Selingo notes that people are increasingly disinclined to pay for "second tier" schools that don't give merit - if they don't get into "Ivy Plus" then they go straight to state public flagship. He thinks this will become very common for people in the $160-220k HHI range (donut holes). I agree. If you don't get top-drawer prestige, why pay the top-drawer price?
|
They also go to SLACs that offer merit. Because in many states the flagship is hard to get into or the kid wants a smaller environment. |
We have a higher income than that, and were just looking at LACs, but I agree that it's hard to justify full-pay for a school like Haverford, Colby, Bates, F&M, or Vassar, when you can get $30K/year or more in merit aid at many schools ranked in the 30-50 range. My kid ED'd at one of them and got merit aid. If he'd decided to ED at, say, Bates, and got in, we would have paid, but I'm feeling much better about paying a lot less for a school that is pretty much the same in quality.
I disagree with the concept that people are skipping "target schools." Many schools in that 30-50 range could not be considered safeties. They were targets for my kid (3.7UW, 1460 SAT) but still offer significant merit aid if accepted. |
This part is so real. If you’ve found safeties you love, and you’re already coping with the crazy ED1/ED2/lottery situation for your reaches, what role are targets supposed to play? It used to be that a target was a better school than a safety, but with fairly predictable admission odds given your grades and test scores. But with grade inflation and test optional, everything seems random. And nowadays every safety has an honors college and plenty of strong kids who are there on merit. So what are target schools supposed to be for anymore anyway? |
+1 My DD had similar stats which I know put the super selective LACs out of reach. Then the next tier down which would be reasonable reaches are too expensive for us. So she focused on the schools where the cost would come in comparable for what we pay for our other kid to go to a VA state school. So, her list was all safeties + W&M (waitlisted). |
This is a critical point (and sort of undermines his whole premise). My kid applied to two super-reaches, three reaches, one target, and three safeties. Two of the reaches should have been targets based on stats, but their acceptance rates are in the low- to mid-teens, so they’re automatically reaches. (The target was one where my kid’s stats should have made it a safety, but its acceptance rate is only 25-30%, so how can that be a safety?) Building this around the “target” concept confuses the matter. What he’s really saying is, if you’re a private school but not top-ranked/highly desirable and don’t offer generous merit, your market is getting smaller and smaller. Target is not really a useful concept these days. |
I think some of this is just parents thinking the “Ivy plus” schools ARE targets. By the time decisions come out, it’s too late to shift gears. |
My kid got a substantial merit package at a SLAC in the T50-100 range and we could not justify the price difference with the higher ranked but not T20 schools. The gap was substantial. |
Totally agree with what the OP and others have said.... even putting finances aside, the system is so busted that there's no such thing as "Targets" for admission anymore.
If you define Target as a place where you are not assured acceptance, but you have a fairly reasonable shot of getting in-- that is blown away when we take away fair and reasonable. (thanks, TO!) Anyway, who could blame folks for choosing Ivy-Plus or a great in-state option? Good for them. Higher education has to reckon with the fact that families fully understand they emperor is wearing no clothes. |
Jeff Selling has a talent for creating names for things that are not clear. Buyers and sellers still makes me confused. I get the concept, just who is buying and who is selling.
I read this email this morning and thought the same thing. I think he's right on with this - he describes me! - but are the skip over schools the ones we're skipping over a la "fly over" - or the ones we're skipping to? But whatever -- for sure agree with this. Not paying 90k a year for BC, sorry BC lovers. Just no value there for full pay families. |
The schools are buying and selling. If they're buyers, they have to give you money. If they're sellers, you have to give them more money. Fly-over schools are the ones you're skipping. Same concept as fly-over states--they're not the destination. |
my kids list was fully this:
Ivy plus Good matches that offered merit, including international schools. In the end, he really had a hard time deciding btw the full pay ivy plus and the merit at Denison (with money for grad school). But had he had a full pay middlebury or full pay Colby or full pay BC option, he would have scratched those without a second thought. Which is why he didn't bother. The only thing is you really have to show a lot of interest and/or don't pick schools known to yield. Or have an international school you feel good about. Or you could end up with nothing, I guess. |
I read the email. he doesn't say fly overs, that's the PP. that would be clear. he's using skip-overs and it's less clear, but I get the idea. |
I think he's using "skip overs" and "second ring" to describe two different things. People are skipping over the second ring to the skip overs. Which is weird.
If I were his editor, I'd say those were the same thing. Skip over the second ring to the goldilocks schools: fit plus merit. |
+2 Our DC had high stats (1580 SAT, 4.8W at a magnet) and although in theory that put the super selective LACs within reach, we didn't/don't see a meaningful difference between the education offered at a T20 school and the one at a T40 school. DC chose an LAC ranked in the 40s with very generous merit aid (the other option was UMD Honors College with merit aid), which made it financially reasonable for us. |