<p>As an opposite view of the thread "Schools on the Rise", what do you think are schools that are slowly on the decline?</p>
<p>Just the ones that are shuttering their doors, like Antioch…</p>
<p>Small, private liberal arts colleges in general have been shrinking in numbers. I believe there are now about 150-200 of these schools (depending on how you count). Maybe someone can site some trend data. </p>
<p>Women’s colleges comprise a subset of the LACs. The “Seven Sister” schools have faced serious challenges since the Ivies became coeducational in the late 60s and early 70s. Vassar went coed. Radcliffe has pretty much ceased to exist. Any declines perhaps have been stabilized or reversed at the others by now (?) I don’t know about other traditionally women’s colleges such as Goucher (now coed) or Mills. The two remaining coed colleges that are able to command top-20 rankings, Wellesley and Smith, do have much higher admit rates than most other top-20 schools.</p>
<p>Another small subset in this category are alternative or “hippie” colleges that had a heyday in the sixties and seventies. Antioch and Goddard have not fared too well. New College (Florida) sorta falls in this category, though in its prime it was not just “alternative” but also academically stellar. It went public, and according to a number of posts sounds like it is a little run-down. Hampshire seems to be the best survivor of that era.</p>
<p>It’s a little early to see a trend, but the current financial crisis is taking its toll on state universities. Even before the crisis, according to some posts, a couple of the top flagships had been dropping in the US News rankings over the years (though I’m not sure if that reflects a change in quality or a change in the ranking methodology.)</p>
<p>Schools that do cannot become financially self-reliant are the ones that will suffer the most in the long term.</p>
<p>I would actually say more schools are on the rise rather than on the decline… but perhaps the UC system with their budget cuts… also, for some reason… I would say that public schools (at least according to rankings) have been on the decline.</p>
<p>Schools that no longer require SAT scores probably did so because they were on the decline.</p>
<p>alam, public universities have been on the decline according to the USNWR because of changes in the magazine’s methodology, not because of a decline in the universities’ standards.</p>
<p>collegehelp I beg to differ. Schools like Middlebury is definitely maintaining its reputation.</p>
<p>Alexandre, fair enough…</p>
<p>and some schools like WFU went SAT optional beucase (I think) they want to enhance their reputation… not really because they were on the decline. I think schools who are having significant money problems will go on the decline.</p>
<p>I would argue that public schools are a mixed bag. The University of Michigan has great finances, especially for being located in a rather insolvent state, whereas Illinois and California, as stated, are experiencing severe budgeting problems (and corruption problems) which don’t seem to be resolving anytime.</p>
<p>couldn’t ya’ll have just discussed both on the same thread? : P</p>
<p>anyways, the UC schools will be basically poor this year. that always sucks.</p>
<p>I think that the money arguments and the SAT arguments are on target. Colleges need the money to attract faculty and top students, build and maintain first-class facilities, provide deep and important resources to students (think advising, think financial aid), etc. Take away the money and the quality dissipates quickly, particularly in comparison with institutions that have it.</p>
<p>As for the SAT arguments, this is an attempt by some schools to attract more minorities or an attempt by others to theoretically improve their selectivity. The result is often a less qualified student body and, for those who believe that the quality of one’s peers is an absolutely vital piece of the undergraduate experience, this is not an improvement.</p>
<p>Broadly speaking, the publics are in greater danger than the top privates. Most states are in real fiscal straits and their ongoing funding to colleges in their states is unquestionably at risk. This can and likely will affect all of the areas referenced above (ability to attract and retain top faculty, ability to build and maintain premier facilities, ability to provide important services to undergrads, including financial aid to students of need). </p>
<p>For example, look at financial aid. There are 25 colleges that meet 100% of the need of their undergraduate students. Only two of those are public (U Virginia and U North Carolina). Other publics with large endowments like U Michigan choose not to match that record as they meet only about 60% of the need of their OOS students. That financial discrimination might be the right choice for U Michigan and other publics, but this is a material difference and reflects the different institutional priorities among various highly ranked publics.</p>
<p>U Michigan deliberately restructured their finances over time to become less and less dependent on state funds. This has put them into a much better position in the current economy compared with other Michigan state publics. It also may be why their OOS tuition is on par with Yale’s.</p>
<p>I thought some of the SAT optional schools did so to attract more international students who might not do as well in the CR and Writing areas. But, that was just my guess.</p>
<p>Actually Hawkette, private universities are more dependent on their endowments than public universities.</p>
<p>And it is easy to meet 100% of OOS need when you admit primarily wealthy students or has an OOS population under 20% of the undergraduate student body. At UVa, only a quarter of students receive any sort of aid. At UNC only a third of students receive any sort of aid. At Michigan, almost half the students receive aid. Student indebtedness upon graduation is a much better metric of an institution meeting students’ financial needs. With the exception of very few universities in Michigan’s league (Cal, Caltech, Harvard, MIT, Rice, Stanford, UCLA, UDub, UNC, UT-Austin, W&M and Yale). At virtually all elite universities, including UVa, students graduate with $20,000-$35,000 debt. Below are approximate indebtedness average upon graduation at some elite universities:</p>
<p>$20,000:
Brown University
Dartmouth College
Georgia Institute of Technology
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign
University of Pennsylvania
University of Virginia
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Vanderbilt University</p>
<p>$25,000:
Cornell University
Duke University
Emory University
Georgetown University
Tufts University
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Rochester</p>
<p>$30,000
Carnegie Mellon University
University of Chicago
University of Notre Dame
University of Southern California</p>
<p>$35,000
New York University</p>
<p>^ do you have the source for that? i’d like to see the full list</p>
<p>
Those figures are useless, as they’re lagging behind current financial conditions by about four years.</p>
<p>Vanderbilt has since completely eliminated loans, and others like Penn, Duke, and Dartmouth have eliminated loans for many of their students.</p>
<p>Michigan, needless to say, has not.</p>
<p>Back to the OP
I have heard some serious concerns about Brandeis.</p>
<p>Does anyone have a guess for why the indebtedness is so high at NYU?</p>
<p>Alex,
</p>
<p>Are you aware that only 35% of U Michigan’s OOS students receive need-based aid? Not almost half as you claim above. The issue that I pointed out is with the aid to the OOS students. </p>
<p>For comparison, the OOS need-based aid numbers for U Virginia and U North Carolina are 28% and 34%.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, if that’s your metric, for the 48 colleges ranked in the USNWR Top 50 that provided data, U Michigan would rank 40th overall and nearly tied with Penn State for last among State Us. For the record, I think that Penn State is known for having really lousy financial aid. </p>
<p>Rank , Avg Student Indebtedness , College</p>
<p>1 , $5,859 , Princeton
2 , $9,871 , Caltech
3 , $10,813 , Harvard
4 , $11,108 , Rice
5 , $12,297 , Yale
6 , $12,589 , WILLIAM & MARY
7 , $14,148 , MIT
8 , $14,291 , UC BERKELEY
9 , $14,323 , UC IRVINE
10 , $14,946 , U N CAROLINA
11 , $15,155 , UC DAVIS
12 , $15,318 , U FLORIDA
13 , $15,724 , Stanford
14 , $16,317 , UC SAN DIEGO
15 , $16,733 , UCLA
16 , $16,800 , U WASHINGTON
17 , $17,000 , U TEXAS
18 , $17,107 , UC S BARBARA
19 , $19,016 , U VIRGINIA
20 , $19,085 , U Penn
21 , $19,358 , Boston College
22 , $19,390 , Brown
23 , $19,625 , Yeshiva
24 , $19,839 , Vanderbilt
25 , $19,891 , U ILLINOIS
26 , $19,908 , Northwestern
27 , $20,095 , Brandeis
28 , $20,126 , Dartmouth
29 , $20,881 , GEORGIA TECH
30 , $21,123 , U WISCONSIN
31 , $21,984 , Johns Hopkins
32 , $23,181 , Emory
33 , $23,333 , Georgetown
34 , $23,687 , Tufts
35 , $23,961 , Tulane
36 , $24,205 , Duke
37 , $24,500 , U Miami
38 , $24,750 , Cornell
39 , $24,827 , Wake Forest
40 , $25,586 , U MICHIGAN
41 , $26,800 , PENN STATE
42 , $27,121 , U Rochester
43 , $27,562 , U Chicago
44 , $27,692 , USC
45 , $29,756 , Lehigh
46 , $29,835 , Notre Dame
47 , $30,375 , Rensselaer
48 , $30,533 , Carnegie Mellon</p>