<p>Johns Hopkins would cost a Maryland resident 3x as much as University of Maryland SOM. About $30K/year more.</p>
<p>Wait…I stand corrected…the UMd figure was for a semester. So, Hopkins would only be about $15K/year more.</p>
<p>On the other hand, UVa SOM looks like it costs nearly as much for a Virginian as Hopkins, and MORE than Hopkins for an out-of-state student.</p>
<p>I’m pretty shocked to see that because my last year at UVa SOM I paid ~8K as a non-resident (I remember paying more, but that’s what the chart on the website says), and my tuition had about doubled in four years’ time.</p>
<p>^The tuition is much higher in 3rd and 4th year at state schools in our state. In 3rd and 4th year it is the same as at private schools. I guess, it is different from state to state, this is the only explanation.</p>
<p>A little off topic, but on the theme of cost, Texas medical schools are ridiculously cheap. I read that Baylor’s tuition is something like 8k for an in-stater. That’s unbelievable for a top 25 med, IMO. UT-SW and the others are right ‘down’ there in cost as well.</p>
<p>Tuition may be cheap, but you also have to take into consideration living costs. Baylor’s Tuition may be cheap, but it is located in downtown H-Town, so the living cost should be significant.</p>
<p>However, then again, living costs in Texas are really low compared to the rest of the country… =)</p>
<p>^^^^ Even though Baylor is “cheaper”, it must have ****ty Financial Aid, because the average indebtedness of Baylor students is 91K. It sticker price is only 38K a year to attend (fees, living costs, tuition according to US News). Now compare that to Columbia’s Medical School, which has an average indebtedness of 113K. Columbia’s sticker price is around 63K a year. </p>
<p>Maybe this is because Columbia attracts wealthier students who don’t need to take out a lot of loans to attend med school, but I don’t think thats the case.</p>
<p>Baylor eliminated merit aid 2 years ago (although it still appeared on their website both years). Baylor was more expensive than SW for my D (by $30-40K) over 4 years for an IS student. </p>
<p>Those indebtedness numbers get a little screwy. You need to check the details. IIRC, they include any student who took any loans. The students who take very small loans can skew the numbers. Dramatically. I think it’s best to look at need-based grant aid numbers if you are hoping to qualify for need-based grant aid (at the relatively small number of med schools that provide substantial grant aid). My D received zero zippo nada grant aid from Baylor. All loans.</p>
<p>That being said, the Texas schools and Mayo are incredible bargains for those students with high expected family contributions. For students who would qualify for need-based grants at Stanford, Harvard, Yale, and a few others? Well, you’d have to see how it shakes out for you. But get admitted first. ;)</p>
<p>*Even though Baylor is “cheaper”, it must have ****ty Financial Aid, because the average indebtedness of Baylor students is 91K. It sticker price is only 38K a year to attend (fees, living costs, tuition according to US News). Now compare that to Columbia’s Medical School, which has an average indebtedness of 113K. Columbia’s sticker price is around 63K a year. </p>
<p>*</p>
<p>Isn’t it rather typical for med students to borrow such amounts? I don’t know how to compare those numbers really because as you said, maybe Columbia med has more wealthy students…or maybe they have more students whose parents are doing some borrowing (so those loans wouldn’t show up).</p>
<p>I don’t know which med schools give great FA (free money) to its students.</p>
<p>I understand now why there are fewer applicants to medical schools now than there were fifteen years ago when I applied despite the substantial growth in the U.S. population over this time. Who wants to enter a career where you start out a quarter of a million dollars in debt and do not finish your training, which is more arduous than in any other profession, until you are over 30 years old.</p>
<p>^But that may be a good thing too. The length and cost of training and education may cause students who are only interested in the monetary gain of a medical profession to veer away from medicine, which would be a good thing. The system, although not so inviting, sort of weeds out students who aren’t totally committed in that way.</p>
<p>1.) Once you’re $250,000 in debt, you’ll find that a lot of people become monetarily motivated.</p>
<p>2.) There is still a trend – not a perfect one – of talent following financial compensation.
You might get fewer doctors who are interested in lucrative careers, but you also have to worry about a somewhat diminished talent pool.</p>
<p>3.) The other way to screen for monetarily motivated students, of course, would be to admit only medical students who were already independently wealthy. And I don’t think anybody really wants to do THAT.</p>
<p>^I agree that after medical school students may become monetarily motivated due to debt, lifestyle, or whatever it may be. However, for students to consider the entire journey out of high school just for money isn’t wise with the length of training and education required. What I’m suggesting is that those students at this stage that are simply motivated by <em>only</em> money may (and IMO should) seek other career paths. The students that do choose different career paths at the high school level or early college (if only driven by money) is good for the medicine IMO. That is what I was trying to convey.</p>
<p>But of course, when choosing a specialty, I can imagine that many students would look for ways to be better compensated and/or better lifestyle specialties.</p>