<p>If your kid is going to a state school, then you should keep an eye on state school budgets so that you don’t get blindsided by state cuts which have been fast and furious for the last four years.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>What I’ve seen is that all of the students are charged a higher tuition rate. But lower-income students get financial aid in the form of grants and loans - so that they effectively get a discount or a lower tuition rate. But the nomenclature is that everyone has the same tuition rate.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>What would you have them do?</p>
<p>Your pair of states may be a special case. Other pairs - it’s probably not an issue. It certainly isn’t for my state pair.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The past few years have seen record enrollments at my son’s school which has been
doing this. Students that can no longer afford full-pay privates transferring in to a
school close to home to get total costs down as much as possible. If you have
a lot of demand, increasing the sticker price probably won’t hurt you very much.</p>
<p>I think you misunderstand me. I am talking about different sticker prices (before the financial aid, including institutional).</p>
<p>So, if my kid decides to go to that school, the tuition is $16K (I am approximating).
For a kid from lower income income family the tuition is $14K. This is before financial aid is applied (federal, state and institutional). </p>
<p>I think this is very different from financial aid packages.</p>
<p>By the way, my son is not planning to attend Business school, so it is not really my financial issue. I just think it is outrageous. I really do.</p>
<p>I haven’t heard of this kind of pricing before. The schools our kids attend/have attended have a sticker price. They don’t have sticker pricing based on your income. They provide grants or loans if you have higher need.</p>
<p>Could you point me to a webpage that describes this kind of pricing?</p>
<p>The “Robbin Hood” method of subsidizing COA for lower income families has been the accepted norm for decades. You can’t now propose flat lining COA for everybody? where would the merit aid and need based aid come from? It is classic wealth redistribution. IS or OOS, your total COA is based on your families income and assets. With few exceptions, the gap between IS and OOS tuition is closed by offering grants/legacy scholarships/subsidized loans - unless you’re considering a really popular school (Public Ivy - like UMich), the ultimate differences will be relatively small.</p>
<p>I’ve read this proposal in a paper (I think Star Tribune in Minneapolis) several months ago, fall 2011. I have not followed up the story, so I am not sure if it went anywhere or even how far it went. I have never heard about this kind of pricing before either and I thought that proposal went too far.</p>
<p>I think that it may have been a misinformed proposal. The general approach is to have one tuition rate and discount from there. That way, the higher income folks don’t see it as in-you-face so much. Also, those receiving the discounts may feel better about their discounts as some may consider it merit money.</p>
<p>It is mainly different in that it is transparent. Raising tuition for all, but then increasing financial aid to the poorer students does the same thing (price discrimination), but in a more opaque manner.</p>
<p>On the other hand, it appears that people react differently when price discrimination is done opaquely than when it is done transparently.</p>
<p>All schools ostensiblly operate like that. But…if you look at the numbers, what they call grants are typically discounts from the sticker price. Which is to say that the money actually just never shows up. The sale of the degree is simply made at a lower price. </p>
<p>One thing that happens when you actually charge everyone the same price is that the incentive to choose the higher paying customer disappears. </p>
<p>I do think that there is an opportunity for some schools to simply have one price. No aid, no nothing. It would be interesting to see how that worked. Some schools are slowly moving in that direction, but I think it is reluctantly. Those are the ones who are finding that they can’t get enough full-tuition qualified matriculants at the posted sticker price.</p>
<p>I do not believe I misunderstood the proposal. I distinctly remember mention of the $2K price difference and discussion about subsidizing. Maybe I will try to look it up over weekend.</p>
<p>Also, the opaque subsidizing through grants does not bother me, because usually those grants subsidize the best students who also cannot afford school. The proposed price difference does not consider merit at all, only financial status. There are already federal and state programs for this. Where does it stop?</p>
<p>Also, I am talking here about public schools. Private schools are free to price their school whichever way they want.</p>
<p>Would it bother you if a public university had the following pricing policy for in-state students, instead of a typical policy of stating a list price and then offering financial aid to discount the tuition?</p>
<ul>
<li>$0 tuition for students from households with income less than $80,000.</li>
<li>Academic year tuition charge of 22% of [household income minus $80,000], up to a maximum tuition charge of $13,000 per academic year.</li>
</ul>
<p>How about a private university that had the following pricing policy?</p>
<ul>
<li>$0 tuition for students from households with income less than $100,000.</li>
<li>Academic year tuition charge of 40% of [household income minus $100,000], up to a maximum tuition charge of $41,000 per academic year.</li>
</ul>
<p>If no other need-based financial aid (both state and federal) is given than it would not bother me. provided students make satisfactory progress towards their graduation.</p>
<p>P.S. I already stated that private Universities are free to set their prices anyway they wanted.</p>
<p>At the rate things are going, this philosophical discussion will become moot. Each year, government funding of state higher education institutions decreases, and each year in-state tuition rises to help make up the difference. In Washington, state funding of public colleges and universities has fallen by 50% in 6 years. In-state tuition is rising by 10%-12% annually, so it is only a matter of time before IS=OOS.</p>
<p>^^ who do you work for? the teachers union? There has been a decrease, but not enough support the tuition increases. If you’re into this kind of study? see report at this link;</p>
<p>Washington will invest LESS in its public baccalaureate institutions in 2011-13 than it did in 1989-91 (in actual dollars). This is despite the fact that state spending will have grown from $12.7 billion to $32.4 billion and our institutions are serving 32,000 more students. .
<a href=“Home | The Seattle Times”>Home | The Seattle Times;
<p>Tuition at UW increased 20% for instate residents. OOS doesn’t increase quite so fast.
However there are also programs like [WICHE</a> | Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education](<a href=“2014 Annual Report: WICHE - WICHE”>http://www.wiche.edu/)</p>
<p>FWIW: In Canada, we have almost exclusively public universities, and they are funded at the provincial level (and are still, by definition, truly still public in terms of funding). Many are excellent but the actual or perceived variance across them is far far less than the variance across US publics. </p>
<p>Who gets into them and what they pay is the same for all Canadian residents, regardless of which province one is from. The exception being Quebec, where Quebec residents pay very little to their own universities - maybe $2k a year- and the fee to students from outside of Quebec- about $6k a year- is on par with all other universities.</p>
<p>Canada in general seems to get more for its money in terms of government provided services like primary and secondary schools of uniformly high quality, universities, and medical insurance for all instead of 25%, compared to the US.</p>
<p>Also, there is no need for standardized tests if the high school courses and grading are standardized at a high level. The admission web site for University of Toronto makes no mention of required standardized tests for applicants from high schools in Canada.</p>
There has been a decrease, but not enough support the tuition increases. If you’re into this kind of study? see report at this link;</p>