@calmom in post #39 is absolutely correct. Because for many demographic groups, college in this country is a social identifier. It signals, for better or worse, who you are. The “type” of person who goes to University of Michigan (from out of state) is different from the type of person who goes to Bowdoin. Families that are concerned about this aspect of university attendance fall into the consumption trap.
^Academically and socioeconomically similar students to my son from his school are going to both public and private colleges. They are not different “types.” They all are high achievers.
Some of them purposely wanted the public colleges because they were a better fit, some wanted public colleges because they were less expensive, and some ended up at them as last-choice safeties. But to imply that they are a different “type” of student is inaccurate. And it is either insulting to the public university kids, falsely implying they are less stellar in some way, or insulting to the private college kids, implying they are trying to look rich instead of because they are seeking the type of education they desire.
It is also inaccurate to imply that only rich kids go to top private colleges. Look at my separate thread on Williams Financial Aid on the Williams forum, and Williams is not unique in this regard: all the top colleges actively seek out socioeconomic diversity and are very generous in supporting needy students.
I think @brantly might have been referring to the subjective perceptions of the parents and how they lead to the “consumption trap.”
You can argue all day about it being good or bad but you can’t deny the fact that financial aid raises cost of attendance and pushes most doughnut hole families (unless they drain their retirement) out of the race for elite colleges, making spots available for rich and poor. If cost was low for everyone and all students were supposed to pay back loans then parent’s ability or willingness to pay wouldn’t control child’s destiny, no matter you are poor, middle class or wealthy.
Sometimes it’s out of your control. Right now our family income is not just “middle class”; it’s less than the median for the US as a whole. My husband is disabled. I’m his primary caregiver, so my own earning potential is limited. And, despite having “gold level” health insurance, we have medical bills that are so high ($300K) that they have drained savings set aside for our daughter’s post-graduate education and, increasingly, are draining our retirement savings. Even so, we have resources available to us that we would not have if my husband and I hadn’t had 60+ years of fairly privileged existence and the social resources that have come with that—good educations, a fair number of “connections”, and the self-confidence and savvy to make use of what we do have.
Our daughter is getting ready to apply to medical school. We won’t be able to help much with that. And she’s not going into a specialty that will be very lucrative. But she sees school, and work, as being more than a financial decision. It’s about how you want to spend your life. For her, that includes making a “living wage,” feeling like she’s doing good work that has a positive impact on society, and living a lifestyle that is not that different from the one she grew up in.
@calmom is correct.
@TheGreyKing You misunderstood my point, or maybe I didn’t make it clear enough. I picked Michigan not because it’s public but because it’s large and has a rah-rah football culture. The students who choose Michigan (from OOS) are very definitely looking for a different culture than the student who chooses Bowdoin.I certainly was not insulting anyone who attends UMich. My own child goes there. And I never mentioned anything about rich vs. poor.
What’s one of the first things you ask a new person at a cocktail party? If you’re our age you ask what do you do for a living. If you’re 20, you ask where do you go to school. Those are social definers – for better or for worse. Calmom had asked why someone would choose a college that would require the parents or student to take loans, rather than a lesser ranked or lesser known college that costs less. That’s why. People are chasing the social identifier.
Thanks for the clarification.
But a student may want the resources, small class sizes, accessible and devoted professors, bright peer group, tight knit community, and endless opportunities of a top small liberal arts college like Bowdoin for those reasons- not just to be able to say “I’m brilliant”! (In fact, social id would be a weird reason to choose Bowdoin, as most people haven’t heard of Bowdoin and have heard of Michigan!)
You are proving my point, which maybe is too fine a point. The student who wants the resources, small class size, accessible/devoted professors, etc. signals something about them vs. the student who chooses Michigan. All those things are seen as universally good things, and the fact that they ARE great things to the Bowdoin student says something about them.As for most people never having heard of Bowdoin … that’s the point. As long as the “right” people have heard of it. See where I’m going?
Example: I have one child who is a rising senior and looking at small LACs like Bowdoin (although not that one specifically). At info sessions, his eyes light up when they talk about tutorials, meetings at coffee shops with professors, independent research, etc. My other one who goes to Michigan would rather have her fingernails pulled out one by one than to take a tutorial with a professor. Their choices signal something about them.
Exactly. At least in New England, there are certain social groups where having a kid accepted to a NESCAC school (especially those schools perceived to be at the more selective end of the spectrum) is a big deal.
But the point is, the student who can get into Bowdoin might be eligible for significant merit aid at Rhodes or Denison —enough aid so that their price point looks a lot more like what the median or lower middle-class family might expect at Bowdoin. And that student will get the LAC benefits - small classes, accessible profs, etc. at the LAC’s that participate in CTCL college fairs even if most of those colleges aren’t showing up at the top of the US News list.
I just attended a family members graduation from U Michigan.
Yes, the main commencement was in the stadium.
His degree was granted in a small ceremony (five other students in his program) and he got hugged by every single faculty member on the dais (and he’s not a hugger). This was a BA, not a grad program.
So I find it a little bizarre that Michigan is getting held out as ground zero for large class/impersonal education.
I majored in Classics back in the day and classes of 12 students was the norm once you were past Freshman year “Intro to…” type classes. And I’m willing to bet that even at Michigan, Wisconsin, U Illinois, your senior seminar on Pliny or Herodotus isn’t going to be 800 students trying to get a seat.
Not to knock Bowdoin- a fine institution- but it doesn’t have a lock on small classes.
Michigan and Bowdoin are both examples of great colleges that attract top students. The choice between them is a matter of personal preference.
I think we have wandered off the original sticker price discussion, however, into a debate about large vs. small colleges. This thread was originally about how only the wealthy actually pay the sticker price at top private colleges, while families of other income levels, from poor to upper middle class, receive substantial discounts in the form of financial aid.
Really? Upper middle class wage earners receive substantial discounts in the form of financial aid? Really?
Then how come our kids didn’t get substantial financial aid at their colleges? Oh I know…because our kids colleges don’t guarantee to meet full need for all accepted students.
Wouldn’t have helped DS…his EFC exceeded the cost of attendance at Boston University when he was a freshman.
You know…we are not wealthy. But we did have college costs as a priority item for the undergrad years for our kids. Both parents worked full time. We made it work.
No…we had NO college savings.
I am referring to the article and chart in the original post.
I have to agree with @thumper1 about the Upper Middle getting substantial discounts??? What struck me was how close the EFC was for the Very Affluent and the (merely) Affluent. They are expected to pay essentially the same, yet the A’s make $60,000 less than the VA’s per the assumptions of the article.
I looked at this as a percentage of income that the family is expected to pay. I did not see exact numbers in the graphs so I used the guesstimates of $70k for the VA & A, $35k for UM, and $18k for the M. “One striking pattern is the similarity of college costs for a given family across different selective colleges. Prices do vary from one college to another, but often not radically so.”
So:
Very Affluent 70/246 = 28.5%
Affluent 70/186 = 37.6%
Upper Middle 35/123 = 28.5%
Middle 18/75 = 24%
Now, I’m sure I’m going to be criticized for saying that this is unfair to Affluent. I’ve seen many people on CC say things to the effect of, “Oh boo-hoo. You make $175,000 per year. You can afford it.” But, if you look at the numbers, the Affluent are expected to pay more (a higher percentage of their income) than anyone else.
Based on these numbers, I’d estimate my family falls in the 85th percentile. I have completed the EFC for 2 schools on this list along with 3-4 others that probably just missed the list and my EFC was $55-59,000 or approx 35% of my income. My limited experience thus far aligns with the findings of the article.
Based on this data, the affluent are penalized.
The percentage difference IS interesting, @SoFloDad.
I will be paying 34% of my family’s total pre-tax income this year, so you and we must have similar incomes.
But I consider it worth it, so I am not upset. I think it is right that less affluent people pay a smaller percentage of their incomes, because it is harder to meet other expenses (mortgage or rent, taxes, family transportation, etc.) at lower incomes. I very much believe in a progressive tax system, so I feel the same way about aid. And all students benefit from being surrounded by students from diverse backgrounds, financially and otherwise.
Yeah, it would be nice if the “very affluent” paid more than we did— paying for college is certainly easier for them than for us!— but the point is, it is fair because we can afford full pay without jeopardizing our retirement savings, our home, or our car.
And S’s college is so generous that the net price calculator shows that, based on our salary this year with our assets, we actually would qualify for some aid if we want it for sophomore year. I am in awe of how generous his college is! At the same time, the college bill is HUGE and the end is a long way off with graduate school highly likely.
There is a downside to looking at colleges that appear to be out of reach. Your kid might get in and they might not get the aid you need and they might decide to take on a lot of debt, or you might decide to take on a lot of debt. CC rarely can address individual family decisions. What seems like a lot of money to some families means another family will pay the full ride (often at a large % of their family income).
How can the student “take on a lot of debt” unless their parents co-sign the loans? Student debt in student hand only is limited to the Direct Loans…$5500, $6500, $7500, $7500 for a total of $27,000…and that’s for the full four years…not each year.
I’m with @TheGreyKing . We paid my whole salary…all of it…to colleges for 7 years while our kids were in undergrad school. DH’s salary paid our other bills. No complaints…at all. Well worth the money spent.
I took the OP and the article to suggest that you actually look at schools and investigate what they would cost before just writing them off as unaffordable. Not that you send in the application or buy the sweatshirt or start selling the family jewels to pay for the school, just that you look to see if there is a way to make the school come in under the budget.
And yes, HAVE a budget!
Not every school will work but schools might offer more than the family thinks. We found schools that offered more than we expected and others offered nothing. Sometimes the ones that offered more still didn’t offer enough to make it work, but I’m still glad we looked at them and could make an informed decision to apply or to say goodbye.
My daughter fell in love with a school while on a recruiting trip. She looked at me with pure joy shining from her eyes and said “Can I commit?” and I smiled and said “No.” We didn’t know about the total cost and the money she’d receive. She could love it all she wanted to but it still had a $50k+ price tag and our budget was $15k. We made it work but if we couldn’t have, we would have said goodbye. We did not dismiss it immediately because it was outside the budget.
I agree @Happytimes2001 . My son has the stats to get into a lot of schools he likes but those schools are so expensive ($60k). With his stats he would not qualify for top merit which means they’d still be at least $52k which is simply not worth it. We are focusing on realistic choices that would meet his needs yet still be reasonable in cost.