<p>I just put in the financial information that we’re talking about here into my son’s university with commuting and with his test scores and GPA and it spit out a net cost of $3,500 per year. With the American Opportunity Credit, that would bring it down to $1,100 per year.</p>
<p>The main cost reducers are the Pell Grant at $2,100 and the Commonwealth Scholarship (requires 3.75 or better GPA and 1400 SAT or better) of $10,868. There are lots of other small need-based and merit-based private scholarships at this school based on major, heritage, city of residence, etc.</p>
<p>In contrast I know of no one that did that when I was in college, everyone went away to college and even today, at least around here, MOST kids do not go to CC, less than 5% of our graduating class at a public high school will got to CC and most go away to college, even if it is sort of close they live on campus.</p>
<p>You must live in an unusual area, probably a very wealthy one.</p>
<p>When I was graduating from high school (whose area then covered lower middle to upper middle to upper income neighborhoods), about a third went to four year schools (many students went to the local state schools) and about half went to two year schools (mostly the local community college). The high school’s attendance area’s income and wealth levels have gone up a lot since then; the current destinations are about two thirds to four year schools and one third to two year schools.</p>
<p>Massachusetts Community Colleges Open Pathways to Education & Careers</p>
<pre><code>Serving more than 190,900 students, community colleges are the largest and fastest growing segment of public higher education in Massachusetts, with more than 138,600 students in credit courses and 52,300 students in non-credit courses.*
Accounting for more than 56 percent of undergraduate credit enrollments.
Representing more than 47 percent of the students in the Massachusetts public higher education system.
</code></pre>
<hr>
<p>There are a ton of private higher-ed institutions in MA - I don’t know what the total private enrollment is in the state but it looks like CCs are a decent chunk of overall higher ed in MA.</p>
<p>I’m sure it depends on the school. Most of my graduating class in the mid 80’s (private school in NYC) went to a 4 year “away” college. Had I gone to my zoned public, I doubt that would have been the case.</p>
<p>Most of my kids’ class also go away, in a pretty well to do area’s public school. Couple towns over, not as many do.</p>
<p>ucbalumnus–nope, average middle class area but one where people put a strong emphasis on education. Pretty much every school around here is like that though, with a handful of exceptions.</p>
<p>Median household income in the US is about $50,000 annually. Seems that a lot of posters here self-describing themselves as “middle class” or “middle income” but saying that they won’t get any financial aid (i.e. probably well over $100,000 income).</p>
<p>ucbalumnus–no, I think the average income in our area is about $70,000, which is a bit above the national average but factor cost of living and it’s still a middle class area. Yes, there are some very wealthy people in our area, but also people on welfare…</p>
<p>We are above that average, thankfully, but we are just one family in that average.</p>
<p>That is taking all the household into account. If only account for those families with HS and college age kids, I bet the median will be much higher than that $50,000 figure. Because on average, age around 40 ~ 50 have the highest earning power. </p>
<p>In other words, it coudl very well take $100K a year to be a middle class within that relative narrow demongraphic.</p>
<p>For households headed by someone age 45-54, the median is about $61,000 per year. For those headed by someone age 35-44, it is about $57,000 per year. For those headed by someone age 55-64, it is about $50,000 per year.</p>
<p>ucb, correct me I am misinterpreting your posts, but it does not seem that you can acknowledge that for the middle class, college costs take a larger bite of the earners’ take-home pay than ever. For us in that $75K-$125K AGI region (OK, let’s call that leaning towards upper middle class, of course dependent upon locale), our FAFSA yields too high an EFC to be considered for need-based aid. And I have reconciled with that, really.</p>
<p>Where I have had a problem for years–and have been excoriated on this forum for stating it–is that because of this growing anomaly, where salaries have NOT risen even close to the rate of college tuition increases, most private institutions & many OOS publics were simply out of reach cost-wise for my D’s, without doing serious, insane damage to family finances. </p>
<p>I could see this right off the bat when D1 was applying all over the US in 2004, and in the ensuing eight years, that disparity has widened. Maybe there’s been a leveling off in the last year as some high-cost, low-return privates are facing falling enrollment. I guess the light bulb must’ve gone off there.</p>
<p>We zigged & zagged with our savings, took loans, and in the end both D’s have gotten fine educations at OOS publics. We had choices at least. I think they’ll both be employable, so I have no axe to grind in that regard. But the question still begs…why is the family at this income level in a sense penalized by having to pay full freight at most institutions, and 80-90% at the high-octane privates?</p>
<p>Truly what is happening here is a microcosm of the debate in Congress currently.</p>
<p>jnm123-ucbalumnus’s issue is that he lives in CA and is under the impression that the rest of the country is just like where he lives and can’t fathom that other parts of the country have great schools and do things differently then he does. This comes out in pretty much every post he makes. I’m sure that a lot of people in CA do commute to school every day but around here, that just isn’t the case nor is it the case in any town around us. If you take community colleges out of the equation, CA would probably have a similar experience, however, more people in CA go the CC route to start then they do here. </p>
<p>Yes, the middle class, and I will use that for salaries above the national average of $50,000 because in a lot of areas $50K is poverty level and in others you are closer to upper class because of cost of living, is in a tough spot for funding education but it really hasn’t changed any over the years. In 1980 the middle class salary was about $38,000 with families making over $75K considered upper class. Affording a college education on that salary was just as difficult then as it was now and financial aid was not given out at that salary range, other that loans.</p>
<p>There is a cost of living calculator on CNN’s site allowing you to input your current salary and city and another major city. It tells you the comparable salary for that new location. So if I put in $70K for Detroit, it says you need a salary of $102K to live comparably. This is why using hard fast numbers like that doesn’t work. It is kind of fun to check out the comparisons. </p>
<p>^very true. If I put in our salary and compare it to other parts of the country, some places we could have a comparable lifestyle on $40,000/year less and in others we would need $100,000+ MORE to have a comparable lifestyle.</p>
<p>OK, then. Let’s take it one step further. Would you be able to say, SteveMA, that ‘back in the day’, for middle-class incomers, was there a wider array of college choices–top to bottom cost-wise–then there are now? I can’t remember student loans, much less Parent PLUS loans, being as much a part of the picture then. I remember a few college buddies on loans but am almost certain it was tied to work-study, and they said they were ‘putting themselves through college’. We’re talking 35 years ago. </p>
<p>I did, at that time, feel fortunate that my folks could pay for my education & didn’t force me to get a job, except in the summer when I’d work like a dog & give the paycheck to my dad. Which is the way I worked it with my two D’s.</p>
<p>Trinity is not even a need-blind, full-need school. So there must be about 50 other private colleges that are at least competitive with Trinity for need based aid ([Need-blind</a> admission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need-blind_admission]Need-blind”>Need-blind admission - Wikipedia)). If you were looking only at OOS public schools, I suppose it’s not too surprising if you concluded that families at these income levels are shut out of need-based aid … though of course, their sticker prices would be lower, too ([Best</a> Values in Public Colleges, 2011-12](<a href=“http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/colleges/]Best”>Best College Values, 2019 | Kiplinger)).</p>
<p>Is Trinity College an unrepresentative example? Again, that depends on what schools you’re considering. Trinity seems to be somewhat less selective than Georgia Tech, UNC, UVA, UCSD, W&M, Michigan, UCLA, or Berkeley (maybe much less so for OOS students with need).</p>
<p>It seems to me that if your family income is in that $75K-$125K range, and if your student has pretty good (not necessarily phenomenal) stats, you should have a fairly good selection of colleges with a net COA of ~$25K or less per year.</p>
<p>jnm12–everyone I knew had student loans back when. I had SELF loans, my parents did not take PLUS loans but I know people that did. My parents did not contribute a dime to my education though. I had ample choices and worked my butt off to pay for a private school, that cost a heck of a lot less net then the state schools I applied to thanks to some nice scholarships. The rest I covered with loans. </p>
<p>One of my college roommates was the daughter of a cardiologist, she didn’t pay any of her own schooling, other than that, everyone else had loans…and had them paid off within 5 years or so of graduating because we made a point to get rid of that debt. </p>
<p>Every family I knew expected their kids to earn as much money as possible when we were in college even the very wealthy families–who now have their names on college buildings :D. We all had 2 or 3 summer jobs or a few lucky ones landed jobs where they could earn overtime. We all worked 50-60 hours/week. Looking back at what my parents made, they could have helped some, but not as much as WE are able to help our kids in relation to their college costs. The average student loan debt back in the 80’s was about $16,000, now it is about $24,000. Average starting salary for a college grad in the 80’s was $16,000, now it is over $40,000 (close to $50,000). The debt ratio has gone DOWN in the past 30 years.</p>
<p>I think what has changed is that more parents feel the need to pay for their kids’ college education and they themselves have taken on more debt, which is not included in the above numbers. Just one example from some friends–they have taken on over $80,000 in loans for their 2 kids so their kids could go to their dream schools. They had other, less expensive options that would not require them to take any debt. No idea why they went that route but back in our day, that would NOT have happened.</p>
<p>Actually, I have the same criticism of people in California who have a similar very distorted idea of what “middle income” and “middle class” are.</p>
<p>As far as schools go, what you describe (99% of high school graduates going to 4-year colleges, everyone taking calculus BC, etc.) appears to be the outlier nationwide (and probably in your state as well).</p>