Washington Post article on colleges that reduced tuition costs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really needs to be another forum for elite colleges and one for the rest of the schools not deemed worthy by the snobs on here. Normal conversations cannot be had about the schools that 95% of the kids in this area attend.

I know like how Jeff had to start an AAP thread because the discussions about TJ and the gifted programs were dominating the general schools forum. It would be nice if people could have discussions about normal colleges without having the 5% of families that send their kids to top 25 colleges, tell us what losers we are.

+1

Ha! I started a thread about that and it was deleted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There really needs to be another forum for elite colleges and one for the rest of the schools not deemed worthy by the snobs on here. Normal conversations cannot be had about the schools that 95% of the kids in this area attend.

The article mentioned 4 schools who have been known to lower tuition. Here are there acceptance rates:

St John's (Maryland) 81%
Sweet Briar College (PA) 80%
Elizabethtown College (PA) 70%
LaSalle Universiity (PA) 80%

I don't know the specific ranking of these schools, but these acceptance rates would indicate these schools are not n the top end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really needs to be another forum for elite colleges and one for the rest of the schools not deemed worthy by the snobs on here. Normal conversations cannot be had about the schools that 95% of the kids in this area attend.

The article mentioned 4 schools who have been known to lower tuition. Here are there acceptance rates:

St John's (Maryland) 81%
Sweet Briar College (PA) 80%
Elizabethtown College (PA) 70%
LaSalle Universiity (PA) 80%

I don't know the specific ranking of these schools, but these acceptance rates would indicate these schools are not n the top end.

Who gives a rip? Did anyone ask about your opinion about the selectivity of these schools? Is there any possible way that your comment is of use to anybody? If you are not interested in these schools, or in schools that might lower their tuition, then move along to some other discussion. I'm sure there is some thread debating Harvard vs. Chicago vs. UVA that you can chime in on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardly anyone pays sticker price.

People say that, but I'm solidly middle class - $150,000 in NOVA and I know many families at our income who did not receive a dime in financial aid at these private colleges. Which colleges give financial aid (grant, not loans) to families making $150,000?

I should say that the private colleges that I'm referring to our schools that are ranked in the top 30

If you impose that limitation on yourself, then yes, you are mostly right (with a few limited exceptions such as e.g. Harvard).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardly anyone pays sticker price.

People say that, but I'm solidly middle class - $150,000 in NOVA and I know many families at our income who did not receive a dime in financial aid at these private colleges. Which colleges give financial aid (grant, not loans) to families making $150,000?

In general, colleges ranked below around the #30 level by USNWR give merit scholarship money to high performing students.

Name-brand, elite schools do not, with the exception of e.g. Ivy League schools with huge endowments, who do give need-based aid to families making $150,000.

My niece received some scholarships from private schools ranked in the 60-70's, but even with the scholarships, the tuition would still have been higher that what she is paying to attend a similarly ranked public university in her state. Something about this just doesn't compute with me. Why would people pay more to attend a private school that has the same ranking as some of the public schools in their state? It seems to me that many of these families must still be relatively well to do, that they can pay $10-$15,000 a year more in tuition for their kid to attend a similarly ranked school that just appeals to them more. Those of us who have HHI less than $200,0000 can't spend the extra money just cause their kid likes the school more. It would have to be significantly higher ranking for most truly middle class families to deem it worth paying for.

Because many (most?) of us do not choose schools based on their rankings.

Because for a variety of reasons, the private school in question works better for their kid's needs, they can afford it, and they want to maximize chances for success.

Our DC got into every school he applied to, including UMD-CP. We are paying about $13,000 more per year for him to attend a private SLAC than we would have paid UMD-CP, and it has been worth every penny.

[Anonymous]

The article wasn't very helpful in determining whether the schools were lowing the net amount of tuition paid for a typical student or not. Since most/many of the students at these schools receive financial aid the important number to know is the net cost of attending the school and whether or not this number is increasing.

[Anonymous]

So why do you think the schools in this article are lowering tuition? To give students/their families a financial break? No, they are decreasing tuition to increase their applications and in turn increase their enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article wasn't very helpful in determining whether the schools were lowing the net amount of tuition paid for a typical student or not. Since most/many of the students at these schools receive financial aid the important number to know is the net cost of attending the school and whether or not this number is increasing.

Exactly. My take is that they reduced tuition to attract new applicants but ultimately aren’t netting any less money than they were before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article wasn't very helpful in determining whether the schools were lowing the net amount of tuition paid for a typical student or not. Since most/many of the students at these schools receive financial aid the important number to know is the net cost of attending the school and whether or not this number is increasing.

WaPo continues to produce low information journalism. Very disapppointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really needs to be another forum for elite colleges and one for the rest of the schools not deemed worthy by the snobs on here. Normal conversations cannot be had about the schools that 95% of the kids in this area attend.

I know like how Jeff had to start an AAP thread because the discussions about TJ and the gifted programs were dominating the general schools forum. It would be nice if people could have discussions about normal colleges without having the 5% of families that send their kids to top 25 colleges, tell us what losers we are.

There was a thread on this a few weeks ago that has disappeared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardly anyone pays sticker price.

That’s just not accurate. At top 20 schools typically 50-60% of students are not receiving aid. And at the next tier it’s 40-50% (more merit aid comes into play).

I've never understood why people bother to attend private colleges for schools that are outside of the top 150. Every state has public universities that rank the same or higher. Even families who are not paying the full sticker price of $45,000 are generally paying more than what they would pay for a similarly ranked state school Take Virginia Wesleyan for example. It's a non prestigious private college. Why would anyone choose to pay for that as opposed to schools that attract similarly qualified student such as Longwood or Radford. I just don't get it.

Part of the experience for my children was to live out of state for college. They met lots of different people and experienced a different part of the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardly anyone pays sticker price.

That’s just not accurate. At top 20 schools typically 50-60% of students are not receiving aid. And at the next tier it’s 40-50% (more merit aid comes into play).

I've never understood why people bother to attend private colleges for schools that are outside of the top 150. Every state has public universities that rank the same or higher. Even families who are not paying the full sticker price of $45,000 are generally paying more than what they would pay for a similarly ranked state school Take Virginia Wesleyan for example. It's a non prestigious private college. Why would anyone choose to pay for that as opposed to schools that attract similarly qualified student such as Longwood or Radford. I just don't get it.

I've never understood why people would decide who should educate their children based on how some magazine ranks them.

[Anonymous]

Ponsi scheme, govt should look into it, everyone pays the same

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardly anyone pays sticker price.

That’s just not accurate. At top 20 schools typically 50-60% of students are not receiving aid. And at the next tier it’s 40-50% (more merit aid comes into play).

I've never understood why people bother to attend private colleges for schools that are outside of the top 150. Every state has public universities that rank the same or higher. Even families who are not paying the full sticker price of $45,000 are generally paying more than what they would pay for a similarly ranked state school Take Virginia Wesleyan for example. It's a non prestigious private college. Why would anyone choose to pay for that as opposed to schools that attract similarly qualified student such as Longwood or Radford. I just don't get it.

I've never understood why people would decide who should educate their children based on how some magazine ranks them.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These are not highly desirable schools.

St. John’s may not make the ranking game but is one of the colleges that changes lives.