Yeah, um, my kids won’t be attending those $70k schools.
They’re not even up for discussion.
We’re looking at publics and privates that will end up in the 20’s and 30’s.
One thing that’s helping: I’ve gone to college navigator, and looked up the % of kids receiving institutional aid. If it’s in the high 90’s, we can probably assume my kids will qualify. So some of the private schools that start in the 30’s end up in the 20’s.
As you can see from my avatar, I was an American who headed north to college.
It comes down to expectations. McGill has a sprawling athletics/recreation complex. It was built between 1930 and 2010. Everything a student needs is there but there is no WOW factor like a prospective student gets when walking into say Boston University’s FitRec center. The campus roads are cracked and the sidewalks are patched in places. etc. Class sizes are also larger than at comparable US schools.
If students, and parents, want everything state of the art and manicured along with small class sizes, it is going to cost more.
@HarvestMoon1:
The top Canadians unis (which are all public) are very comparable to top American state schools, IMO.
The price for Americans in Canada does depend on the school and program. CS at Waterloo is very reasonably priced. Likewise, a BA or bachelors of arts & science (you can major in CS with those degrees) at McGill is also pretty cheap.
BS degrees and engineering tend to cost more, however.
They’re not cheaper (and may even cost more) than majoring in science or engineering at UW-Madison/GTech/UMinny even as OOS.
Also, similar to many of the better American state schools, Canadian unis grade very tough. Waterloo CS grads do terrifically well, but they feel no compunction about flunking kids out of the CS program there. I believe I heard that the attrition rate of the Waterloo CS program is 5% every semester (out of the program; usually in to an easier major), so a good chunk of the kids who start in CS don’t finish in CS there.
You think those costs are high?
You should see what people are spending on handbags & footwear!
I think private schools should set their tuition at what ever they feel is appropriate.
If a competitive school sets their tuition at say $15,000 and gave no need based aid, they are likely to have little problem filling the freshmen class, but then I bet you money, that they don’t have a problem filling the freshmen class NOW.
So why should they reduce costs and eliminate need based aid?
So their campus can be even more socio economically homogenous?
Also, residents of CA, MI, IL, WA, TX, MD, GA, NC, VA, WI (and MN) get access to at least one top CS school (or in the case of VA, a top school overall) at in-state rates.
But yes, for the rest of the US (slightly over half, by population), CS at Waterloo, UBC, & McGill can be considered akin to good extra in-state options (BTW, while SD Mines, NM Tech, and UMinny-TC aren’t as highly regarded for CS, they, as well as some more schools in the Dakotas have OOS tuition rates that just aren’t that high; I believe UMinny OOS costs are comparable to PSU & Pitt in-state costs).
@emeraldkity4, actually, many of the elite privates aren’t very socioeconomically homogenous these days. You can argue that WashU is, but stung by the criticism of their low percentage of Pell grant recipients (it’s a fraction of most other elite privates), WashU is joining the herd in cutting back on merit aid and expanding fin aid.
At Emory, Harvard, MIT, Rice, Cornell, UPenn, Northwestern, and Stanford, Pell grant recipients make up over 15% of the student body. At Columbia, they’re 30%. This compares to a general population where something like a bit over 20% of families are Pell-grant-eligible.
I see more families considering cost now than when my older two went. There is a big difference in stretching to pay tuition of $32K (which were the top prices 8 years ago) and $47K in 2014 (plus room and board). Many people have not had a $15K bump in salary since 2007. Yet Tufts, where COA is proposed to rise 4% next year to $61K, does not think it will have any impact on applications or yield. As long as that keeps up, no incentive to reduce tuition. But it will mean that only the wealthy (or have rich grandparents) and those with substantial need will be able to attend these schools. Those who are full pay, but either don’t think they can or really can’t afford those fees, will not be attending. And for many it would mean raiding retirement accounts, not giving up lattes.
Is it really only 20% that would get Pell grants, or 20% who would get the maximum Pell grants?
https://fafsa.ed.gov/FAFSA/app/f4cForm indicates that a family of 3 (2 parents, 1 college student) can get a Pell grant (but lower than the maximum amount) even with income at $50,000 and presumably more. This encompasses much more than 20% of the families in the US.
@emeraldkity4, actually, many of the elite privates aren’t very socioeconomically homogenous these days. You can argue that WashU is, but stung by the criticism of their low percentage of Pell grant recipients (it’s a fraction of most other elite privates), WashU is joining the herd in cutting back on merit aid and expanding fin aid.
I don’t consider schools which offer merit to be elite privates. WUSTL offers merit, but I’m glad to hear schools are offering better aid.
Back when my kid applied to college, we didn’t qualify for need-based aid. Eight years later, if we had a HS senior going to a meets-need school, we would qualify for aid – I’m assuming our EFC hasn’t increased that much, while the COA has risen about $20,000.
We know a kid who is going to University of British Columbia. The decision wasn’t based on finances but the parents are very happy at the huge savings compared to some of the other Us where she was accepted and considered. They are also excited to take her up there and visit her there.