<p>I'm sure this has been done before, but if it were your kid, which would you suggest taking into account the following conditions?</p>
<p>1) You got absolutely zero aid from HYP but received the regents scholarship for 5k from LA or SD, the total cost for four years is 180k vs 72k. </p>
<p>2) You plan on graduate school which will cost you at least another 100k (at least 3 years)</p>
<p>Which would you advise your kid to take?</p>
<p>Depends if I had the extra $108k. In my case, it wouldn't be a matter of advice. I don't have it, and would never cosign on $108k worth of loans.</p>
<p>If I had it, I'd tell them to go where they liked. For lots of folks who attend HYP, $108 is pocket change.</p>
<p>The interesting situations are those in-between.</p>
<p>Most grad schools are free to the student in a PhD program. Professional schools even have some $$$.</p>
<p>I agree that it would depend on the "big picture" & what financial assets were available to the family & the student. In our family, we've explained to our son that we can help him with college or grad school but probably not both. </p>
<p>We're hoping he may choose to go where he gets good merit aid, even if he gets into a more prestigous "dream school," but we'll cross that when we get there. As of this moment, we haven't heard back from any schools, but expect that he'll get at least two full-ride offers, based on his stats. For us as out-of-staters, UCs are as expensive or more than a lot of the other schools he's interested in, so he didn't even apply to any UCs.</p>
<p>HImom, it's exactly that! </p>
<p>1) I can go HYP and come out debt-free, but then that means I'm all on my own for graduate school.
2)The other option is to go to UC for undergrad, almost any school for grad, and come out debt-free completely from both.</p>
<p>There's a lot to be said for looking CLOSELY at each of the schools who have accepted you & really scrutinize what each has to offer you. I never went to a HYP or similar, just large state Us & loved graduating without debt. I also went to a large out-of-state law school & got lots of merit aid so didn't have debt after that either.
My brother went to a HYP-type school & was able to pay off his debt in very little time. He chose to go to UCSF for med school (turning down HYP because they were too expensive) & was very happy graduating with honors.
He loved his years at the prestigous school & also his years at UCSF. He has no regrets. There are folks who do very well in college & get merit aid to go to grad school (depending on their what they're going to study), so that their grad school is tuition free. That's a long shot, so not good to count on it.
No one can make your choice for you, but to complicate things, might I suggest one more option--start at your local state U & then consider transferring for your upper division work when you're SURE what you want to study? This is what my brother did, so my folks only had to pay 2-2.5 years of expensive tuition instead of the full 4 years. It's something that might be one more option to consider.</p>
<p>It depends on which graduate school and which graduate programs. Some graduate programs admit students with a full financial aid package if they meet the criterion of excellence, regardless of the students' (or parents') income and will not admit students who can support themselves if they do not meet the eligibility criterion. Depending on the school, this financial aid package may include full tuition and stipend for a couple of years, supplemented by teaching fellowships for the next few years, or, as in the case of Princeton, full financial aid for 5 years.
But many if not most professional schools (medicine, law, etc..) are not as generous with financial aid. In that case, it is important to save for graduate school.</p>
<p>We were in exactly that position. She is at the HYP school. There were a number of factors in the decision. Although it is by no means pocket change for us, neither did financial factors make it impossible to choose the HYP school. We had one kid at the UC school and so knew what it had to offer. It was also the particular kid in question. I would not advise or pay to send a kid to any private school who was not going to take full advantage of what that school had to offer if they had a less expensive and good choice. My son is about to graduate from a UC and he has had many, many large lecture classes, etc. Last semester (sophomore year) the largest class my daughter had was 16 and the smallest was around 8. This semester she has one class with 6 people and she has one class where she meets privately with a full professor every week (in addition to lectures) to discuss her writing -- it's a writing class. We'll cross the graduate school question when we get there. It's a complicated question and I don't think there is a right answer for every family.</p>
<p>We made that exact choice. Cal with a Regents vs. Princeton. We don't qualify for aid however, although I wouldn't say $108K=pocket change. It's as mimk6 said - it was the right decision for the kid, for who she was. The experience of college isn't just the degree, it's learning and not only in the classes. D needed a place where she could get her hands around the institution.</p>
<p>For grad school - well, if it's BSchool she can work first and save. If it's law school she can earn a lot afterwards. She won't go to medical school. For grad school, get grants and teach like everyone else:). I would rather spend $$$ on what I know than hedge on what we don't know yet. NPV and all that.</p>
<p>We, too, had the choice: Regents at UCLA vs. HYPS, and we supported D's choice of HYPS. D is reserved, prefers a small circle of close friends, and thrives best with personal attention. As a freshman, she had a history course with one of the world's leading experts in the subject, and there were only 4 students in the class. The only large class she has had larger than 20 was statistics. (As a liberal arts major, classes tend to be smaller at her school than intro math/science). As a sophomore, she already has a good position on the school paper. She is guaranteed four years of housing, and loves the close-knit, easy sociability of residential life. These experiences, alone, have made the private undergraduate experience worth the sacrifices, at least for us.</p>
<p>If you get 0 aid from HYP, you can probably afford to attend, since those schools are quite generous. What you said about being able to graduate college debt free supports this. Graduate school finances are an issue, but shouldn't be the determining factor. First of all, you can work at school and during the summers to save at least a small amount of money. Second of all, you don't need to go to grad school immediately out of college, and many people don't. Stay at home to limit your expenses and work for two years. Graduating from HYP, you shouldn't have much of a problem getting a nice salary. Also, as others have mentioned, depending on what grad school you are looking at, you may be able to get aid and grants.</p>
<p>If I lived in California, there is no WAY I would choose HYPS over UCLA or UCB - it just makes no sense to me. But then again, I am choosing UT-Austin over the possibility of getting into Yale, so call me a sucker for publics.</p>
<p>I really do think that aside from individual family finances, you have to consider the kid. </p>
<p>Our S's choice last year was UChicago versus instate at Berkeley, with a cost differential of $98K, I think. Granted, Chicago is not at the same level as HYP, however, it presented a similar situation as the OP's. S could go to the UC and have money from us leftover to put toward grad/law school, or he could go to Chicago (which when we visited, I thought the ideal school for him) and come out a bit in debt with no money for grad. </p>
<p>After much careful consideration, our son chose Cal and it seems it was a great decision for him, though I can see how it wouldn't be for other types of students. </p>
<p>He has loved his first semester there, gotten involved in an EC with leadership roles and has a paid internship that takes him out into new cities every weekend (campaigning). He's had a range of medium (25 students) to very large (800) classes, met a half dozen candidates at state and national level, met a Pulitzer-Prize-winning novelist, attended off-campus retreats, has been published several times, has decided to double or triple major because the classes are so interesting, has jumped right into upper-div. courses because so many credits transferred, currently has junior standing which opens up possibilities of taking time off to volunteer on a campaign, etc... He admires his teaching assistants across the board, all of whom are grad students attending one of the top grad schools in the nation for political science/philosophy. </p>
<p>True, he doesn't have the close relationships with professors (yet) or the intimate learning experience that he would have had at Chicago (or that is available at HYP apparently), but he says it really doesn't bother him. </p>
<p>I have to admit, class size would be the one thing I'd change about his experience, to be honest, just because I think smaller is better. The experience of Robc116's D sounds ideal, though S said he finds the big lectures exhilerating, especially when the professor is a really good one.
Also, though an introvert, S can be quite outspoken at times and doesn't mind asking questions or presenting a point in a large class, or going up to the professor afterwards and getting clarification. </p>
<p>Now, for our HS sophomore D, I'm thinking an LAC experience would be more beneficial than a big university. She's less of an independent learner, less brave and would probably really enjoy the intimacy of small, close-knit classes and more friendly relationships with professors. </p>
<p>To the OP, who you are plays into this kind of decision at least as much as finances.</p>
<p>momof2inca - I couldn't agree more.</p>
<p>My opinion is biased since I went to UCLA but I also fully agree with momof2inca. You need to look at the individual student.</p>
<p>For the sake of discussion let's set the financial issues aside. I will argue that for many students - more that people in this board would care to admit - large public schools like the UCs, Michigan, UNC or Virginia, have a lot more to offer than HYP and the like. It is simply a matter of numbers. A Princeton student cannot possibly be exposed to the kind of learning experiences you will get in Berkeley or UCLA. For the right kind of student these opportunities more than compensate for the disadvantages associated with attending a large lecture.</p>
<p>I am not trying to take anything away from the "elite" schools. They offer an amazing education (I know because my son attends one of them) It is just that in my opinion the premise that, money issues aside, HPYSMC are always better than UCSD or UCLA is not always true and as parents we do a disservice to our kids if we simply join the USNWR ranking bandwagon. You can chose a public school both because it is cheaper and because it is also better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
A Princeton student cannot possibly be exposed to the kind of learning experiences you will get in Berkeley or UCLA.
[/quote]
Broad statement. For example?</p>
<p>"A Princeton student cannot possibly be exposed to the kind of learning experiences you will get in Berkeley or UCLA."</p>
<p>Currently, at UCLA it is almost impossible to take upper division courses outside one's major. It used to be easier to do but now with budget cuts, etc. a kid has a hard time getting into courses he/she might really want to take if they are outside the major -- and you need a lot of upper division units to graduate and only some of them need to be within the major. We found that the budget cuts strangled our son's academic experience by limiting his choices of classes (he is in his last quarter.) Although my daughter has not gotten every class she might have wanted at Yale, it isn't because of policies made for financial reasons. I can't completely compare the two because my kids are very different but my son has never seen or talked to the same person twice for academic advising (it was the same way when I went to UCLA) whereas my daughter has a dean who knows her, and an academic advisor within her major. I am not knocking UCLA (because it really is a top university) and I truly think that a kid like Momof2inCA's is going to have a great experience at Cal because he is a go-getter and will find those experiences (although I am making assumptions.) However, at a place like Princeton or Yale, etc. it is very hard to get lost -- at UCLA it takes a concerted effort not to get lost in the crowd.</p>
<p>I think the differences in quality of advising and class size (not necessarily teaching) between top state schools and top private schools are vast and should be somewhat expected. If I were paying $100K more for S's education, I certainly would expect top-notch, personalized advising and small classes. (If we end up going the private college route for high school D, it will likely be because of those two qualities.) But our S marches to his own drummer and could care less about who is advising him, whether he sees the same person for advising and how big his classes are. He likes to map out his own schedule, and with the transfer units from high school and CC, even if he makes some mistakes in that area, he's got room to make up for them. Coming from a small public magnet high school where everyone was well known, he sought out and is immensely enjoying a place where he can get lost in the crowd and where it's a challenge to be noticed. He likes to do both, depending on the circumstances and his mood, so Berkeley is perfect in that regard. Additionally, I think learning to fly in a big university atmosphere is realistic preparation for the world outside of college (much needed on his part, since he's generally been somewhat sheltered by his mom and dad and extended family, by suburbia and middle-class lifestyle).</p>
<p>I live near Princeton and visit the campus often. Just of the top of my head:</p>
<ul>
<li>Bruin Walk. An area of campus where students promote clubs and activities of the broadest range you can imagine. There is nothing that comes close to it in Princeton.</li>
<li>The best Medical Center in the West Coast offering an a wide variety of jobs, not to mention opportunities to volunteer.</li>
<li>Community outreach programs across the greater LA area.</li>
<li>A much more diverse student body.</li>
<li>Big time athletics.</li>
<li>Many more cultural activities.</li>
</ul>
<p>I am still with momof2inca, for kids that march at their own drum this is a much more fertile ground for growing up.</p>
<p>Again, I am not saying the classroom experience is the same, or even comparable. Unfortunately the budget cuts are making it very tough on everybody. But there is more to a college education than what happens in the classroom.</p>
<p>"A Princeton student cannot possibly be exposed to the kind of learning experiences you will get in Berkeley or UCLA."</p>
<p>And I would suggest that a UC student cannot possibly be exposed to the kind of learning experiences one would get at an Ivy. They are just different, and I'm sure it depends on the student involved. I would say, though, that many students would find it easier to get involved with research and internships at a smaller, more personal school. As far as diversity goes, are you sure? I would expect that most of the students are from California, which limits the geographic diversity and the exposure to people from other parts of the country or even the world.</p>