<p>For us it comes down to the same way we've lived our life ... if we can't pay cash for it, we don't buy it. The only thing we've agreed to allow debt on is our home, but even that is much less than every realtor attempted to get us to take on because of the formula they use based on income. My kids have both grown up that way, too ... we're definitely the last to get anything new that's out there, and the first area of a store they head to is the clearance rack. So, when it comes to education ... it's the same way (husband has a Ph.D from Purdue, and I have a Master's from Purdue ... and Purdue paid for those graduate degrees). We have x amount of dollars set back for education -- and that includes them working part time, but I want their college years to be more about school and opportunities than working every free hour -- and that means that they need to evaluate their goals. Both want "grad school" in some sense, i.e. law, medical or pharmacy .... and thus will need additional funds for that endeavor. They are making their choices, and they also agree that their graduating with a lot of debt isn't worth it to them, in terms of security and future possibilities, i.e. first time home ownership, etc. They're stellar students ... and we know they'll do great wherever they end up because of their work ethic and creativity. My D's applying to chapel hill and Fl state schools ... and in the end, the deciding factor (besides admission) will be money spent. Chapel Hill will have to make a great offer to beat free tuition in Fl in highly respectable universities.</p>
<p>I'll add ours - we don't believe in going into debt for our kid's college education, or for the kids taking on large debt. Our DD will graduate in May debt free, DS will graduate with $8000 in debt (or less, if the school changes its loan policy -fingers crossed!). That said, by living modestly, we have been able to pay the first 4 years of our 7 years of kids in undergrad school, out of pocket. No debt so far. Our kids both turned down full-rides to schools, and I would be richer if I had insisted they take them - but we are thrilled with the "riches" they have received and are receiving at their private school, where the profs have time to mentor kids and opportunities abound for all (not just the top go-getters like at many large public U's)</p>
<p>Just as expensive isn't always better, I also think a private school isn't always better. Maybe sometimes but not always. I know a number of kids who are going to state Us, some in honors programs, some not, who are in small classes, know their teachers, participate in research and are thrilled with the many opportunities a large environment offers. Not all are classic "go getters" but they're certainly not sloths either. Some of it is fit. This applies at the hs level too. My s went to a huge public and did just great...<br>
One thing is that it is impossible to tell how your child would have done if they made a different choice. Would they really have suffered at big state U? Would they have been bored at a small LAC? Could we have spent less money? Of course, those of us who have happy kids are feeling pretty good.
And as far as being richer, I thought of it as my child becoming richer depending on his or her choice. Cheaper choices bring him $ to spend on other educational opportunities...including grad school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
a set of rationalizations that make your own answer superior to others so it "fits" your concept.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, I don't think my answer is "superior" to any others. I think my answer is superior for my kid and my family. And I offer it only as such.</p>
I know a kid who went to Baylor (2nd tier, current US News ranking #75) at about the same time my son started college, and he ended up traveling all around the world working on research with one of his profs, I think starting the summer after his freshman year. My son is at a CSU (off the main grid for US News, ranked #48 on one of the regional master's universities list) and just completed an internship via a program that is open only to CSU students, and appears to be much better in certain particulars than what would seem comparable through better schools -- in this case I think his school gave him an "in" to a very strong privately funded program that was specifically geared to provide opportunities to the type of students who would not otherwise get them.</p>
<p>My d. (at the Ivy-level school) has a great internship opportunity for this summer, but it is something she has arranged on her own via networking through contacts outside the school. She does feel that the NAME of her school has been a tremendous edge in getting this internship; but it is really her own efforts that have led to it, and I know of another student at the same college via this board who has a similar major who has had a hard time finding internships, perhaps simply because she is focused on a slightly different type of internship. </p>
<p>So it probably depends a lot on the individual student, and major or field of interest. It can be an advantage to be the only applicant in a field of 50 or 100 to have "Ivy U" on the resume; but no advantage to be competing among a field of 20 from the same or equivalent universities. An elite private may have an array of offerings through its career center or departments that are only available to its students; but the public u's also have their own set of different offerings available only to their students. </p>
<p>The point is, it is easy to rationalize when a student has gotten a fantastic opportunity via an elite college that somehow the elite school was a necessary part of the equation..... but the reality is that there are great opportunities available all over the spectrum. Some of it depends on chance; my son's low-tier college internship opportunity was via a competitive process, with only one student selected from his school -- as great an opportunity as it was for him, obviously I can't draw the conclusion that it is commonplace.</p>
<p>But there is an advantage at times to being the "big fish in a small pond" ... or the kid who stands out within a department as being one of the best and brightest. The best opportunities are competitive at any school -- but in some places the competition is a lot stiffer.</p>
<p>I'm enjoying this discussion and empathizing with the OP as I remember having the same questions last year. I agree with all of those who have said let the student be the guide. Sometimes what jumps out to the students are things you can explain that they just don't have the life experience to figure out. Other times, they notice things that are important to them that perhaps a parent would miss. My S last year dismissed completely a huge scholarship from Emory ( I couldn't believe it at the time!!) because he just didn't feel culturally comfortable with the students there. When choosing between a well known LAC with 2/3 scholarship and leadership bennies OR a lesser known school with a full ride - he spoke of the library hours being restricted on weekends at the school he perceived as less rigorous. As it turned out - I think he was probably right. His school has a library open 24 / 7. The school he turned down had a library closed at 6pm on Saturdays and open only 4 hours on Sundays. He posited that this meant many many students left campus for the weekend and/or the rigor wasn't there to require too much studying.
Would I have noticed this? never.
But he's happy. And the $$ is workable, while he still has some great scholarship perks.
As someone said - you can't do a control group - so just make your decision and allow yourself to enjoy happiness without looking back :)</p>
<p>I have been around this board and wrestled with this discussion for a few years. I believe Opie is right and that we all have to rationalize our choices otherwise we could not coexist w/ the dissonance. </p>
<p>Orjr above ^^stating you can't do a control group so make the decision and run with it. A concise statement that hits the nail on the head. Decide and do not look back. You will drive yourself nuts.</p>
<p>Son is at sophomore at his full ride top 50 safety. He left a lot of $$ and prestige (Ivy ,top ten) on the table. His opportunities and accomplishments so far have been stellar. He is beyond happy. </p>
<p>Do not think for one minute that "all the really smart kids" are at the top schools. There are way too many smart kids to go around:) and thousands of great opportunities out there for those that want them. There are also many great profs and mentors out there just waiting to help your student become everything they can be.</p>
<p>....and they don't have to come at the cost of $150,OOO.</p>
<p>Rationalization involves creating phoney or superficial explanations for our choices that would not be considered plausable if we were being honest. So I disagree that anyone should have to rationalize their choice. A belief that going into hevy debt was not a good option for you is valid. So is the belief that the second tier school has enough strong points in particular areas to be the smarter choice for you. And so on, and so on. They are explanations, not rationalizations.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Rationalization involves creating phoney or superficial explanations for our choices that would not be considered plausable if we were being honest.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Does it , SS? I'm not so sure. In another field of inquiry altogether, a for profit business deal, it helped me to recognize that my "opponent" (Yes. It was not a win/win.:() had to think the way he did, rationalize the way he did. Heck, if not - how could he shave in the morning without wanting to off himself? It helped me realize that I was never going to get him to view things from any other perspective because for him to do so would have made him admit that he was a scumsuckingleechbastardnotworthyofspittingon. </p>
<p>But I'm over it, can't you tell? ;)</p>
<p>I agree with the (edified) opie and chedva and sax, while recognizing that SS's point can be valid but I don't think it has to be. </p>
<p>(Yuck! I sure am disgustingly sweet this morning. What the heck is wrong with me?;) BTW , good job posters. Very respectful posts. :))</p>
<p>
[quote]
blossom - curious. How does a lazy slacker 17 year old even get into MIT? Sounds like he had a great record (scores and GPA) but I thought it took much more than that to make the cut.
[/quote]
This was me in HS. Very good grades, excellent test scores, excellent ECs, and I'm guessing excellent recommendations. It's also truw I went off to college having studied less than 5 times in my life and having never done an ungraded HW assignment. I was smart, immature, and bored with HS ... I also had a lot of potential. I went to an "elite" school and got my lunch handed to me for a bit (close to probation) and then did very well my last couple of years. There is no way to know for sure but I'm positive if I had gone to my State U I would have basically kept up to essentially my HS ways and done fine (around 3.0) ... which would have been a much worse outcome.</p>
<p>I know this is a contrarian point of view ... but I believe top tier schools are most likely to be most valuable to high potential kids who did not push themselves in HS ... getting thrown into the deep end with no where to hide will force them to face their lack of focus ... while sending them to an mid-tier school because "they didn't earn the right to go to a top tier school" is putting them in an environment that allows them easily to continue their HS ways.</p>
<p>
[quote=combined]
so it "fits" your concept. ...Ya know there really isn't an answer to this question.. only a set of rationalizations that make your own answer superior to others..
I think my answer is superior for my kid and my family and I offer it only as such..... we all have to rationalize our choices otherwise we could not coexist w/ the dissonance...As someone said - you can't do a control group - so just make your decision and allow yourself to enjoy happiness without looking back :).[/combined]You know there really isn't an answer to this question, only a set of rationalizations that make (my) answer superior to other (answers) for my kid and my family. We all have to rationalize our choices otherwise we could not coexist with the dissonance. As someone said - you can't do a control group - so just make your decision and allow yourself to enjoy happiness without looking back :).</p>
<p>I am struck by curmudgeon's rationalization about rationalization, or was it an explanation about rationalizations. I will keep this in mind next time I deal with a scumsucking, etc. Which person could be me, possibly, except that I don't allow myself to see myself that way. Seems to me that "explanations" and "rationalizations" are the same, just one sounds better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
...I believe top tier schools are most likely to be most valuable to high potential kids who did not push themselves in HS ... getting thrown into the deep end with no where to hide will force them to face their lack of focus ... while sending them to an mid-tier school because "they didn't earn the right to go to a top tier school" is putting them in an environment that allows them easily to continue their HS ways.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Imagine the result if all the 'elite' schools let it be known they prefer smart slackers over smart hard workers. </p>
<hr>
<p>curm, I don't see where there is any big difference between your position on accepting appropriate merit offerings, and stickerschock's. I guess I'm just being dense this morning. I'll have to work on the sweetness thing. But thanks for setting a good example.</p>
<p>This must be a really tough question for us parents to grapple with since the topic keeps showing up in new threads with slight different titles and twists. But it's the same fundamental question.</p>
<p>It's disturbing for us mortals because we don't know the future and can't preview alternate endings to the story of our kids' lives. Wouldn't it be great if we could see in advance how s/he turns out after attending school A compared with how s/he turns out after attending school B? Or would it? Think about the formative people and circumstances in your life. Were they predictable ones you could have foreseen? Were they always what you'd have chosen in advance, or were they a form of adversity? Do you always even understand fully how certain life experiences affected you? How would you even evaluate which end result was better for your child? Career success? Salary? Meeting a soul mate? What? Since we're not mortals, our family handled the uncertainty by praying A LOT for guidance.</p>
<p>In the end, we chose prestige and perceived elite quality over merit money/great price and very good quality. It was a hard decision--one I've discussed in detail on several of those other threads. But what I want to share with you all now is that things really do have a way of working out just fine! If you'll notice, there aren't many parents who are coming on here to say their child made the wrong choice and college was a disaster.</p>
<p>In our own case, we're beginning to see how it's all going to work out after all. Since a huge issue was financial and projected debt, one fabulous development was a change in S's school's financial aid policy which will reduce S's debt for his remaining years. Secondly, another opportunity has just presented itself for S which could supply some of the rest of the money needed to avoid graduating in excessive debt.</p>
<p>midmo, there is no difference (that I know of)
[quote]
between your (my) position on accepting appropriate merit offerings, and stickerschock's
[/quote]
I was simply quibbling with her quibbling :) about rationalizations: phony, superficial. My position is where it has always been- "know your kid, know your finances, be honest from the get go, apply widely and well, don't get hung up on one school, start with a safety they'd be happy attending that you KNOW you can afford, ratchet 'up' from there" . </p>
<p>I asked, or tried to ask , "Does it always have to follow that rationalization is self-deluding?".</p>
<p>re rationalizations...I think it was Woody Allen who said in Sleeper: "Rationalizations are more important than sex...Have you ever gone a week without a rationalization?" ;-)</p>
<p>Nope, it was Jeff Goldblum's character in The Big Chill who said that about rationalizations.</p>
<p>The dialog, according to IMDB, is: </p>
<p>Michael: I don't know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They're more important than sex.
Sam Weber: Ah, come on. Nothing's more important than sex.
Michael: Oh yeah? Ever gone a week without a rationalization?</p>
<p>"the topic keeps showing up in new threads with slight different titles and twists. But it's the same fundamental question." I think it is because each family has a slightly different situation. </p>
<p>Based on what I have read here, I picked up that it has alot to do with what type of a person the student is. Let's me give your all an example I recently learnt about my own DD.</p>
<p>She is really passionated about this environmental thing and she started a recycling program at her HS. After classes in each and everyday, at most of school functions, she herself will gather everything from the collection boxes and sort out the things. This makes it impossible to get home by school bus. So DW will have to go pick her up everytime. </p>
<p>Last December, DW and me went away for one week. We asked her to either find a ride or stop the recycle program for one week. Of course she did not stop the program and she walked home for a whole week. This would take her about 1 hour one way and in snow. She is just so determined and driven at things she wants. </p>
<p>The #1 chioce for her now is the "Environmental science and Policy" at Duke. As the parent, how could I deny her of that just because it costs more??? OTOH, I am pretty sure that DD will shine at any school she finally attends.</p>