Middle-Class Families Increasingly Look to Community Colleges

Is it because the CCs do not have suitable courses (e.g. calculus 1, 2, 3, calculus-based physics, general chemistry, etc.) or because Rutgers engineering does not accept them as equivalent to its own courses?

Rutgers Engineering doesn’t accept them as equivalent.

@“Cardinal Fang” "Another example of price discrimination is airline tickets. Last-minute fares are jacked up, because the airlines know that there are some people who are willing to pay those high prices at the last minute. Most people aren’t willing, so they don’t buy tickets for a flight that leaves the next day, but the people who do want the last-minute tickets want them a lot and are willing to pay a lot to have them.

The more price discrimination there is, the better for the seller. Some buyers are better off under price discrimination, and many are worse off."

But the price discrimination you cite is not the same or even remotely related to differential pricing for college based on income & assets. Last minute fares are jacked up for everyone not just those with higher incomes. The airline does not give cheaper fares if you submit your tax returns and can show you have lower income. Again, no other pricing for other goods and services is similar to college pricing.

Please see post # 33.

@PurpleTitan
@NPKR01, er, no, there are doctors and medical clinics who charge uninsured patients (who don’t qualify for Medicaid) differently depending on income.”

Um… some private doctors and medical clinics which is what you would be referring to, may occasionally give discounts. But, they are private entities, can do what they like with their pricing for goods and services, and decide on a case by case basis. The price these private businesses-doctors and medical clinics- charge for medical care is the same for all. You have to prove you are an exception to get forgiveness of a part of your bill. And very few will qualify for a discount. Probably less than 1%. Private entities are always free to give away services for free or discount them, donate to charity, or do free missionary work in Africa, South America, Central America and so on. But it’s their choice. That’s not anything like what we were discussing and what I have stated still stands- only college pricing has a differential based on your income. It’s an institutionalized practice in higher education in the US.

Why are you so desperately trying to disprove something which is so obviously true? Financing for higher education in the US is the only area of goods and services where your price is determined by your income and assets.

According to its website, Rutgers Engineering does accept calculus, physics, and chemistry for transfers from CC’s. In fact, it says that these classes are required, and that many transfers complete them at NJCC’s.

http://soe.rutgers.edu/oas/transfer_external

@NPKR01

100% agree.

The system is patently unfair to those of us in the donut hole. And, yes it is bizarre to design a system that charges based upon need.

Of course it is great for the colleges. Who wouldn’t want a business where your contributors get a tax deduction and your resulting investments grow tax free and the government gives you grants and creates artificial demand by subsidizing clients who can’t pay.

We in the donut hole do pay extra to subsidize those who can’t pay. The cost of College rises when the demand increases. Econ 101.

I attended our state university many years ago and received a full tuition discount because of my income. My children won’t get it (due to technicalities), even though our income is well within the current $125k/year limit, but I don’t resent the families who will. I suppose my taxes help subsidize the program to some degree, the same way my property taxes subsidized our local public schools that neither of my children ever attended, but I value education and I’m happy to be able to assist other families in some small way.

If the student plans to attend medical school, he needs to be wary of which classes are taken in community college. Some medical schools won’t accept some math and chemistry credits because typicalky, classes in community college are easier than the same course taken at a 4 year colkege.

@NPKR01:

“And very few will qualify for a discount. Probably less than 1%.”

You like to make assumptions, like I said. Generally wrong ones.

“Private entities are always free to give away services for free or discount them, donate to charity, or do free missionary work in Africa, South America, Central America and so on. But it’s their choice.”

So why can’t it be the choice of private colleges to do the same?

Oh, please! The cost of college is variable because higher education is so complex, meeting the needs and desires of millions. It once was more affordable, sez the woman who put herself through all the way to PhD, but it stopped being supported by the state. Add to that high cost administrators and technology gone rampant and no one can afford it.

That say, my daughters provide a good case of the complexity. The elder applied to a flagship, LACs, techs, and private universities. The flagship and HYPS came in cheapest with an annual cost including room and board of 10K. The range of annual cost was 10 K to 35K, and I am in the top quartile of earners.

Her sister, on the other hand, may go to a community college. Neither she or I will see this as a tragedy. She has a different set of goals and a different relationship to scholarship.

@mamalion

Please reference NYTimes article by peter Campos a few years back.

Your hypothesis on why College costs have risen is off the mark.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/opinion/sunday/the-real-reason-college-tuition-costs-so-much.html

I don’t think that’s true. I think the colleges with the best aid have huge endowments. According to Time Magazine, 1/3 to 1/2 of the operating budgets at some of these elite schools comes from their endowments, so full pay families aren’t being charged the full cost either. You’re just not seeing the extent of your subsidy.

I’m not clear what changes “donut hole” families would like to see. You can’t want colleges to increase the upper income limit in their aid eligibility calculations so that your income falls within the limits because that would still be the tiered system that you so despise. Are you saying there should be no discounts at all? The kid whose family income is $40k should pay the same as one whose income is $180k? How do you envision that working out at a college whose COA is $60k/year?

“Donut hole” families may not be able to pay $60k, but they might be able to swing $20-40k, and there are lots of great schools available at that price point. What do you expect the lower income families to do if need based aid is no longer offered? Surely you can’t believe that a college education should only be available to the wealthy.

@NPKR01

Campos and I agree on administrators, but we don’t on state funding, particularly because his argument for increases ends in 2009 (in fairness to him, it’s a 2015 opinion piece). Overall, at the moment, 2018, states have provided a 1.8% bump, not equal to inflation, but this follows years of decline. It’s a response to sharp cut backs during the Great Recession.

These articles provide a more complex picture than the opinion/editorial:

https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding

https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/state-local-funding-student-1000-personal-income-state-2015-16

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/slideshows/states-investing-most-in-higher-education-per-person

I am sorry that you cannot afford your child’s education. It is a fear almost all of us share.

The missing word is “choice” …choice of child’s education.

@momofthreeboys Yes, the missing word is choice. We can accept our families’ education choices might be limited by ability, location, or major, but money hits us as too unfair and upsetting. I guess, just speculating, because the US promotes messages of opportunity. There is a paradox here: the general rhetoric in the US is equal opportunity, but it rejects anything tinged with socialism. While people want opportunity and are upset when it is shutoff, many are equally upset at the idea of the state leveling the playing field.

Is there any proof that meet full need schools have a lower yield in the middle of the donut hole vs wealthy and low income families?

Equal opportunity in my opinion is equal access to post public K-12 education for educationally qualified students and it is available through community colleges and public institutions. It does not mean equal opportunity to attend each and every institution in the country as in for-profit and private, nor does it mean that each individual student has the equal opportunity to attend any particular institution that the student picks at an equal cost to the next student. Some states have limited in some ways access to public institutions by defunding and lowering funding. The moral obligation and mission is on the states to provide equal access for students of that state since we do not have a national higher education system.

It is private colleges that have had a mission to enroll a class of their choice at a price of their choice along with some heavily endowed public institutions but the colleges, alone, still pick and choose who to admit and how much to charge. Still, the public universities that do this sometimes come under scrutiny from the constituents of the state if public sentiment feels they are shutting out qualified students in that state. In terms of “meeting need” once a public institution adds the Profile as a requirement they have stepped outside and developed their own determination of what need constitutes. I, personally, struggle with that and the concept of “public.”

Yield and rankings and all the fog have obscured the bottom line. Look at the howling and chest pounding that goes on with students at fabulous, internationally reknowned public institutions because they are “ranked” too low. It is ridiculous and the media keeps encouraging this thinking that somehow it is all “important” and public is not good enough. Again even then, a student can start at a CC and the end game is the college they graduate from and not the college they start at, but that concept gets continually missed except by families that support and follow that path.

At some point there was a table on Yale’s web site with a number of students per family income range. I remember that it showed only approximately 500 out of 5.3K students total from the families with income between $150-200K/year. This is the demographics that Yale asked to pay the largest percentage of their income.
Other meet full need schools probably have a similar distribution of incomes but the doughnut hole may be in a different place.

Approximately five percent of US families have an income between 150k and 200k and approximately 10% of Yale students are from those families. I don’t see the problem. They appear to be over represented by a factor of 2.

@labegg - the cost of the car and insurance does add up but I figure that we would be paying for a car/insurance whether our son commuted to CC or not. He needed driving experience and he needed a car for PT jobs, activities, etc. The CC commute has actually worked out quite well for him.

One of the problems that we’ve seen with regard to CC course offerings is that some of the courses that our son would need to take are offered at rather far flung satellite campuses. That would make getting the associates degree that he’s interested in a bit of a logistical nightmare. CC isn’t really a viable option for him. However, I can say that we have been impressed by the quality of instruction offered at the CC, as well as, the accessibility of the instructors.