<p>^^that’s what I said - that the people defaulting on college loans aren’t in college, so they don’t affect college tuition. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ah…but in a sense, the increase in B.A & B.S. degree’s that have “flooded” the market, are causing the degrees to have less “worth”, even while Tuition continues to increase. The market is being flooded, degree’s have less value, this reduces the earning capability of students, causing the students to default on loans. </p>
<p>“I’m one who fits into that category. Anything for our first darling, and we did borrow PLUS for him. But we started the repayment process (Thank Goodness) immediately, which made it painfully obvious that we could not go that way with our other kids. But at least these loans are now paid off, which they would not be, had we begun payment 6 months after he finished school. As it was, it took us 15 years to pay for his education, including those 4 years he was in college. So when the second one entered college, the very idea of adding a loan payment for his college was just not financially feasible. We could see it very clearly. Fortunately, he went in-state public which gave us a breather. But we were foolish enough that we had to feel the pain to understand it.”</p>
<p>wow…15 years and you had more kids going to college. Did you have any loans in his name so they feel the responsibility. What did he study and where? and did he get the career he wanted…</p>
<p>Brovo for you for paying it back…but I am sure that college cost a lot more with whatever the interest rate was. </p>
<p>Can you tell me why parents are stretching their necks out like this? sounds like you kinda regretted or lesson learned. I know its hard to not give kids what they want. i wanted mine to go to the priv schools they got into and I was willing to do anything. afterall, they worked so hard and deserved. My husband said no since we didnt get enough aid. though i feel like i let them down, my kids dont feel that and have no regrets and happy as can be with lots of potential.</p>
<p>Cali, we had other kids in private school–we pretty much went the private route, our choice absolutely, k-12, so we took out the loans on a planned and measured basis for the first. We started repaying that loan (10 year plan) immediately, and did so each term, so that when he graduated, we had about 9 1/2 years to go on that last semester loan. Yes, he did take out the full Direct Loans but WE repaid them. We had him take them because the interest rate on them were far more favorable, but he never paid out of his own pocket for them.</p>
<p>He picked the wrong school for himself, and though he’s now in the type of work he seems to like, he still isn’t making a living wage especially for around here. It’s taken him a while to get where he is. Yes, I would feel better if he were a blazing success, but since his loans, we did manage to pay off as planned, that 's not the reason why DH and I had to rethink the strategy. It’s that things do happen in those years, and that constant monthly payment is a true drain. DH had some job and income setbacks and some financial hits were taken. Our state school in that time barely cost $15K a year and now that perspective is back, I can see that any number of them, the ones who turned down pricier options are doing just as well as their peers. It depends a lot, and I mean A LOT on the kid and the course of study, rather than the school. </p>
<p>We’d be in deep water trouble and in worse shape, maybe not made it through some hard times that hit had our second one wanted to do the same as his brother, and if we had acquiessed for the sake of parity and fairness, and also because, that’s really one of the things in life I ever so wanted and want to provide for my kids. We had to plan out the costs and what we could afford and put a cap on it which hurts me terribly. Even so, the cap is too much as my last two in college cost every bit of that top amount, and truthfully more. It often comes out to be more because we aren’t strict to the dollar, we’re weak, and because stuff happens. </p>
<p>Yes, the college would have cost us about $200k had we paid as we went (probably more with luxury, frivolty and discretional things that I did not track and am not counting), but with the whopping interest of the PLUS, and the Direct Student rates were no bargains back then either–they’ve just been lowered, we paid A LOT more. Do the math and yes, we did pay alot. </p>
<p>He did get a top of the line education in a field that got him job opportunities, but he decided he did not want to continue in that field and in that work. That’s really a ll one can do is get the opportunities. We have a friend whose DD went to Yale and she found she loves working with young children and barely making min wage at a Montessori school, loving every second of her work. She and her parents have braggin’ rights to Yale for the rest of their lives, but if unless she finds a way to parlay what she loves to do in a high pay way, she’ll be living close to poverty level on her wages. Other peers of my son are doing post grad research and other impressive things after graduating for prestigous programs and being very well educated and accomplished, but the jobs they have, the work they want to do does not pay. Heck, one of mine is a poor starving artist because he wants to audition and do acting work of which he cannot get enough that pays enough to get him off the poverty line. At least neither of my kids have no student loans over their head. We paid the loans they took, because we asked them to take them on our behalf in place of PLUS so that we got a little break in the interest rates, but we paid any such loans taken back. None of my kids have student loan payments in their budget, and yes, it’s been a relief for them, because frankly some of them could not afford them. The math just would not work, and deferrals and defaults would be in the picture had they had them.</p>
<p>I cannot blame my son a whit. He looked us right in the eye and said he could go to State U where he was accepted. But we wanted to give him his"dreamschool" and, he did prefer Top 25 U. So we bit and paid. Part of wanting to give them everything and anything, absolutely. And I don’t know what I would have done if the others really wanted to go to Top Price U and gave us a case for such choice and said they really wanted to go there. I would have probably done it. I’m not strong that way. But we gave them the number we could afford, and they didn’t say a thing other than, Ok and were fine with it. Any acceptances that cost over the amount went off the table and they picked schools that fit that dollar amount. No full price top of the line privates, and some OOS schools that charge way up there were considerations without merit bringing down the price. My one son actually got his merit award doubled simply telling his first choice school this (and some other things, all true) which made his private LAC within the range we said we could pay. Barely, but made it. And, yes, for him the school was worth every cent in that he loved it there, absolutely loved it, and double majored, did well and is now esconced in a top rate job, but right next to him is a kid that went to a state Polytech on scholarship, something my son also could have done.</p>
<p>cptofthehouse</p>
<p>thanks. I have more regrets about where my kids went to college than they do. I begged for the first to go the the priv one (top univ) where he would have gone and husband said no. Even the Head of Financial Aid told us that loans for undergrad was not worth it despite getting a degree that pays well (engineering). Son went to a state U and making decent money now and happy where he went. 2nd one still in school and I offered to pay if wished to transfer to a stronger program and said “NO!” SO… Not sure why I still get “wish he had, wish we did, why we made a big thing about cost and didnt let him go” For one…we never had much debt but mostly the house. So the whole thing was scarry. Time will tell where life takes him but doing great so far. I think as a mom, I didnt fight or make what they wanted and give it to them when they deserved it and that is the issue that I am dealing with…it comes and goes. We will prob save $100k plus when all is done with 2nd child and would be willing to help with grad school if need be more specialized. I think what makes it hard too, is that I know alot of kids getting what they want- even if the parents are about to go bankrupt.</p>
<p>crazy about the girl that went to Yale but I know of many kids and some adults that went to Ivy and just not using that education. Or could not get jobs. I was reading bios from start ups in Silicon Valley and many have Ivy or close to it, but many also dont say where their undergrad is from (though others from same co state it) so my guess it was nothing to brag about but they got masters and are successful. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know which lines in the CDS Data10 used, above, to calculate Stanford’s net costs.
For 2013-14, Stanford’s tuition, room & board totaled $55,856 (2013-14 CDS section G1). Average grant aid, for the 842 students who received it, was $40,395 (CDS, section H2, line k). So for just those students, the average net cost (for tuition, room and board) was only $15,461. Now, if you divide the grant aid among ALL entering freshmen, the average grant per entering freshman was $19,271 (($40,395 * 842 grant recipients) / 1765 entering freshmen). So, the average net cost was $36,585. This is somewhat higher than the $31,700 shown by Data10 for 2013. (We must be using different data or methods to calculate.)</p>
<p>For all of the 100 private universities on Kiplinger’s “Best Value” list, the average “total cost per year” is $51,680. The “average need-based aid” is $23,236. So the average net total cost per year, for n-b aid recipients at these 100 private universities, is $28,444. <a href=“http://www.kiplinger.com/tool/college/T014-S001-kiplinger-s-best-values-in-private-colleges/index.php”>http://www.kiplinger.com/tool/college/T014-S001-kiplinger-s-best-values-in-private-colleges/index.php</a></p>
<p>For all of the 100 public universities on Kiplinger’s “Best Value” list, the average “total cost per year” is $21,259 for in-state students. The average “total cost per year” is $36,279 for out-of-state students. The average of these two figures (IS and OOS) is $28,769, very close to the average net cost for n-b aid recipients at the 100 “best value” private schools ($28,444). <a href=“Best College Values, 2019 | Kiplinger”>http://www.kiplinger.com/tool/college/T014-S001-kiplinger-s-best-values-in-public-colleges/index.php</a></p>
<p>It seems to me that these colleges are priced to be affordable to a (small/upper-) middle class family. Your in-state public flagship typically will be priced in the low to mid $20Ks. The net cost for a middle class student to attend a selective private university will be in the high $20Ks. An average out-of-state public flagship might run into the mid-to-high $30Ks. I suspect these relative numbers, in real inflation-adjusted dollars, have remained fairly steady for many years (just as Data10’s numbers show for Stanford). </p>
<p>The big, significant spread is between in-state flagship and full-sticker private school costs. Full cost to attend an Ivy (or peer university/LAC) typically is double, or more, the in-state flagship COA. This spread generates many anxious discussions on College Confidential. However, this is a problem that for the most part only faces families fortunate enough to have both high-achieving children and relatively high incomes.</p>
<p>Note that the numbers in the Kiplinger tables linked above can be misleading because some of the averages only include students who received financial aid, not the full student body. If only one student received need-based FA, and that student received a full ride, the Kiplinger table would report the average need-based aid is a full ride. What the Kiplinger table calls “Avg need based aid” matches the value the CDS calls average need-based scholarship of grant award of those who were awarded scholarship or grant aid (line k from section H2). Similarly what Kiplinger calls “Avg non-need based aid” matches the value the CDS calls Average dollar amount of institutional non-need-based scholarship and grant aid awarded to students who had no financial need and who were awarded institutional non-need-based scholarship or grant aid (line o from section H2A). The average debt at graduation appears to include the whole class, as the numbers are close to those reported from The Institute for College Access and Success for 2012 . </p>
<p>
Note that the 4 colleges on the list with the lowest average debt at graduation are the unlikely combination of HYP and North Georgia. Harvard’s website claims that they are less expensive than state schools for 90% of students in the United States, and 100% of students can graduate debt free. Stanford has mentioned a similar mission, involving trying to being affordable for all students in the United States. Colleges with good financial aid are affordable for most US families with incomes well below middle class. At such schools, the average net cost may be more of a sliding scale based on income for most students, rather than a reflection of the sticker price. For example, using Harvard’s NPC with varied income levels, 1 kid in college, a 4 person family, and $100k salary in savings, I get the following net cost to parents by income level. I’ve listed the % of income in parenthesis. The rate of increase in cost is quite variable for different income ranges. Note that there is little change in percent of income between $100k and $150k, but the percent of income more than doubles between $150k and $200k income. This can lead to surprising conclusions about what income levels may be most likely to struggle with costs.</p>
<p>Income – Cost to Parents (% Income)
$65k – $0 (0%)
$100k – $8k (8%)
$125k – $12.5k (10%)
$150k – $15k (10%)
$175k – $32k (15.5%)
$200k – $41k (21%)
$225k – $52k (23%)
$235k – $61k (26%) </p>
<p>@Data10–did you mean zero in savings or $100K in savings in the example above?</p>
<p>"…using Harvard’s NPC with varied income levels, 1 kid in college, a 4 person family, and $100k salary in savings…"</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>It was a typo, $100k in savings.</p>
<p>
I was focusing on average cost to students, rather than cost after need-based grants, so I included things like scholarships and tuition waivers. I used the (total dollars from the table in section H - loans, work study, and other self help) / (number of undergrad students). Note that I looked at the full undergrad class instead of just freshmen. Using your methodology with consideration to only need-based grants, I also get less than $1k difference in inflation-adjusted average price between 1999 and 2013.</p>
<p>The problem with the analysis of the “net price” is that it does not take into account those that have to pay full price, for whom the cost has gone up dramatically. in just the 10 years since my oldest started, tuition has gone up $10K at his top 30 private U (which is just under 1/3). Need-based aid has increased, but the merit aid has not and in fact some schools have dropped this entirely. For the Stanford example, the 842 students got a discount but the other around 900 students got nothing so their ACTUAL cost was almost $56K. The average COA is not relevant as most familes are actually full pay (according to the data presented). Given that the COA is not normally distributed, the median cost would be the more appropriate measure. This would likely be closer to (or exactly) $55.8K (if as presented 842 got aid and the rest none). If medians were considered, a more realistic analysis of how costs have increased could be undertaken.</p>
<p>I took PLUS loans for Barnard girl because it was the only way she was going anywhere. The financial aid packages, at the end of the day, left my contribution to be within a few thousand dollars no matter where she went. When you’re talking that much money, $2000 either way wasn’t enough to base the decision on. The University of Michigan was our best package but they still thought I could pay $18K a year, but I couldn’t. American was the worst package, expecting me to pay $22K a year. Barnard was right in the middle. That means at the state directionals, we would have been full pay. </p>
<p>I was in a unique position to see an OOS and IS package from U Mich though. They initially had her classified as a non-resident. They had sent a letter saying that if you met certain conditions you had to fill out this form to be classified as a resident. I read the criteria and it didn’t apply so I didn’t do the form. When we got the financial aid package though, I realized she was classified as OOS. I got that all fixed and got a new, in state package. My expected contribution didn’t change at all. </p>
<p>I’ve managed to get myself a new job with a higher salary but my EFC hasn’t changed much (there were some assets liquidated that falsely inflated my income in previous years) but now I really CAN afford it. With both in school, I’m hoping to not take any more loans. I’ve got myself positioned to live on half my take home income come September and the other half goes to tuition payments and loan payments. My goal is to have everything paid off by the time they have both graduated. They will take their Direct loans and that’s their contribution to their education. If they’re really struggling with paying them, we’ll work something out, but those interest rates are so much lower than mine that it makes sense to take those first. </p>
<p>Overall, for us, most schools have been the same cost so they may as well go with their dream schools. The costs are outrageous for full pay folks- I agree. For the rest of us, it’s like shopping at Kohl’s. Their prices are ridiculous but there are always 15%-30% off coupons and other sales going on to allow you to pay what it is really worth. </p>
<p>
The problem with looking at “sticker price” is it doesn’t take into account those with typical US family incomes for which the inflation adjusted cost has decreased at many colleges in recent years. At Stanford, I expect you’d find that inflation adjusted price decreased for lower and middle income students, and increased for upper income students. Average price is a way to find a balance these extremes and analyze reasons for sticker price changes since average can be computed in such a way to look at the total tuition/ R&B dollars the college receives per year, which is the most relevant figure for the college’s operational costs.</p>
<p>
No, 842 freshman received need-based grants. Need-based grants are far from the only possible source of reduced cost. For example, some students did not qualify for need-based grants because of external scholarships, some received non-need based athletic scholarships, some received non-need based tuition waivers, etc. If you include these additional sources, most families are not full pay.</p>
<p>
Median cost is not available for analysis. Even if it was, it has as many flaws as average or sticker. A more ideal method would be to separate cost for specific groups. For example, cost for students with typical US family income, cost for students from typical middle class families, cost for students from wealthy families that are paying sticker price, etc. However, again this data is not available for older years.</p>
<p>
This is not a meaningful stat because you are not considering inflation. For example, suppose the tuition increased from $35k to $45k between 2003 and 2013. When expressed in 2013 dollars, the increase changes to $44,300 to $45,000… a $700 increase over the course of 10 years sounds far more reasonable.</p>
<p>Previously, inflation in prices assumed a concurrent increase in average income. That has not happened, to my knowledge, over the past 3 decades. In essence, the $10,000 increase in tuition is in real dollars for the average family.</p>
<p>
A graph of household income for the past 3 decades is at <a href=“http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Income-Distribution.php”>http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Income-Distribution.php</a> . Note that middle quintile household income appears to closely follow inflation during the past 3 decades. The upper quintile, who is most likely to be full pay, also seems to be following inflation, although not as closely as the middle quintile. According to the census data, the upper quintile household income increased from ~$144k to ~$182k between 2002 and 2012. This upper quintile household income increase is ~1 percentage point away from inflation for the 2002 to 2012 period.</p>
<p>My college has gone up 10X in cost. My father was a government employee and I can see exactly what someone in that job would be making today, and it’s not 10X more. Not to mention what comparable housing would cost. I would have gotten about half the cost covered by fin aid those days which does not even come up to the required student contribution even with a zero EFC these days. it would be a tough go for a GS-11 who was 20 years along in there to pay for a top private college for his kids even with the fin aid package that would net. </p>
<p>Aw, Cali, hugs, and a lunch or dinner if you find yourself in the NYC area. Your heart is right were it should be as a mom. I know exactly how you feel. I hurt a lot about many things about my kids. Labor pains are nothing compared to the other kinds parents can get later on. Good thing I don’t have a heart condition, because I think it would have done me in. Real problems as well as my personal regrets. i did try to do the best I could. </p>
<p>Using @Data10 link, since 2007, real (inflation adjusted) mean household income has decreased for everyone except the top 5%. OUCH! :-& </p>
<p>(If you look at it since 2006, then even the top 5% income has decreased!)</p>
<p>Tuition cost at state publics vary (sometimes greatly) by state, as does state based merit (Bright Futures in Florida, for example) and the level of access to merit scholarships.</p>
<p>Data, I meant to stay that my son stated college in 2007, not 2003 so the increase is from 2007 to 2013,not 2003. (not sure why I did that!) And this was a period in which wages were completely staganant or declined. I just ran a US inflation calculator which told me that if I purchased something for $34,000 in 2007 it would have cost $38,200.35, in 2013 not the $44,000 reported for this year. </p>
<p>As to your other point, there is very little other money out there that is for those without finanical need. And that goes to the super stars. Many of the top schools don’t give merit money or athletic scholarships. Most kids who don’t get institutional money are very close to full pay. </p>
<p>By the way, if you look at the average tuition at a private college in 1980 it was $9,500; in 2013 dollars that shouldb e $26,858. Much different than the $44,000 many privates charge today. </p>
<p>I disagree that the average is any better of a measure since the prcie of tuition is not normally distributed. It has a big bulge at the upper end where all those full pay kids land. Also, many schools will give a very minimal “merit” award of a couple of thousand so there is a minimal discount, but nothing that will really put a dent in it. The schooll can then say they gave a higher percentage of scholarships. </p>