<p>In this economy, many smart students who were accepted to top private schools chose to attend their state flagship universities because their parents could not afford the same luxuries as they did before. In my school, about a half of of the students who were accepted to Tier 1 schools will be attending our state flagship because they would save money, thinking that they would be able to compete there to attain the top spot.
Now why do I say to stay away from the state flagships this year?</p>
<li><p>Many private schools will accept wealthier students with weaker statistics to cover the costs of financial aid. This would mean private schools would have a relatively weaker student body this year, allowing you a better chance of succeeding at a top private school. Meanwhile, state schools would be in much greater demand this year and the student body would get much stronger. There is less of a guarantee to attain the top spot at a state flagship now, especially the stronger ones. Factor in grade inflation, and a top private school would look more appealing.</p></li>
<li><p>States will undergo severe budget cuts, which means there will be less funding for the state schools. This means the quality of education of many public universities would falter. Top private schools would have less of this problem because they have large endowments. Plus, some state flagships would have a severe increase in yield, which means overcrowd is very probable. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>If you can reasonably afford to attend a top private university over a state flagship, please do so. Please feel free to discuss your opinions and start a debate.</p>
<p>The only reason I even want to go to a top school is to be surrounded by a STRONG student body. If the economy means that more smart people are choosing my state’s flagship honors programs, all the more reason to go there and save a ton of cash.</p>
<p>it doesn’t matter for me. In the end, there is no way rice and duke would be worth 50K in loans. The CBHP at Alabama is where i will be going - assured opportunity to research, produces an incredibly high number of goldwater scholars and Academic All Americans, plus it has GREAT school spirit. And it is a full ride. I think that many states schools will be attracting brighter students, but in the end, those who push themselves will be able to stand out. At a private school, endowments are dropping drastically as well. what makes you think quality of education there will not drop?</p>
<p>lockn: Let’s say there would be an equally strong student body at both schools after the incident (assume it’s Columbia and SUNY Geneseo Honors). The student body would be the same, but the resources at Columbia would be greater than that of SUNY Geneseo. Would you rather be a top student at Columbia or SUNY Geneseo Honors? You would be paying a little more money for: the name, the grade inflation, the resources, the faculty, the networking (those wealthy people are wealthy for a reason), the job placement, the quality of education, the stronger placement into the top grad schools, etc. Again, I said REASONABLE difference in price, as in 20-40K for 4 years.
Mesquite_girl24: again, the key world is REASONABLE. 200K in debt, as we would both agree, is not reasonable in the least. The top private universities would find ways to get around the endowment drops (like enrolling more rich students), while the state flagships, dependent of state resources, would suffer more because a) tuition is less at state universities and b) generally have much smaller endowments than top private universities.</p>
<p>vinnyli. Obviously you live in a state where your flagship universities are weak. At least that is your perception. There are quite a few states where the flagship schools are excellent, and your comments would not be accurate for those at all.</p>
<p>Your argument was that a weaker student body at top privates is a positive thing. This is in complete opposition to my reasons for wanting to go to a good school - if your goal to impress professors, you might disagree.</p>
<p>If it was was a choice between two institutions with comparable student bodies, yes, I’d go for the cheaper one even if it had less resources (which may not even be the case). I’d pick UCLA over USC, UVa over Georgetown. In my state, the choice isn’t so clear.</p>
<p>rjkofnovi: my flagship university is not strong, but it’s not weak either (UConn), and its honors program is selective. I am aware of the fact that some state flagships, like Chapel, GT, Berkeley, Ann Arbor, etc, are comparable to the top private universities. I’m just saying that if I had to pay 40K more for 4 years for Stanford than Berkeley engineering (which is a great school, btw), I would do it because of the reasons I have mentioned.</p>
<p>If someone wants to go to an expensive private school, cool, that’s their choice. But there’s certainly nothing wrong with saving money by going to a public, when many publics are just as good as privates. Why discourage it? In the end, people who go to public school will graduate with a perfectly fine education WITHOUT a massive pile of debt. </p>
<p>I’m not against private schools or anything. I just think it’s ridiculous to talk people out of saving money if their financial situation is tight.</p>
<p>what about top tier public schools like UIUC, michigan, Berkeley, others? i would have no qualms picking any of these over high up private schools.</p>
<p>I don’t disagree with you, world changer. All I said was if the parents can REASONABLY afford to send their kids to a top private university without going into too much debt, then they should do so over a more inexpensive option.</p>
<p>IVYGRAD2007: I’m not judging anyone. I can totally understand if people choose Berkeley or Michigan over top privates due to money issues. I’m not here to discourage that; I’m just presenting one side of the argument. And I’m not say go 100K in debt here, but something more reasonable like a 20K-40K difference over 4 years, depending on the options.</p>
<p>Now it’s down to 20K difference. Do I hear 10K? Just teasing you vinnyli. I can see your point in some cases, but I feel you just painted too broad of a brush with your original comments. BTW, I can see many people choosing Berkeley or Michigan over so called top privates, even without money issues. :-)</p>
<p>No Vinnyli, your reasoning is flawed. And not only are your assumptions wrong, but a success strategy based on spending an extra $20-40k (your numbers) simply to avoid competition? That sounds pretty sad.</p>
<p>"Meanwhile, state schools would be in much greater demand this year and the student body would get much stronger. There is less of a guarantee to attain the top spot at a state flagship now, especially the stronger ones. "</p>
<p>Couldn’t that be considered a good thing? I think that being surrounded by high-achieving students in a competitive university could actually be a positive towards picking a good flagship.</p>
<p>I guess you’ll have the chance to decide whether or not to come up with the money when you have children. Your perspective may well have changed by then.</p>
<p>Yes, Erin’s Dad, except I’ll be the one taking out the loans and paying them, not my parents.
We’ve talked this over, and my parents were willing to let me borrow the same for UConn as the other schools (they made me sign a legal contract saying I would have to pay them back after graduate school and pay for my brother’s education). The difference between BC and UConn Honors is 5K a year and NYU Stern and UConn is 35 K a year. Even though Stern was my dream school by a long shot, I chose BC because 140K+ in debt would be a burden, while 20K is much more manageable. I’ll get summer internships and write articles to pay for the loans at BC, where I can reasonably do well in without added stress. :)</p>
<p>I’m avoiding the 40-60k in loans (roughly) of Emory to go to Tulane. yeah it isn’t a public but it is much lower ranked but it saves us money and I will probably have the same opportunities.</p>