Paying for a second or third tier college

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Virginia of it all really distorts this question—Virginia and California are really the only states with more than one public college that is on par with nationally renowned privates.

That said, I am the oldest of three kids and went to any Ivy. My brother, the second oldest, went to a top 50 school with high name recognition. My sister, the youngest, went to a no-name regional SLAC on a full ride merit scholarship. I have an excellent, high-earning career. My brother has a very good career and is married to an extremely successful woman. My sister has been laid off multiple times and is still struggling to find her purpose.

People complain about paying full freight for these schools in the lower half of the top 50 but ime the outcomes are good because the peer group is solid. But if the choice is between noname private or non-flagship public, it gets tough.

Personally I think only Cal, UCLA, UMich and GT are on par with the top private colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Floridian here. Can someone explain why NJ has such weak state schools when the taxes are so high there?

And I agree with the others that the state matters. We have a great option here (which I’d actually claim is tier 2 not 3 as claimed earlier) so for us the decision is simple. But if it was basically pay for a good school or don’t go to a good school at all, I’d be more likely to pay. Actually have you looked at UF? The OOS sticker price is probably equivalent to in state at many others but for a stronger college.

In the Northeast, the long tradition of top tier private colleges means the elites were never going to use the public colleges. There were also pushes for open enrollment at places like CUNY to ensure access but that cut into any lingering prestige. The taxes in these states are often just paying for bloated public sector pensions.

Georgia resident and I get the Floridian’s curiosity. This all makes sense now. UMass, UConn, SUNY are in states with the best K-12 but the SEC schools have a lot more public/popular support.

[Anonymous]

The point of going to college is not just to take classes. It is the peer group and the academic environment.

Any school with an average SAT below 1500 is probably not really worth 100K COA. If the peer group is not at that level, then what exactly are you paying for?

Conversely, if the state school average above 1500, then yes it's better than going to a private with a lower average. You want your DC to be surrounded by serious, highly capable students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point of going to college is not just to take classes. It is the peer group and the academic environment.

Any school with an average SAT below 1500 is probably not really worth 100K COA. If the peer group is not at that level, then what exactly are you paying for?

Conversely, if the state school average above 1500, then yes it's better than going to a private with a lower average. You want your DC to be surrounded by serious, highly capable students.

Test optional schools have a lot of dummies.

Take those off your list.

[Anonymous]

^ only 40% of students at UVA and Vanderbilt, for example, submitted scores. You can’t trust their reported numbers. The averages only matter when 100% of students are required to submit scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point of going to college is not just to take classes. It is the peer group and the academic environment.

Any school with an average SAT below 1500 is probably not really worth 100K COA. If the peer group is not at that level, then what exactly are you paying for?

Conversely, if the state school average above 1500, then yes it's better than going to a private with a lower average. You want your DC to be surrounded by serious, highly capable students.

You must be the same one with obsessions about 1500 average posting in the BC/BU thread. Don't you have better things to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of going to college is not just to take classes. It is the peer group and the academic environment.

Any school with an average SAT below 1500 is probably not really worth 100K COA. If the peer group is not at that level, then what exactly are you paying for?

Conversely, if the state school average above 1500, then yes it's better than going to a private with a lower average. You want your DC to be surrounded by serious, highly capable students.

Test optional schools have a lot of dummies.

Take those off your list.

Then the list will look like this:

Tier 1
HYPSM, JHU, Upenn, Brown, CalTech.

Tier2
Cornell, Dartmouth, Rice, CMU, Georgetown

Tier 3
Gatech, UT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Floridian here. Can someone explain why NJ has such weak state schools when the taxes are so high there?

And I agree with the others that the state matters. We have a great option here (which I’d actually claim is tier 2 not 3 as claimed earlier) so for us the decision is simple. But if it was basically pay for a good school or don’t go to a good school at all, I’d be more likely to pay. Actually have you looked at UF? The OOS sticker price is probably equivalent to in state at many others but for a stronger college.

Former NJ resident- taxes are high partly because the public K-12 schools are usually quite strong, especially anywhere within commuting distance of NYC. There’s also probably still some level of corruption contributing to it, but that’s a topic for another day.

Rutgers is a perfectly great school and an excellent choice. On par with UMD, OSU, etc. Better than a lot of state flagships. But growing up in NJ nobody wanted to go to Rutgers. The campus is not super appealing, including different campuses that you need to take buses between. Nobody likes New Brunswick. Most NJ kids either want to go to New England, NYC, or South for good weather. NJ has a lot of smart, underprivileged kids who do great at Rutgers but UMC families dont love that and would rather pay more for their kids to go to a fancier option or another state flagship. Penn State and Vtech were super popular for my high school graduating class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tier 1
HYPSM, Chicago, JHU, Upenn, Columbia, Northwestern, Brown, CalTech, Duke.

Tier2
Cornell, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, WashU, Berkeley, UCLA, Notre Dame, Umich, CMU, Williams, Amherst, Georgetown

Tier 3
USC, NYU, Gatech, UNC, UVa, UF, BC, Tufts, BU, Swarthmore, Pomona, UT, Northeastern, Barnard, Bowdoin

I would pay for all of Tier 1 and 2 and all but 3 of Tier 3, over UVA or WM in-state tuition. Well, it is really only ONE that is a hard NO. I could be convinced on the other two. That one should not be in Tier 3.

[Anonymous]

What is a 3rd tier?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Floridian here. Can someone explain why NJ has such weak state schools when the taxes are so high there?

And I agree with the others that the state matters. We have a great option here (which I’d actually claim is tier 2 not 3 as claimed earlier) so for us the decision is simple. But if it was basically pay for a good school or don’t go to a good school at all, I’d be more likely to pay. Actually have you looked at UF? The OOS sticker price is probably equivalent to in state at many others but for a stronger college.

Former NJ resident- taxes are high partly because the public K-12 schools are usually quite strong, especially anywhere within commuting distance of NYC. There’s also probably still some level of corruption contributing to it, but that’s a topic for another day.

Rutgers is a perfectly great school and an excellent choice. On par with UMD, OSU, etc. Better than a lot of state flagships. But growing up in NJ nobody wanted to go to Rutgers. The campus is not super appealing, including different campuses that you need to take buses between. Nobody likes New Brunswick. Most NJ kids either want to go to New England, NYC, or South for good weather. NJ has a lot of smart, underprivileged kids who do great at Rutgers but UMC families dont love that and would rather pay more for their kids to go to a fancier option or another state flagship. Penn State and Vtech were super popular for my high school graduating class.

Former NJ resident and this is true. UMC rather go to Lehigh or Colgate than Rutgers, or BU/BC/Villanova or south if want SEC.

[Anonymous]

Lots and lots of UMC northeast kids would pay out of state for UVA and UMich and they have been for 30 years, this has always been the case, same for BU/NYU for more city vibe kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tier 1
HYPSM, Chicago, JHU, Upenn, Columbia, Northwestern, Brown, CalTech, Duke.

Tier2
Cornell, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, WashU, Berkeley, UCLA, Notre Dame, Umich, CMU, Williams, Amherst, Georgetown

Tier 3
USC, NYU, Gatech, UNC, UVa, UF, BC, Tufts, BU, Swarthmore, Pomona, UT, Northeastern, Barnard, Bowdoin

I would pay for all of Tier 1 and 2 and all but 3 of Tier 3, over UVA or WM in-state tuition. Well, it is really only ONE that is a hard NO. I could be convinced on the other two. That one should not be in Tier 3.

If you know who are going to USC and NYU from our private, you will have a hard time paying the tuition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tier 1
HYPSM, Chicago, JHU, Upenn, Columbia, Northwestern, Brown, CalTech, Duke.

Tier2
Cornell, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, WashU, Berkeley, UCLA, Notre Dame, Umich, CMU, Williams, Amherst, Georgetown

Tier 3
USC, NYU, Gatech, UNC, UVa, UF, BC, Tufts, BU, Swarthmore, Pomona, UT, Northeastern, Barnard, Bowdoin

Hahaha. Good troll attempt.

Accurate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point of going to college is not just to take classes. It is the peer group and the academic environment.

Any school with an average SAT below 1500 is probably not really worth 100K COA. If the peer group is not at that level, then what exactly are you paying for?

Conversely, if the state school average above 1500, then yes it's better than going to a private with a lower average. You want your DC to be surrounded by serious, highly capable students.

No state school average was above 1500 when it was test required and none would be now if they were all test required. The highest-scoring public was UVA with a 75Th%ile around 1500. William and Mary had basically the same, but a lower 25th%ile. UCB who knows because of test blind. Michigan and UNC were lower than UVA.

Top SLACS Williams Amherst Swat never had medians of 1500 pre-TO. The schools that did were all the ivies but two (cornell low and Columbia never published because of GS they knew they were lower than others) as well as MIT Hopkins Duke and Vanderbilt. (Chicago always TO).

I agree with you on peer groups, if you have a student above 1500 you want them with similar peers, and if they are 1560+ with a bunch of 5s and A/A+ in high school, they really need to attend the highest scoring peer schools to have decent % of peers that they are on par with. That is how we picked and in fact we ranked them by SAT range as our first applied during test required. The students at these top schools have not really changed except for the schools who swung far toward TO when they used to be one of the highest -ten scoring schools (Vanderbilt--was higher range than two ives and higher than northwestern).