire, or Amherst to U Conn. Once you get out of a very tiny slice of LAC’s with huge endowmments and deep financial pockets, you find small institutions which, despite their intimacy and nice feel, have a dozen well funded academic departments, and scores of “just hanging on” departments with a handful of tenured professors. These schools are busy conducting academic reviews right now to quickly ascertain which majors and programs are to get cut with the latest fiscal austerity moves.</p>
<p>OP shouldn’t sacrifice the families financial security for any college, but to suggest that they are shortchanging their D by making her go to a public U to study history vs. the allegedly superior experience/resources available at an LAC is sort of lame unless you know which LAC. There are many LAC’s right now struggling to field a full team for their history departments, and I wouldn’t want to be the OP’s D at one of them.</p>
<p>Simbot:</p>
<p>You do realize that your child will have to go to graduate school if she intends to pursue history as a career? Keep that in mind because many of the graduate history programs may not fund master’s level students. It may not be until she gets into a doctoral program that she receives funding as a TA or through a scholarship. </p>
<p>Because of the library and archival resources available as well as the size of the departments, history is best studied at large institutions. However, the increase digitization of materials is improving access to documents that were in the past only available in large and remote libraries. </p>
<p>Has you daughter compared the history departments at the Cal States to her LAC?</p>