<p>Can someone please explain to me the allure of a private school. With the exception of ivies, the only big advantages of most private school are aesthetic, and the well known, fancy name associated with it.</p>
<p>Also, I was talking to a girl who was deciding between Rutgers and Princeton. She had spoken with a Professor at Princeton who advised her to go to Rutgers because guess what...he teaches there too. As do many of his collegue.</p>
<p>I guess to me the difference between most privates and publics are the price tag. If you want to go into debt until your 30s, then that's cool. I guess a private school's for you.</p>
<p>I don't mean to be bashing anyone's desicions, but does anyone else have any insight as to why, other than scholarships or financial aid, someone would go to a non-ivy private school? I'm boggled.</p>
<p>Any sane person would pick Princeton over Rutgers. public schools generally have weaker students and rutgers particularly is a pretty bad school, while Princeton is basically #1. </p>
<p>Private colleges usually have better classes and better research opportunities, interships, etc and are just overall better.</p>
<p>It's also over $40,000 a year we're talking about vs. close to nothing. She'll be so happy down the road...especially the way the economy's going</p>
<p>"I guess if you call insane thinking about your financial situation in the future, then you can call her crazy."</p>
<p>I think most people would choose Princeton over Rutgers BECAUSE they're thinking about their situation in the future. College is an investment into the rest of your life. Most top privates also have larger endowments and thus can offer generous need-based aid packages to prospective students. **Really, it's a personal decision<a href="my%20main%20point">/b</a> - no one's going to force you to go to a private school, right?</p>
<p>EDIT: Just as an example, look at these statistics. There's no huge debt incurred just from going to a private school - in fact, the publics seem to have more debt upon graduation. I'm sure a study could also find that grads of top prviates make more money over time, too, in general. If you're set on a public, then that's good for you, but someone who chooses a private isn't make a stupid financial decision at all.</p>
<p>Average indebtedness at graduation: (numbers from CollegeBoard's site)
School (Type) - Amount
Ohio State University (Public) - $19,975
University of Virginia (Public) - $16,847
Harvard College (Private) - $9,290
Princeton University (Private) - $5,592</p>
<p>xenonator, Princeton is indeed awesome, but it is $200,000 better than any university, let alone Rutgers, one of the top 100 universities in the US. Of course, if one comes from a wealthy family, financial consideration would not be a factor. But to most people, $200,000 is hard to overlook.</p>
<p>I don't think her decision was a bad one, in fact it was probably a very smart decision. If she was pre-med for example, an extra 160 would be HUGE for med-school. A talented/driven student (which she most likely is if she got into Princeton) will have very good prospects coming out of a school like Rutgers with top grades and many graduate school opportunities.</p>
<p>"Can someone please explain to me the allure of a private school. With the exception of ivies, the only big advantages of most private school are aesthetic, and the well known, fancy name associated with it."</p>
<p>Why are you singling out Ivies? If you're going to go with a discussion of elite privates vs publics, the Ivies are just 8 of the top elite privates.</p>
<p>Well private schools have many advantages. They usually have a smaller student to teacher ratio, so more specified help with professors. Also, a lot of the time there is guaranteed jobs afterwards. better education usually.</p>
<p>Just to let you know, private schools may be more expensive but they offer more financial aid than large public schools. Also, you have an advantage to be recognized by professors for your work due to low class sizes and more elite opportunities. You are paying for those opportunities that will put you into a more competitive place for jobs, grad school, or whatever else.</p>
<p>"I'm sure a study could also find that grads of top prviates make more money over time, too, in general."</p>
<p>Actually, I read a study a while ago that said the majority CEOs do not come from ivies or even the very top schools. This is probobly because to become a CEO, you need social skills which are generally what some students in top schools lack.</p>
<p>Also, geranium, if you read my first post, i know that. However, many people can't recieve FA and loans are there only option.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, i'm singling out the ivies because it is understandable that someone would choose to go to an ivy over a top public school because of the sole fact that it is an ivy.</p>
<p>I would only recommend a private university for undergraduate education if it offers a top-notch education and is considered prestigious/well-known. There are some public universities that offer a superior education than a private school, such as Michigan and UCLA. If the private school doesn't offer you financial aid, I would default to the public school.</p>
<p>And not just for prestige. Many applicants don't want join the rest of their class at the flagship. Many applicants want a unique experience - LAC, religious, rural/city, academic, social, whatever that only a private can offer. The high cost of privates make them self-selective in some ways and merit (academic/EC) scholarships will only further sift out the applicants for ones that fit the private college's profile/reputation/stigma.</p>
<p>I also wonder about the difference between private and public too. I've never been to college and have just lived in US 2 years so far. personally I think private schools have high tuition to run the school and make opportunities for students. I'd rather private to public. But my financial problem does stump me. So I'm looking around at some public or private with low tuition.</p>
<p>1) The elite privates in the past year have begun to offer so much FA that they are often, if not usually, cheaper than Public for families making under about $150,000 per year</p>
<p>2) The college one attends not only does not determine financial success, it doesn't even influence it materially at all. It was once thought that equal SAT scorers from Princeton or Rutgers, to give a hypothetical, would see a 7% differential in favor of Princeton. The Mellon Foundations study referenced in this article: Newsweek.com:</a> Newsweek US Edition: Nation: The Worthless Ivy League? demonstrates otherwise -- that an Ivy acceptee who instead enrolls at an approx. Top 100 school will do roughly as well financially over the ensuing 20 years as acceptees that do actually attend the Ivy, I believe within 1%.</p>
<p>Note: An issue I have with this study is that if focuses on financial success. There are other types of "success" as well.</p>
<p>3) Not all Publics are the same. UCLA/Berkeley/Mich/UVA/UNC are all Top 30 undergrad. Berkeley is #1 or #2 in the world for Ph.D. programs depending on how the criteria are weighted, and UCLA and Michigan Top 25 in the world (higher than 2-3 of the Ivies).</p>
<p>4) Not all Privates are the same. An undergrad-focused Brown or Dartmouth or Williams vs. a Grad focused Harvard or Stanford (just look at the number of students undergrad vs. grad at each school).</p>
<p>So, it can no longer be said that Private will be more expensive. Nor can it be said that Private will have more prestige --- all the Publics I mentioned in 3) above would be more "presitigious" than most privates ranked from 30-50 in the USNWR annual ranking. And lastly, which I think is a point people just don't seem to be able to accept, is that the school itself does little or nothing to add or subtract from the financial success a high achieving high school student will achieve in life... an Ivy quality student who goes to the Ivy will do no better than an Ivy quality student who chooses for financial, family or other personal reasons to attend a lower ranked school.</p>
<p>Having gotten the prior points out of the way in my above post, let's get to the real issue:</p>
<p>Where is a student likely to find an environment in which they will learn more, learn better, develop greater analytical, writing, and creative skills, fit socially, and generally, THRIVE? </p>
<p>That might be at a large, public, graduate student oriented University with esteemed research faculty, robust D1 athletic programs and thousands of courses offered each year, an LAC at the opposite end, a largish prestigious Private with more graduate students than undergrad, or a small public (i.e. William and Mary).</p>
<p>"This is probobly because to become a CEO, you need social skills which are generally what some students in top schools lack."</p>
<p>That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Because someone is intelligent and motivated, s/he must have NO life, NO friends, and NO social skills, right?</p>
<p>To the OP: if finances are an issue, obviously many students will choose the cheaper public. But for lower- and increasingly much of the middle-class, privates are cheaper than an OOS public and sometimes even an IS public.</p>