How did you justify paying for a reach over a financial safety?

Parents Forum
101

<p>"People always think they’d be really well off if they just earned $5,000 more a year. And they can’t possibly imagine how anyone who earns more than $25k more than them could hardly have financial woes. Yet, when you get the additional money, it’s amazing how quickly it disappears, and you wonder where it all went. "</p>

<p>I disagree. From the beginning, we saved aggressively for our kids’ education, and were a two-income household essentially living off one income (mine). We were cheap / frugal about many things, precisely so we could say to our kids when it came time to look at colleges - go where you like, you don’t have constraints. Extra money doesn’t have to disappear if you’re committed to living within or below your means. I don’t think oldfort is being smug at all. </p>

102

<p>oldfort, you are a long-time poster and I respect that. But you are really being tone-deaf on this issue. NO ONE is saying people with money shouldn’t spend it how they please. I just don’t understand why you can’t accept that there are many, many people in this country who do not enjoy your fortunate circumstances. You are the one casting aspersions on people’s choices.</p>

<p>I agree that we live in a global economy. My point was that at a micro level, hiring is done by a person or team of people in a specific place. In most companies that are not multinational, that hiring starts with the local market and extends outward as needed. You don’t have to believe this but it’s true for the overwhelming majority of businesses in this country.</p>

103

<p>I think a lot of this boils down to what your own college experience was, and what you feel is your obligation to give your children. My H and I both went to top 20 schools (LAC and national university) and wanted to give that opportunity to our D if she was prepared to take advantage of it. However, if she lacked the ability or interest, it would not be the end of the world. We did feel, however, that as we were given top educations by our parents, we should pay it forward if possible.</p>

<p>Not all colleges are created equal. There is a complex alchemy between institution and student. I would rather spend my discretionary income on a great college than on a nicer house or car. We also have lived beneath our means for many years to make it happen. It was not a conflict or struggle, just the obvious thing to do. My D could have gone to college where I work for free. It would not have been the best fit for her and it never occurred to me to make her do it.</p>

104

<p>

But for those who have the luxury of discretionary income there are other things besides nicer houses, cars, and handbags. I chose to pay dance studio fees for my daughter for umpteen years, I financed several trips overseas for my daughter in high school. This idea that parents are blowing their money on frills is disrespectful-- the biggest expenses that middle-class parents face over the years often are tied up with educating and enriching the lives of their children, well before the kids reach college age. </p>

105

<p>sally305 - I am not being tone deaf. I didn’t come from money. My parents were not able to save any money for our education because they were immigrants. We had to be self supporting very early on. My background gave me great incentive in making sure our kids would have more options than me. I was not always so fortunate. I was laid off a few times just like many people, but I made sure my kids’ education was never at jeopardy. Their private school tuitions were always the first thing I paid. </p>

<p>As far as choices in life…D1 had an aspiration to be a ballerina. I asked her if she has enjoyed the life I’ve provided for her. I told her the likelihood of her continuing such life style would be very slim if she were to become a dancer. I didn’t tell her that she couldn’t become one, but I just wouldn’t be giving her financial support. </p>

<p>I recently interviewed a lovely young lady for summer internship. I could tell she came from a comfortable home environment. I asked her why she would choose to work at a challenging work environment. She said, “I have no intention of living in a shoe box some day.” Her message to me was she expected to make it on her own, without her parents or future husband’s support. </p>

<p>We all make choices.</p>

106

<p>@YZamyatin‌ </p>

<p>From what I’ve seen, the reasons vary across different university forums. </p>

<p>On the forums for typical dream and reach schools (NYU,UCLA OOS, Penn State OOS, or Stanford) there are people trying to justify why spending 60K at the school is worth it.</p>

<p>While forums for cheaper and less popular schools like Texas State University there a people trying to justify why they should accept a full ride. </p>

<p>Some of the reasons other than price I have seen people decide to pay for a reach over a cheaper school dealt with things like m/f ratio or location. For example on the USC thread a student was trying to decide between UCLA and USC for CS(UCLA) and CS Games (USC)</p>

<p>His reasons as stated by his mother for why he wanted to choose a school</p>

<p>“UCLA:Ranking, Price, Neighborhood, Diversity, male-female ratio,
USC still has the strength of Game Design Program, and the fact that it is private with everything that comes with that (professor attention, class size, faculty ratio, alumni)”</p>

<p>Personally, I would say diversity plays an extreme factor in decisions if one costs more than the other. My mother for example choose to attend a historically black private university over a more diverse public university because she desired to be around her own race. And as I have seen in other threads there are Asians who don’t want to attend Berkeley because of its large Asian population and would rather go to another in which Asians are the minority (or vice versa) , as well as Latinos who rather attend a Hispanic serving institution in place of areas with a low Hispanic or Latino population (vice versa). This can also go into the m/f ratio.</p>

<p>Also I would say that religion is a factor. Some may choose Baylor University over ASU because it is a christian school. This could also go with the some people’s belief in the stereotype that Christian universities are safer universities (which is contradicted by the Trinity Christian University drug scandal). and also the strength of the presence of religion on a school whose primary focus is not religion which to some may be a negative. </p>

<p>Overall, I would say that the “fit” justifies the reason behind paying sometimes 20K more for a university over a financial safety.</p>

<p>Its like as stated in the posts above that if someone is trying to choose between two cars, the overall feeling of driving the car and its amenities are the reason behind why someone would choose an expensive car X over cheaper car Y… Even though both may get you to the same place, </p>

<p>They may like bigger/smaller car (university size) or they might like better (perceived or actual) mileage (Alumni) or other qualities.</p>

107

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s not disrespectful to acknowledge that even upper-middle-class people have different financial priorities. I know people in my area who spend big bucks on houses, leased cars, annual Caribbean vacations etc. These same people would find it absolutely crazy to spend 60K per year on a college, any college. They aren’t hurting for money. They just spent it differently. To them, college is just a white-collar credential. There is no point in spending extra because they do not value their children’s’ college experience more than they value their high-end kitchens and baths, or luxury autos. I am sort of an education snob and do look down on this attitude in private. But they look down on my small house and old cars, so it all evens out. We all get what we want out of life. </p>

108

<p>Well said, NJSue. I see that as well. </p>

109

<p>I’m with you Sue</p>

110

<p>Not sure why I’m weighing in here since there are already 8 pages-Im sure what I will say has been covered one way or another. I’ve read a few but not all pages. I would think key factors are the type of person the student is, the economic realities of the family (including other kids) and the student-family goals/values. It’s never going to be a one size fits all. I would say that there are things I hear people say that I think are flatly incorrect so I will address them. </p>

<p>1) The belief that “It does not matter where you go for college so save your money for graduate school”. If there is a chance a student wants law, medicine, or business school, considered “professional schools”, this advice may have merit. They are expensive. But the term “graduate school” usually refers to getting a (usually) PhD in an academic field. If that is the plan, you are in luck because most (not all) graduate students have tuition remission with stipends in return for working as a TA or GA. Naturally these are competitive and academically oriented but students who can get accepted to such programs usually get them. Now you’re talking another 4-6 years of school. </p>

<p>2) The belief that “Going to a name vs unknown school doesn’t matter”. There are a few issues combined into this one statement. There is the issue of the quality of the school which may be very high regardless of whether the school is a household name or not. High quality schools are usually those that have strong students, active faculty and a good record of getting students through successfully in a reasonable amount of time and equipped with the skills/credentials needed to gain entry to a job or more education. Sometimes small local schools filled with local students fall short (not always). But most people can agree that these things are important. But what about the name issue? </p>

<p>Does going to a competitive ivy plus (state flagships included) type of school matter? Studies show that it can be very important or not matter at all depending upon characteristics of the student. The students most apt to get into those schools are often the ones for whom it makes less of a difference for. For poor students, especially if the family is uneducated, it makes a huge difference. It gives them entry to connections, networking possibilities that they would otherwise not get. A student graduating from an Ivy, for instance, spent the last 4 years developing friendships with people who are likely to end up in powerful positions, most of whom already have the connections to get those positions. Those connections make a huge difference for the poorer student who probably started college without knowing many people in key professional positions. The wealthier students at the Ivy probably had those connections or similar ones anyway. Thus, had those wealthier students gone to Podunk U, they would not have lost the connections that coming from a wealthy family brings with it. A poor student going to Podunk U will probably not ever make those connections. Studies support this reality. </p>

111

<p>@calmom

I think this is insulting. I am spending “why not” money on my kids, and your money is hard earned and has so much more attached to it, therefore what I choose to spend on my kids’ education is not as meaningful as what you are spending on your kids. News flash…People like me are no different than you, every dime I spend on my kids is what I choose to forego on myself. </p>

112

<p>3) meant to add that other things being equal, going to a competitive well known school (well known to academicians not to US News readers) will help get a student into graduate school compared to a less well known or less competitive school. There are a few reasons for this but the two most important is that they are more likely to provide the type of opportunities (research, for example) that are viewed as valuable by graduate school faculty and the student is more likely to have worked with a well known and well connected researcher/scholar-whose letter of recommendation will be more valuable than Dr. Po Dunk’s. </p>

113

<p>

</p>

<p>Gucci bags?</p>

<p>What percentage of your annual income did you have to borrow to put your kids through college?</p>

<p>It isn’t the same. </p>

<p>Use your money however you choose, but there’s a huge difference between choosing how to allocate funds between one option and another, and not having the funds to make the choices.</p>

114

<p>

</p>

<p>Muhammad Ali</p>

<p>If there is ever a time to go for the reach, it is when you are young, invincible and have all the world ahead of you.</p>

115

<p>

DS went to a professional school in the end but we still did not follow this advice.</p>

<p>When he applied to college, we were really not sure what his future might be. We did not want to make a guess. Our choice was made based on the “worst” assumption that he may join the workforce immediately after college. How would we know what his future would be back then? Vision is always 20/20 after the fact.</p>

<p>You may call me a sort of education snub as well, considering the fact that, with the moderate income, I still sent DS to a college as a full pay for 2 years - he might as well be a 4-year full pay student if we were not extremely lucky after 2 years. But in my circle of friends, I believe EVERYONE of them would likely make the same choice as I did. You could say the people I befriend with are all sort of education snubs.</p>

116

<p>

</p>

<p>Be careful of public versus private generalizations.</p>

<p>USC class sizes may be smaller than UCLA class sizes, but many of them can be quite large.</p>

<p>For CS, USC seems to break up some of the large classes into 40 to 75 student lectures, although often taught by non-tenure-track lecturers. This is based on its schedule and faculty roster:
<a href=“http://classes.usc.edu/term-20143/classes/csci”>http://classes.usc.edu/term-20143/classes/csci&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://www.cs.usc.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/teaching-faculty.htm”>http://www.cs.usc.edu/faculty_staff/faculty/teaching-faculty.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

117

<p>

</p>

<p>Problem is, on these forums, lots of people write “grad school” without being specific as to whether they mean professional school (MD, JD, etc.) or PhD program.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>For pre-PhD study, the optimal undergraduate school would be one that is well respected in the major, in terms of producing BA/BS graduates who become successful PhD students (as seen by PhD program faculty). The “rankings” of schools by major for PhD preparation can differ a lot from overall school rankings, vary between different PhD programs, and are not published (so a high school senior looking that far ahead toward PhD program admission would not have any information of this sort to guide him/her in selecting an undergraduate school).</p>

118

<p>I regret going into debt to attend a reach school, rather than taking the full-ride offered to me by the state flagship. I went on to get a graduate degree, and no one cares what undergrad school I went to.</p>

<p>Now that we’re looking at schools for child, we will not consider undergrad schools that don’t give substantial merit aid. Therefore, no ivies, no Georgetown, no hoity-toity merit-aidless LACs. Not worth it. The money will be saved for grad school/ professional school.</p>

119

<p>^^^Personal experience or anecdotes may shape what you would do for your children. Hindsight is 20/20. You never know if your child will need a graduate degree.For most US college grads, the Bachelors degree is the terminal degree and you get one shot at it.</p>

120

<p>

</p>

<p>I respectfully disagree. That depends entirely on your field. If you are looking at professional schools (law, medicine), then that is absolutely correct. Spending big money on an undergraduate degree may well be a waste. If you are looking at PhD programs, it may or may not. For example, if your child is looking at laboratory sciences, then what gets you into a top PhD program is proven research potential. At an MIT or a CalTech (for example), the students will get these opportunities, and a significant minority will graduate with (sixth or seventh) authorship of a paper in a significant peer-reviewed journal. At other schools, that might not be the case. So in these fields, spending on the undergraduate education may well be worth it. In most of the humanities, the required lab work is not the same, and the value changes.</p>

<p>My experience is that the top schools (HYMPS and a few others) which offer no merit-based aid, have significant need-based aid. The NY Times reported that Princeton regularly has ~80% of students graduate with <$5K in debt (Harvard is about 63%) and while these schools do recruit from wealthy families, they are also tuition free if the family income is less than roughly $75K (and this varies between schools). Because of the way in which these schools handle need-based aid, I would not worry too much about sending a first child here, because, I would have some confidence that the need-based aid would increase significantly when a second child went to university (as it did in my case). So I would not have to fear that by stretching to accommodate child 1, I would be depriving child 2 of an education.</p>

<p>That being said, there are only 6 schools in the US which simultaneously offer need-blind admissions and guarantee to meet the full financial need for all of their admitted students (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, Dartmouth, and Amherst). Some (such as Stanford) will make that promise for US admits but not for internationals. Most won’t make that promise at all. As such, I feel that I could take up admission at one of these schools, without worrying about a future disaster that wrecks my home finances. The need-based aid will flex in future years if I need it (and I dearly hope that I won’t). Once you get past a very narrow group of very top schools, that guarantee is not there and the value and risk equation changes quickly.</p>