^^ Per Kiplinger’s, average merit aid at Earlham is $12,143. Yes, that would almost exactly erase Swarthmore’s n-b aid advantage for the $30K-$120K income levels I showed above. Although, the Earlham and Swarthmore demographics are a little different. 26% of Earlham students have a family income less than $40k, but only 14% of Swarthmore students do. Enrolling a more affluent student body would drive up the average net price that Swarthmore families pay even if, for a given income & asset level, there were little or no net price difference between Earlham and Swarthmore. I wonder if Money has accounted for that.
@tk21769, well, the Money ranking is fairly worthless from any individual perspective as your own financial circumstance and academic prowess will make various schools cheaper or more expensive. But from a societal impact perspective, Earlham certainly deserves more kudos for providing opportunities to more poor kids than Swarthmore does. From a societal impact perspective, how much good is a very generous fin aid policy if it’s provided to far fewer kids than what another school provides?
The Money Rankings are of no practical value. The nuances of elite college admissions are extremely complicated which is why so many consultants are able to make a living charging 4 and 5 figures to help students and parents navigate this byzantine system. While the LAC’s are somewhat different from major universities the top schools like Williams and a few others are as prestigious as all the top schools except HPYS. The primary difficulty of gaining admission is not just the small class sizes but the fact that so many in the admitted class are admitted ED and are hooked. As for the cost the top schools have such generous FA that in most cases the top schools are as cheap or cheaper for most students than even the state schools. This is only untrue for people in the 150k-300k income range. Above 300k most families will choose the best school and below 150k the top schools offer enough FA such that most students will choose the private schools if admitted.
@SAY, just because people may choose to be full-pay at a private doesn’t make them cheaper than elsewhere. I agree that the Money ranking isn’t practically useful to anyone, though.
I would change “most” to many or some. And that is without getting into “best” as being some type of objective measurement (which it isn’t). A lot of $300k+ families either do not have the cash to pay full fare or do not see the value.
I’m willing to bet that the majority of students whose parents earn > $300k attend their state university. Most of THOSE families likely didn’t earn that income via an elite degree, and many of them are not necessarily invested in elite schools for their own kids. I think CC people often way underestimate the many, many well to go kids at state universities.
According to the CDS past year (which I believe will be used this year), Villanova’s mid ranges are:
CR: 590-690
M: 610-710
W: 590-690
ACT C: 29-32
Compare to UMiami (51):
CR: 590-690
M: 610-700
W: 580-680
ACT C: 28-32
Very comparable. I expect it will fall right around 50.
I found the Money magazine ranking to accurately predict relative affordability / cost of attendance as per online NPC results for my D as a financial aid applicant to the private LAC’s on her college list. Alternatively, one could fill out countless NPC’s to achieve an affordability ranking, but this could provide a decent starting point. We plugged numbers in the NPC’s for some 25 schools before the Money ranking came out, and I found that our results line up with the list.
In addition, both Forbes and Money seemed to differentiate schools in ways that matched our perceptions but were not captured by the USNWR ranking. For example, D is considering 2 LAC’s that are tied in the USNWR list, and I’ve seen CCer’s declare the schools to be nearly identical. However, when we visited, one of the tied pair seemed academically stronger in a variety of ways than its “twin”, and that same school also seemed a good bit more rigorous than a college only 8 places lower on the USNWR list. Based on the expressed opinions of CCer’s, such a minor ranking difference of 8 spots shouldn’t entail a real difference in educational quality, and indeed all three schools publish similar stat ranges for accepted students… But lo and behold, the school we felt would do a better job had a much higher ranking on both the Money and Forbes lists. Make of it what you will.
Oops, I posted #86 in the wrong thread. Awk.
I agree, @TheGFG Each ranking or poll or rating of schools may serve its readers in different ways. Since financials played such a big role in our college choices, the Money or Forbes rankings were more useful than USNWR schools we couldn’t afford. Doesn’t matter if Yale is ranked higher than Duke, or if an extra point on the ACT would help with admissions if they are out of our league financially? On the Money rankings, it shows some schools that are actual possible for us and that I may not have known were affordable.
USNWR also has a 100 other ways to break down the schools, by region, by LACs/universities, but subject matter, by private or state. Everyone wants to go to a school in the top 10, and if you look hard enough you’ll find a list where your school is #1 (or at least #6)
Money and Forbes must think their rankings have some value and sell some magazines or they wouldn’t print them. You may also have no use for People’s top 25 sexiest men, but some find value in the list.
I’m not sure where you live but I can categorically tell you that most families in coastal California making over 300k rarely chose to send their children to state schools over HPYS or a few other top schools if they get admitted. I’ve had four kids in both top private and public schools and I have never seen this happen. Cal or UCLA over Wash U, JHU, Rice, NU, or Cornell yes but not the top schools. For families under 180k often the top schools are about the same price or even cheaper than State schools. It’s really only the bubble between 180-300k. At Harvard even those families usually get FA.
SAY, re-read my post. I did not say “most families making over $300K would still send their kid to state school even if kid got into HYPS, etc.” I said that I’m willing to bet “most families making over $300 are still sending their kids to state u.” Many of these kids are not elite material in the first place, or even if they are, aren’t necessarily interested in those schools.
Probably does depend on area of the country. I know several people in my kids’ schools in the 300k+ camp who did not pick HPYS over state schools. And several friends in other school districts or private schools in the area who say they know people in the same position. And my guess (though its just that) is there are more places like here than there are people like coastal California.
Like I said somewhere here recently (not sure if it was in this thread though), I see people who are into the HPYS camp and those who are not. People in one camp have a tough time understanding those in the other camp. I have talked about it with several of my friends. One family we know is definitely in the HPYS camp. Both parents are Harvard grads. No doubt they would send their kids to Harvard if they could get in. Oldest couldn’t (don’t think she even tried). Youngest may stand a shot but doesn’t seem likely. Has a hook which may get her into Stanford. They do not understand why anyone wouldn’t want to send their kids to Harvard. My wife and I joke that we are surprised they are friends with us (both state school grads) with kids who have Ivy stats/resumes (significantly better than their kids) who are in/headed to state schools.
It’s funny how such a simple typo as a missing “k” can have a profound difference in meaning.
Very typical to have kids with “Ivy stats” who just don’t bother to get into the fray, especially in states with very good public options.
I’m not even sure it’s true in “Coastal California.”
I have old friends who lived in La Jolla who sent their kids to all the best private school’s. Their oldest daughter, who was brilliant, had always dreamed of going to Penn or some comparable school back east, and her dad (an entrepreneur who never even finished college) had fully expected when she was young to send her to an elite private college. But once she made it clear she also wanted to be a doctor, they decided UCLA was a wiser choice. She went there for undergrad, then medical school somewhere else, and is just starting her residency at a pretty prestigious academic hospital. Pretty sure her dad picked up the tab for med school.
Just because somebody has the money doesn’t mean they want to spend it all if there are other more affordable/better value options. UCLA was plenty good enough for this young woman and clearly hasn’t limited her choices in life.
I know a lot of kids who chose public schools over privates where money was not a factor. I also know a lot of kids who originally went to privates who transferred back to the flagship, saying it wasn’t worth it to pay a premium when the public school was available. Jenna Bush chose Texas, her sister chose Yale.
This is a tough site when someone has to defend that “UCLA was plenty good enough”.
Agreed. UCLA is a top-notch world renowned research university which is also partially state funded.
Sorry my post read that way. UCLA is unequivocally topnotch.
My “plenty good enough” was said in response to the post that implied only Ivies and other elite privates were acceptable to a certain kind of wealthy, coastal elite.