<p>Now whether or not her parents were smart…that…is another topic entirely (lol wouldn’t disclose their income for FA?! Are we for serious!!!")</p>
<p>I think this thread underscores a very fundamental hypocracy in the current model for financial aid at Harvard and all colleges today. “Need” is assessed in terms of the parents financial standing. This means kids whose parents earn very little are actually becoming more likely to go to schools like Harvard than kids whose parents earn > 160,000 - especially in today’s angst ridden economy. </p>
<p>It is enormously hard for my husband and me to send our son full freight to Harvard. In fact, it is irrational if viewed from most perspectives. We are both employed in volatile industries with very little job security. Our high income is recent - we have not accumulated any wealth. We have a second child coming up to educate and virtually no money set aside for her. And our retirement looks very shakey. But we were thrilled when our son was admitted to Harvard and dazzled by all the “opportunities” it represented and so we are basically wrecking ourselves financially in order to send him.</p>
<p>That is perhaps the position of the girl from Vermont.</p>
<p>^^Of course need is assessed in terms of the parents’ financial standing. The primary responsibility for meeting college costs falls on parents, who are expected to pay to the best of their ability – whatever their ability is. Do you expect only the student’s income and assets to be evaluated in assessing financial need? If that were the case, most kids would be getting a free ride at colleges across the country. Institutional operating budgets would implode.</p>
<p>As for the OP’s friend, there are families who, based on cultural background and life experience, are averse to applying for financial aid or borrowing to pay for higher education. It is unfortunate that there was no GC to work with the family. </p>
<p>And put me in the camp that believes a Harvard degree is not “wasted” on a prospective elementary school teacher.</p>
<p>My daughter’s best friend in college - family income around 200,000, four kids living around Phil. The father commutes into NYC for work. Assuming he has been making the amount in the last 10 years, his take home is probably around 10,000/mon. Housing(mortgage, insurance, property tax) - 3500, cars & insurance - $1000, food - 1500, insurance(health, life,ADD) - 500, utilities - 500, commuting-350. This does not include clothing, 401K contribution, presents, or other unexpected expenses (new roof, car repairs, co-pay for medical, glasses…). Assuming everything has gone well for them and they were able to save $2000 a month, that would be around $240,000 if their portfolio didn’t lose value last year. Between those 4 kids, each one would get approximately $50,000 for college, total.</p>
<p>The reason I am using my daughter’s friend as an example is her family believed Cornell Engineering degree was worth $200,000 debt for their daughter. Even as an engineer, she’ll be making around $75,000 the first year out, and most engineers’ salaries do not go up as much as management. It’ll take her a long time before she’ll be able to pay $200,000 off. Of course, unless she thought she could potentially marry a high earner at her school.</p>
<p>No, I think your friend made a very wise choice in taking the full ride. I am also someone who supported my daughter in turning down a full ride at a very nice LAC for Cornell (not Harvard), but it’s without her taking out any loans. I do understand value of top education, but it’s not necessary or attainable for everyone. </p>
<p>Many top schools without merit aids are missing out a sector of our society with income around 150-250 who are living in a high cost area.</p>
<p>Disclaimer - all expenses I listed above are all assumptions based on cost of living around Phil.</p>
<p>I will probably get some scoldings for expresssing this additional thought on the issue but here goes. The reason the current model which looks only at parent financial standing is hypocritical is that all parents have opporutnities throughout their lives as parents to make choices that will improve their odds of financing expensive college educations for their children. I’m not saying luck doesn’t play a role or connections, etc. But we know a great many parents who are college educated themselves and simply chose not to work the big time hour and take on the big time stresses involved in pushing their income to a level that puts your kid into the full freight zone. The irony is that many of us who did do this - conducted our work careers in a manner to optimize our income - did so expressly in order to finance our kids educations. Thus we made continual decisions over the course of our parenting to be able to give our kids the best possible education. Then, we get the reward of making the big, big decision to pay $200K in after tax income to send our child to a top school, while parents who did not make the personal sacrifices we did over the course of parenting find themselves delighted with a terrific deal at Harvard.</p>
<p>So where is the hypocracy? Here: Harvard and other colleges say that the student’s ability to attend will not be affected by their parents - and yet for kids like mine their ability to attend is totally at the discretion of their parents.</p>
<p>If the endowment is really so huge, then Harvard and similar insitutions should simply make tuition free for all students accepted. Then we’d really see something radical happen.</p>
<p>We are paying full-freight to send our child to one of H’s peer schools. Does it hurt? Of course. I dare say there are very, very few families who don’t feel the absence of $200,000, especially in the current economy. But like most parents who can afford to do so, we believe it’s worthwhile to pay for our kids’ education to the best of our ability. I am glad we’re able to give our son this opportunity.</p>
<p>Of course, a kid who gets into a school like Harvard probably could have gotten a large merit award, possibly a full ride, at another fine school. If you’re looking for “tuition free,” that’s the route to take. </p>
<p>But then again, who do you think makes those big merit awards possible? They’re subsidized by other parents, not all of them wealthy, who felt it was worthwhile to pay for their kids’ education to the best of their ability, and generous alumni and donors who thought it was worthwhile to make scholarships available to pay to educate other people’s children.</p>
<p>They make those big merit awards possible to “Harvard quality” students in order to elevate quality of students at their school. It’s an investment for those schools, even for a school like Duke.</p>
<p>sewhappy: you’re doing the right thing!!! </p>
<p>Your son is lucky to have such supportive parents. In ten years the expense and debt will be forgotten and replaced with other life events, expense, and debts. But your son will be a Harvard graduate with an excellent education and excellent life opportunities. And for his children and grandchildren he will be the dad and grandfather that went to Harvard. </p>
<p>Best 200 grand you ever spent!</p>
<p>“They make those big merit awards possible to “Harvard quality” students in order to elevate quality of students at their school. It’s an investment for those schools, even for a school like Duke.”</p>
<p>Yes, it’s in their own self interest. The higher the quality of students who attend their school, the more highly the school will be regarded. Unlike places like HPY, which can get plenty of high quality students without offering merit aid, the schools offering merit aid need to do that to attract high quality students and to maintain or raise the reputation of their universities.</p>
<p>way better than a couple new cars, a remodeled bathroom, and a trip to hawaii</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Correct on the institutional motive. Merit aid is a recruitment enhancement tool. But the money’s coming from somewhere, and that somewhere is usually the general operating budget. Merit aid is controversial precisely because it draws funding from the overall grant budget at the college: If an institution has $100 in the budget to spend on aid (both need-based and merit) and decides to award a $50 merit award, it has that much less to spend on need-based aid.</p>
<p>Depite the controversy, merit aid is not going away. Many excellent schools that are a selectivity cut below HYP (in addition to Duke, Wash U, Emory, Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, and U of Michigan come to mind) will “buy” students who would otherwise attend the biggest boys. A full-freight family that doesn’t wish to pay for education for their top student ought to look in that direction. Harvard is not likely to be offering a free education to wealthy kids any time soon.</p>
<p>I don’t lust after new cars or kitchen remodels. I lust after a retirement before I’m using a walker!</p>
<p>That said, would fight a pack of rabid wolves to keep son at Harvard. It still thrills us and we do see the “value.” Just hope we can continue the lunacy for second child.</p>
<p>"And put me in the camp that believes a Harvard degree is not “wasted” on a prospective elementary school teacher. "</p>
<p>This assumes that there is some real benefit to being at Harvard. I think a lot of folks here are over exaggerating the value of an undergraduate degree from Harvard. By the way what is the certification process at Harvard for an elementary school teacher. Our state school focuses on placing students in schools to satisfy student teaching requirements and other certification requirements. Does Harvard do this?</p>
<p>sewhappy,
Look at it as having accomplished one of your life goals, as in:</p>
<p>“I climbed Mount Kilimanjaro.”
“I ran the Boston Marathon.”
“I met the President.”
“I paid for my son’s Harvard education.”</p>
<p>docT: Harvard is a research university. I don’t believe they have a teacher certification process. Teacher training is generally the mandate of state colleges.</p>
<p>200k is alot of money… but isn’t harvard supposed to give u the aid that u asked for??
i think if she’s the kinda person that goes after what she wants and knows what she wants then nomatter where she is, she’ll do just fine…
but then again, harvard is harvard, UVM is UVM</p>
<p>"Teacher training is generally the mandate of state colleges. "</p>
<p>Exactly and this is the point. Harvard is not the best route if the goal is to be an elementary school teacher.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>utep</p>
<p>mtel</p>
<p>are these undergraduate programs?</p>
<p>The thing is, many reasonable people believe that a focus on state certification requirements is not a recipe for producing the best teachers, including at the elementary school level. A second-tier local state college is doubtless the easiest route to an elementary school classroom of one’s own in a particular community, but it’s not necessarily the best one, and it’s certainly not the only one.</p>