<p>^ I agree. And also, I read recently that the Pell Grant maximum was raised to $5635 for the 2013-2014 school year. </p>
<p>Even so, it seems that the extra $85 hasn’t caught up with the extra 2k! :)</p>
<p>It’s cheaper to go OOS or private if you are a top student in Illinois, for the most part. But, for those who are impoverished, and this is really infuriating to me, they can’t even do the CC and then UIUC route. And the top impoverished students should be able to do that. It should be a MISSION of the state educational system, imho, that they can do this.</p>
<p>I once read a suggestion by PolarbearvShark that instate tuition for Pell eligible students shouldn’t exceed Pell. I really agree with this.</p>
<p>End rant.</p>
<p>I would agree with that motion, especially if they receive the maximum Pell. Because if FAFSA determines that their family literally cannot contribute any money for college, that’s usually the case, and it’s a shame for an already deprived student to also be deprived of an education that they deserve. </p>
<p>And also, with today’s skyrocketing tuition, it’s virtually impossible to work your way through school if you need to pay full or almost full. So even the most determined and hardworking students would still come out short.</p>
<p>I once read a suggestion by PolarbearvShark that instate tuition for Pell eligible students shouldn’t exceed Pell. I really agree with this.</p>
<p>I agree that it shouldn’t exceed (or much exceed) the cost of max Pell aid. Many states do have schools with tuitions this low. Every 0 EFC student has about $11k at his disposal for college (Pell and Stafford), that should be enough for a student to go to local state school (tuition, fees, books, and transportation). Working in the summer and during the school year can provide for other costs (car, pocket money, gas, etc). </p>
<p>States that want to charge more than full Pell for tuition should have state aid that supplements Pell.</p>
<p>I agree that costs have gotten out of control, but we also have to look at what people want versus what they expect. If a state can provide a public option (state college system) for reasonable amount, then it is doing its job. But people don’t want to be limited to local school as commuter…they want the residential experience. I want that for my kids too, but is the state required to give this? In SC, lottery tuition money for basically a B student in HS will pay $5000/year and up to $7500/year after freshman year for STEM majors. If you are willing to be a commuter, then the cost of tuition only at USC and Clemson (flagships) after subtracting tuition scholarship is around $5000. It’s around 3k at USC branch locations. And if you are willing to start at tech schools, that is free at that lottery scholarship level and most gen eds will directly transfer to 4 year state schools. So as a commuter, you could do two years free at tech, then 2 years at 4-yr state school for 3k-5k a year. Not a bad deal.</p>
<p>Now I still take issue with the rate at which college expenses have risen overall. Tuition increases over past few years of even 3-5% outpaces increases family income…at least in our home.</p>
<p>I will add that it varies so much from state to state. I’ve joked with friends that my best college planning advice is to move to NC or VA. For instate students, costs are very low and a much wider selection of top state schools to choose from than in SC for top students. Brother in NC and their tuition costs are very low…</p>
<p>My brother in VA says getting kids into a good state school is not easy. Easier to get into a comparable school OOS, but then you gotta pay the difference. And we are not talking about just UVA and Wm &M.</p>
<p>^^^yep you still need good stats to get into those schools and schools like NC state and UNC-CH in NC.</p>
<p>iBut people don’t want to be limited to local school as commuter…they want the residential experience. I want that for my kids too, but is the state required to give this</p>
<p>No. Just like the state isn’t expected to provide boarding schools for K-12. The “going away” experience is a luxury. It may have some redeeming value, but that value isn’t one that the state has much interest in. The state doesn’t care that your child get the “full college experience” of campus life. Nor should it.</p>
<p>Well, I don’t even “get” that theory.</p>
<p>I mean, all right, are you saying kids who do not live near a four year state university are out of luck? That a kid who doesn’t have the stats for UIUC but does for Northern Illinois is out of luck?</p>
<p>*Well, I don’t even “get” that theory.</p>
<p>I mean, all right, are you saying kids who do not live near a four year state university are out of luck? That a kid who doesn’t have the stats for UIUC but does for Northern Illinois is out of luck?
*</p>
<p>As for your UIUC comment… there should be more generous acceptances/preferences for kids who live near a state university. If stats are still too low, then go to a CC for two years, get good grades, and then have a guaranteed transfer to the nearby flagship.</p>
<p>Obviously, if a student doesn’t live within say 25 miles of a state school or CC then some kind of funding could be made available if low income. </p>
<p>If a student lives within 5 miles of a CC, but 50 miles from the state univ, then aid could be provided for R&B for those last 2 years. </p>
<p>But a student who lives close to a state school that has his major should not be given tax dollars to pay for room and board so he can skip by his local univ.</p>
<p>Think about it. There are many taxpayers that are barely able to provide food and shelter for their own families. Are they supposed to be paying for thousands of kids’ college R&B? No. And many of those families can’t afford to send their own kids away to school. Are they supposed to pay for thousands of lower-income kids’ R&B? No.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, that is the reality right now. There was a post that made me ache a bit. Very nice young student, accepted to UVA, family makes too much for financial aid, but dad has just been layed off the job, and so the family is in financial turmoil. Younger kids at home, and a house payment and other commitments made on an income that is no longer there. With some severance and some savings, they can scrape by and slowly get on track or downsize, but sleep away college at UVA is just something on the “A” list for expenditures anymore, and not likely to be on it for a while now.</p>
<p>If your parents can’t pay to go away to college, yes, your options are limited to what is within commutable distance. My state has low tuition options, but the state schools do not guarantee to meet full need, unlike UVA, and it does happen that kids can’t afford to go away to college, because even with PELL, TAP, loans,work study, there can be a gap even for the EFC. We won’t even get into the many times a family cannot or will not pay EFC. So, yes, this is the reality right now.</p>
<p>By spending the money to shore up our local schools (taking it from the subsidies we are giving private school is my idea), a goal would be for community colleges to be set up to prepare students to transfer to four year schools and those who show they can do well in CC can get the money to do so. The chances of success for a student who has done well the first two years of college are far greater than that of some 18 year old, even with a pretty good high school record. That is a reality. So I am all for more funding for those who have shown they can do it at CC or the first two years at a local school, and have plans to get into a program for a bachelors, and they need to go away to get it. But it’s a pay as you succeed program Don’t make the marks, then back you go to the local options. Haven’t worked it all out, but then no one has asked me to do so. Have cherry picked some great ideas from this board.</p>
<p>No, I know.</p>
<p>It’s just more complicated than it sounds, “Oh don’t go away to school then, and go from home” doesn’t always work. It works sometimes.</p>
<p>I’m a bit more annoyed with the whole thing simply because of the state I live in, and the way it has been so mismanaged. I pay a lot of tax dollars and I would really just prefer they be spent the way I want them spent. 
Silly.</p>
<p>I don’t want to pay double pensions and whatnot. I resent that this is what it has come to in our state. I want the impoverished students to have educational options.</p>
<p>I tutor at the local CC in order to help make that happen.</p>
<p>One thing we do have here is an extension at the CC where a kid can get a four year degree from a good four year state school by doing it from this one building and on-line courses. I think, ultimately, that is going to be the solution that works best.</p>
<p>Bring the school to the kids who can’t afford to go to the school. JMO</p>
<p>^^I think on-line is going to be a big thing. In SC there is an effort to be sure, with help of on-line that you can get 4yr degree even from schools in system that are basically 2 yr schools. Also, USC is redoing summer to allow students to get a full semester worth of school in summer session so kids that need to can graduate early…they are also going to try to get set up so scholarship money is allowed to be used during the summer. Not sure where this stands.</p>
<p>To be sure, some of comments depend on state. SC is geographically not large and most students are in commuting distance of something. Many states can’t say that. As a parent, though, it certainly hurts to see your kids work so hard and then be limited by finances to choices that aren’t as optimal.</p>
<p>In reference to a comment above, North Carolina publics are currently a good financial deal, but the Governor is proposing large increases in tuition in-state and out of state so they catch up with the increases every other state has made.</p>
<p>In PA, our Governor tried to slash funding for all public universities by 50%. He managed to achieve about 25% over the last 2 years. He said he wanted to direct more money so that it follows the student to whichever college was chosen by the student instead of allocating money each year to the publics. (I disagree with that voucher-based argument, but an interesting market-based argument could be made.) However, at that same time, he also tried to cut the state grants that are provided directly to needy students in public and private colleges.</p>
<p>It’s just more complicated than it sounds, “Oh don’t go away to school then, and go from home” doesn’t always work. It works sometimes.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s rocket science to figure out what to do with low income kids who don’t live near a state univ. There really aren’t that many of these kids for it to kill the budget. Many/most poor kids live in/near good-sized cities that are near CCs and colleges. </p>
<p>I do think that the idea of online education, at least for the first 2 years, could work for some as well. </p>
<p>I’m from Calif where there are CSUs and UCs in virtually every county/populated area. There are also many very good CCs with excellent transfer programs. Yet, the way that taxpayer aid is awarded can be crazy and wasteful. Back when I was a student, most commuted to their local CSU or UC (there were soooo fewer dorms!). Few parents would pay for their kids to dorm at a public that was further away. It would have seemed wasteful since tuition was so low, and R&B was about 5-10 times the cost of tuition.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s rocket science either, which is why it is even more annoying to me.</p>
<p>
I agree with this … however I know my “obvious” solution is a lot different than yours or cpoth’s. </p>
<p>For my the I view this through the lens of the opportunity I want my town, state, country to provide for each student … and the idea of how limited the options of a poor student should be are no where in the ballpark of your or cpoth’s. </p>
<p>Two examples. First, the federal government provides PELL grants to students … if a student is eligible for a PELL grant they should be able to use it at any school they want. Second, the idea that a top student from a poor family in Mass only option might Roxbury Community College instead of UMass Amherst defies everything I believe a socirty should do for those in need … and yes I’m willing to pay the additional taxes so one of QM’s auto-admit brilliant kids gets four years at UMass Amherst … instead of 2 at Roxbury CC and 2 at UMass Boston.</p>
<p>Of course YMMV … just wanted to be sure make sure reader’s knew some people idea’s varied a lot from the thoughts dominating the thread now.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>lol…the idea that a top student from a poor family in Mass should be limited to UMass Amherst defies everything I think society should do for those in need…but I realize that we our limited to what we can afford. And, I recognize that a top student from a middle class family has limitations as well. The majority of American students face limitations. That’s life.</p>
<p>^ fine … and I think limiting them to UMass Amherst is a reasonable limit … and I understand you believe that is too generous to have a state sponsored option that includes room and board.</p>
<p>But here is why this topic makes me go nuts. So the plan is in Alabama poor kids from Alabama should go to a local CC for two years … and then two years of whatever 4 years school is closest to their home. While at the same time UA gaps in-state students on financial aid and spend tens of millions on merit aid for in-state and OOS NMF kid full rides (and the world greatest dorms).</p>
<p>For some this model makes sense and is desired … I am heartbroken many believe that the poor excellent student from Alabama only option should be CC and they will be gaped at UA while my daughter (from Mass) could get a free ride at UA (OK, I cheated a bit … she was 1 point from NMF but was only because we’re from Mass … she would have been a NMF virtually everywhere else that year).</p>