<p>Penn is overrated...despite what Penn students say, it is Wharton that is keeping them so high up in the ratings...</p>
<p>^ Definitely agree. Wharton is good, I consider Wharton students to be excellent, but the rest of UPenn really is not that good.</p>
<p>Any school that uses Graduate Assistants to instruct under grads is over rated. Way! Over rated.</p>
<p>^ Any school that thinks a dumb lazy legacy is more important than a hard working poor person is WAY overrated.</p>
<p>Except that those legacies pay for scholarships for poor students...</p>
<p>^ Which is why depending on private money instead of public money is detrimental to the focus on academic excellence. And which is why in many countries all over the world, public schools are considered to be superior to private schools.</p>
<p>Public money cannot fund every school in the US because every child is guaranteed an education here. Other countries have ways of selectively picking out the best students for their publicly funded system, which i think is perfectly fine but which most Americans wont agree with :)</p>
<p>^ Actually, the price of tuition in other countries is much lower than the US. In germany, all university education is free. No tuition is paid. </p>
<p>With the rise of European universities in research (US is starting to lag in research), and with local tuition free for some European countries, I don't see what will stop the US Universities decline, especially cus all that happens nowadays is silly politics about Ivy League status, and nothing concrete about research and academic excellence.</p>
<p>Uhh...in the US, not Germany, scholarships are based on the endowments of alumni. </p>
<p>West side, name a college that is completely innocent of helping legacies and donors, and who is on par academically with ivies.</p>
<p>Well about people getting in with legacy and getting financial aid too??</p>
<p>^ Hippo. The more important focus is on degree of importance of private donations., legacies...etc. i.e. University of Michigan receiving 400 million from the federal government is equivalent to a 8 billion dollar Harvard endowment ( only 5% of endowments are spent a year)</p>
<p>UC Berkeley, UCSF, UCLA, UCSD, University of Michigan, University of Virginia.</p>
<p>What on earth are you talking about? Germany has private colleges, although granted not nearly as many per person as the U.S.</p>
<p>West Side, you're argument makes no sense...aside from the fact that Germany has private schools as ohnoes said, it has MUCH fewer public schools than the US has...furthermore, Germany does not contain 50 states that are fighting for federal funding...the German government funds the institutions that it feels are most prestigious in the naition...in the US by comparison, state schools (keyword = state) are funded by the, surprise surprise, state. An individual state does not have the resources of Germany. Furthermore, if the federal government helps one public school, then it has to help all public schools because we live in a nation where political correctness is more important than actual results...</p>
<p>Now, if you focus on the facts, it should be clear that Germany's public schools are much different in nature and much better than US public schools with the exception of, possibly, Berkeley, but as someone mentioned before, Berkeley in recent years has become primarily funded by private funds...in our country, it is the private schools that have the better resources...</p>
<p>Furthermore, public schools in our country have to fill a majority of their class with students from their state, which already places limitations on the school...no matter how good Berkeley is, its OVERALL class will never be as qualified as that of Stanford or MIT...in other countries, these limitations do not exist, and neither does the whole philosophy of no child left behind...</p>
<p>But seriously, US Privates need to reduce their fees a little in order to attract more students ! ! !</p>
<p>Nomad-
I am confused. As it is, (1) the tuition at private institutions fails to cover the cost of an education, (2) competition for most colleges remains extremely high, and (3) most private schools will offer need-based fin. aid packages to accepted students. So, unless a school has a very, very large endowment, an incredible alumnae giving program or faculty that are willing to work for free, how can you lower tuition and stay in business??? All kidding aside about the free faculty, if a school cannot remain competetive with salaries, the good faculty are going to be lured away. While lowering the tuition, even if practical or possible, might attract students, the students won't be happy with less-than-optimal faculty than they'd expect. And, if less funds are available, programs on campus will be cut- the budgetary axe is not usually very kind. All that said, I must admit that the lower tuition at my s's school (Rice) was a great plus. But it wasn't what attracted him to the school. It is wonderful in its own right for many other reasons. But yes, I have to admit that his education is like getting 4 years of college for the price of 3, and I do appreciate that!</p>
<p>Nomad is right though...public schools offer you a cheap education...decent-but-not-the-best private schools throw tons of money at you if you're smart...but then you got a handful of top private schools sitting on billion dollar endowments and not using it to benefit the population...i have to applaud harvard on this one...accepted students whos parents make less than $40,000 now get to go to one of the world's best schools for free!</p>
<p>For other schools...what do they do with all that money?...theres only so many libraries and new research facilities you can build!</p>
<p>What are you talking about? All of the Ivies and many other schools with billion dollar endowments guarantee meeting 100% of demonstrated financial need?</p>
<p>why dont you go and ask some parents what THEY'RE financial need is and then compare how much the college gave them...they dont coincide all that often...</p>
<p>Bigjake-
You mean "their" need, not "they're" need, yes?? (sorry-- but ya nevah know- this could be on your SAT :) ) Anyway-- yes-- the estimated family contribution to your college tuition is a rather unusual actuarial calculation based on all sorts of strange things. It doesn't take many expenses (healthcare, assisting elderly family members, etc) into consideration. Just assets. The one that really gets me is that they don't take into consideration other educational expenses if you do not have another child in college. So, never mind if you are shelling out $$$ for younger siblings' educations-- if it isn't college, it doesn't count. And worse yet, my s's are 4 yrs apart, so I'll be paying for school forever, and never getting the "benefit" ,as it were, (meaning a reduction in estimated out of pocket $$ for college) of having the 2 in college at the same time. Some colleges, like Dartmouth for example, have an estimated tuition calculator on their website, though I wouldn't use this for more than a rough idea. There is typicaly going to be a wide chasm between what a family feels they can afford and what a school says thay should pay....</p>
<p>Xanatos, what most colleges considerable "demonstrated need" leaves parents paying far more than they can do without significant sacrifices. I'm sweating the next 3-1/2 years and we have only one child to put through college.</p>