No name school w/big scholarship vs. big name school w/loans

[Anonymous]

Here' my opinion:

For a liberal arts major -- choose the no name school.

For a STEM or business major - choose the big name school.

[Anonymous]

OP, I don't know what your no-name school list looks like, but if the schools on that list have good retention and graduation rates (e.g. 90% return rate for sophomore year, 75% or more graduation in four years rate), and if your DC believes that one or more of the schools are a good "fit," then I would choose the lower-rated school with no loans.

The fact of successful people having taken out loans 20-30 years ago is not relevant IMO. The student loan landscape and the cost of higher education is altogether different in 2016 than it was in 1977 or 87.

Evidence-based research suggests that the outcomes of students at school(s) that your DC is qualified to attend are likely to be the same ones that your DC will enjoy, by virtue of the fact of him/her being qualified to be admitted to those schools. In other words, what matters is your DC him/herself. So, e.g., a student who is admitted to Swarthmore but chooses to attend e.g. Kenyon or Denison or Wooster will do as well as the Swarthmore grads, on average:

"Dale and Krueger concluded that students, who were accepted into elite schools, but went to less selective institutions, earned salaries just as high as Ivy League grads. For instance, if a teenager gained entry to Harvard, but ended up attending Penn State, his or her salary prospects would be the same.

In the pair's newest study, the findings are even more amazing. Applicants, who shared similar high SAT scores with Ivy League applicants could have been rejected from the elite schools that they applied to and yet they still enjoyed similar average salaries as the graduates from elite schools. In the study, the better predictor of earnings was the average SAT scores of the most selective school a teenager applied to and not the typical scores of the institution the student attended."

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/the-college-solution/2011/03/01/the-ivy-league-earnings-myth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here' my opinion:

For a liberal arts major -- choose the no name school.

For a STEM or business major - choose the big name school.

Honestly, I think I'd say the reverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I don't know what your no-name school list looks like, but if the schools on that list have good retention and graduation rates (e.g. 90% return rate for sophomore year, 75% or more graduation in four years rate), and if your DC believes that one or more of the schools are a good "fit," then I would choose the lower-rated school with no loans.

The fact of successful people having taken out loans 20-30 years ago is not relevant IMO. The student loan landscape and the cost of higher education is altogether different in 2016 than it was in 1977 or 87.

Evidence-based research suggests that the outcomes of students at school(s) that your DC is qualified to attend are likely to be the same ones that your DC will enjoy, by virtue of the fact of him/her being qualified to be admitted to those schools. In other words, what matters is your DC him/herself. So, e.g., a student who is admitted to Swarthmore but chooses to attend e.g. Kenyon or Denison or Wooster will do as well as the Swarthmore grads, on average:

"Dale and Krueger concluded that students, who were accepted into elite schools, but went to less selective institutions, earned salaries just as high as Ivy League grads. For instance, if a teenager gained entry to Harvard, but ended up attending Penn State, his or her salary prospects would be the same.

In the pair's newest study, the findings are even more amazing. Applicants, who shared similar high SAT scores with Ivy League applicants could have been rejected from the elite schools that they applied to and yet they still enjoyed similar average salaries as the graduates from elite schools. In the study, the better predictor of earnings was the average SAT scores of the most selective school a teenager applied to and not the typical scores of the institution the student attended."

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/the-college-solution/2011/03/01/the-ivy-league-earnings-myth

well those aren't "no name schools. And the article was about Ivies vs. "less selective" schools. I don't think there are what OP means by "no name" schools.

But we can't know since he/she hasn't come back to give examples of a no-name school.

[Anonymous]

Research on college education outcomes suggests that the most successful students are those who were in the top of the class, regardless of the level/"name" of the school. Because there are good teachers across lots of colleges and it's the top students who get the greatest benefit of teacher time/attention/research opportunities etc.

So, if OP's kid is getting a big scholarship at one school, I'd expect that means that kid is also seen as a top student for that school. So, knowing nothing else about the options, I'd go with that one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Research on college education outcomes suggests that the most successful students are those who were in the top of the class, regardless of the level/"name" of the school. Because there are good teachers across lots of colleges and it's the top students who get the greatest benefit of teacher time/attention/research opportunities etc.

So, if OP's kid is getting a big scholarship at one school, I'd expect that means that kid is also seen as a top student for that school. So, knowing nothing else about the options, I'd go with that one.

^^Adding, this assumes OP's "no name" school is a solid college with good graduation and retention rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Research on college education outcomes suggests that the most successful students are those who were in the top of the class, regardless of the level/"name" of the school. Because there are good teachers across lots of colleges and it's the top students who get the greatest benefit of teacher time/attention/research opportunities etc.

So, if OP's kid is getting a big scholarship at one school, I'd expect that means that kid is also seen as a top student for that school. So, knowing nothing else about the options, I'd go with that one.

Completely agree.

My DC was admitted to Bowdoin and Swarthmore, and because of money (we are affluent but cannot pay full price), is at an Ohio SLAC with a huge merit scholarship. No worries here as we know that DC will be very successful. The research supports this.

[Anonymous]

Will DC be ineligible for FA at biggest name schools? (HHI > $120K). And how much a year in loans are you talking about ($5550 vs 30K+)? Is DC a NMSF? If so, look at USC (gives merit aid for HYP-like kids, and has good name recognition itself).

Agree with other posters that it depends on the schools (and also on the cost differential). There are only a handful of schools I'd pay a significant premium for. And no way in hell would I saddle DC with 6 figure debt for a BA -- even from one of them.

If it's the typical NESCAC vs. midwestern SLAC, it's a no-brainer. Go with debt-free. If it's Harvard (with some debt) vs U of Alabama (free) it could be a more difficult decision. OTOH, if DC can get into Harvard and get a full-ride to U of A then presumably DC could/should have other middle-ground alternatives as well.

Lots of folks on college confidential seem quite knowledgeable re merit aid. If DC's list isn't settled yet, you might want to post there.

[Anonymous]

My DC is a good student but will not even be applying to schools that cost $65,000 and do not give merit aid. That is just reality. Plenty of high stat students in the same boat as your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will DC be ineligible for FA at biggest name schools? (HHI > $120K). And how much a year in loans are you talking about ($5550 vs 30K+)? Is DC a NMSF? If so, look at USC (gives merit aid for HYP-like kids, and has good name recognition itself).

Agree with other posters that it depends on the schools (and also on the cost differential). There are only a handful of schools I'd pay a significant premium for. And no way in hell would I saddle DC with 6 figure debt for a BA -- even from one of them.

If it's the typical NESCAC vs. midwestern SLAC, it's a no-brainer. Go with debt-free. If it's Harvard (with some debt) vs U of Alabama (free) it could be a more difficult decision. OTOH, if DC can get into Harvard and get a full-ride to U of A then presumably DC could/should have other middle-ground alternatives as well.

Lots of folks on college confidential seem quite knowledgeable re merit aid. If DC's list isn't settled yet, you might want to post there.

Is this U of SCarolina or Southern California

[Anonymous]

Southern California

[Anonymous]

Do people not realize merit scholarships are bribes to get you to put up with 1) the morons that'll be your classmates 2) a subpar experience, overall 3) a degree that has little if any brand value?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do people not realize merit scholarships are bribes to get you to put up with 1) the morons that'll be your classmates 2) a subpar experience, overall 3) a degree that has little if any brand value?

So what do you recommend then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DC is a good student but will not even be applying to schools that cost $65,000 and do not give merit aid. That is just reality. Plenty of high stat students in the same boat as your kid.

Lots of those $65k schools give a lot of aid. Don't assume you'd have to pay full freight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do people not realize merit scholarships are bribes to get you to put up with 1) the morons that'll be your classmates 2) a subpar experience, overall 3) a degree that has little if any brand value?

I mentioned USC because it's a good school looking to move into the top tier by attracting more high-stats kids. In terms of faculty and facilities, it's already competitive. Basically lots of $$ poured in while the UCs faced budget cuts. And there's certainly name recognition and a loyal alumn network.