<p>What do you guys think of increasing tuition by 5% every year for the next five years? Tuition, typically, is around $12,000 and by the end of the end of the five years it will be around $15,000. That's a large increase. Tell me your opinions.</p>
<p>As a full-pay parent (income over $150,000) I am glad my son only has 2 more years to go. I really think that it will hit the middle class the hardest, since we make to much to be considered for Financial aid but not enough to completely fund our childrens education. It will make the UC’s affordable only to the really low income or the really high income. All I can suggest to parents of young children, starting saving now so you can afford college in 18 years for your kids. I would never depend upon the chance of getting FA in the future.</p>
<p>All of the students who have been profiled in articles written on the tuition rate increase (and were protesting it) were very low income….students who already receive generous financial aid (B&G = free tuition and grants) and most likely the only increase they will have will be receiving additional aid/grants. It’s the middle class students who are full pay that will be hurt by the increase. </p>
<p>FWIW, it won’t affect us. Neither of my kids was interested in attending the UC’s. Ds applied, but accepted elsewhere. We would have been full pay (middle class income that would have qualified for Blue & Gold if only based upon income….offset by very high assets that make us full pay). </p>
<p>
Not at all. $15k per year is a BARGAIN compared to private schools that are charging middle class families full tuition $50k per year. I wish my kids were eligible to pay only 15 grand for schools of that caliber.</p>
<p>@GMTplus7 50k a year? That’s way too much. Even if I were a top-notch student with outstanding stats, I would never want to go to a school that is that expensive (unless I were rich then maybe). You might as well buy a house with that money (but that’s just my opinion).</p>
<p>@MLM @Gumbymom I agree with you guys. I’m from a middle class family, and I wouldn’t say we’re doing well but we’re not scraping for pennies neither. We just get by. It sucks every time when I have to ask my parents to pay for something academic (i.e. AP exams, SAT tests, applications, college applications, and soon college) that we have to pay the full price while most of my friends who are considered to be in the poverty category get all these fee waivers (and I also hate just asking for money in general; I want to feel like I earned it). It seems that all these benefits will perpetuate poverty; there’s no incentive to work hard if you’re given all these benefits.</p>
<p>If UC financial aid policies remain similar to current, the increase will probably be visible in net price only to the top 20% or so income California families and all non-California families.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see people with high incomes telling their employers to pay them low incomes instead (other than perhaps a few CEOs taking token $1 pay to make a point). Obviously, people generally see a benefit to having higher income compared to lower income.</p>
<p>Well over half the students at the UC’s (their own stats; not mine), 55%, pay NO TUTION at all. That is astounding to me. I think that number is getting way too high. After all, if you cannot even afford $1000 a year, perhaps you should start at a CC and transfer thereby cutting your tuition costs in half. Or go to a state school. We simply don’t require low-income students to do that even though very high number of higher income, but “blocked out of the UC” students go that route all the time. I think it is time to ask everyone to chip in SOMETHING toward their education. If we did, we wouldn’t be in the predicament we are today. Seeking higher and higher number of OOS students which thereby reduces the number of spaces available for California students. And, now raising tuition which now falls on the 31% who are paying a full fee bill each year. Everyone can/should get a summer job, a job babysitting or working in stores over the holidays, work-study, etc. …something so that you are contributing to YOUR education. Going on a free-ride is overly generous, and unnecessary.
In the same line of thought as TheIntergration mentioned, there is a student (and I know this first hand) that is on a complete free ride at our local state school and when it came to selecting her rooming assignment, she picked the MOST expensive living arrangement possible (like, who cares? she’s not paying for it!) while many many students that are full pay selected double rooms to SAVE money. It is $3000 more/year to have a single over a triple; $1500 more per year to have a single over a double. I am pretty sure if SHE was paying for it and/or taking loans to cover it, she would have chosen the more economical option. Many full pay students still got stuck in triples eve though they selected a double (still cheaper than a single) since it was a cheaper option. If the taxpayer is footing the bill, then I think they should have to make the same decisions as people who are paying for their education have to make. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with SOME assistance, and grants, loans etc. I just think that we have gone too far and it is becoming EXPECTED and barely appreciated. </p>
<p>Well said @Seashel. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you run the UC and CSU net price calculators for a student from a $0 income $0 asset family, you will get net prices of around $8,500 to $10,000 at UC, $4,000 to $5,000 for commuter CSU, and $11,000 to $13,000 for residential CSU. In other words, they do expect the student to contribute to his/her own education (through work earnings and federal direct loans), even in the maximum financial aid scenario.</p>
<p>Choosing a more or less expensive living arrangement within a given class (dorm, off-campus, or commuting from parent’s house) does not change the financial aid amount, so there is financial incentive to choose a cheaper option within a given class (i.e. a student in the dorm saves money by choosing a cheaper dorm). Additionally, CSU financial aid appears invariant based on living arrangement classes, since the CSU system is supposed to emphasize local (commuter) access.</p>
<p>It is possible that some merit scholarships may operate differently. But merit scholarships effectively are student earnings.</p>
<p>Good. Because it’s privilege to attend a UC. People often pass up the CSU for more prestige, but I like when the cost difference creates more of a selling point, or at least jealousy that I do not have to pay as much.</p>
I have no problem with it. My daughter is getting a 40k education for 13,400 this year at ucsd. Ranked in the top 20 nationally and top 100 worldwide. I could have sent her to usc or stanford for 40k tuition, why?? We are blessed to have the uc system. If people dont like it there is always the csu or cc systems.