“Well there’s the argument that it does make sense to send the superstar to a superstar college because the return on investment is going to be better, whereas the average kid would just dig himself into a huge and expensive hole at a private LAC?”
Well this average kid wouldn’t have been in any hole as his parents could afford to pay for any school.
I know plenty of average kids from wealthy families who go to very expensive, non selective private colleges.
And I really hate the ROI argument since the parents are paying and they don’t actually get any of that return.
I would disagree on the ROI. To me, ROI is the students ability to be successful in their field relative to the cost of the education and whether that higher price point commands a different entry point, or not. For some parents, the ROI may simply feeling good about where their kids are at (expensive non selective private) even if it doesn’t make a bit of difference in the career path trajectory. For others it is knowing their marketability, or graduate school options based on that undergraduate choice. And yes, for others it is their child fulfilling their dream (theirs, not necessarily the child) of a degree from a particular school.
To me, my child’s success (however that success is defined) is a return on my investment and I certainly care about what that return might look like. I expect my child to care too. If they don’t, then what am I investing in? It is a very subjective thing for each family, and each student
In any event, the OP has not been back and was deliberately vague so who knows what was meant.
we told our kids they were going to state schools unless they could demonstrate why we should pay for a more expensive school. unfortunately, the state schools in ny are not very good (when compared to ca, va, mi, etc.) so it was a fairly low bar.