Looking back, do you wish your child attended the least expensive college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I find odd is how much parents on here think of college as trade school. College was such an important coming of age time in my life. I am so glad I went where I went and met my dearest friends. If my parents had just been focused on ROI I think it would have taken a lot away from it. I did well enough, went to la good aw school, and have had a successful life, but it was never totally about that. I hope my teenagers find a place where they can connect with friends, faculty, and the whole thing, and learn and grow as people. I am not obsessed with the ROI equation.

Did the parents on here have fun in college?

I went to a top public before anyone chimes in with how I am just a product of privilege.

why do you assume the two are mutually exclusive? i AM focused on roi, because besides my house, it's the most expensive thing i'll ever "purchase." and my kids do not have a trust, nor will we be supporting them financially post-graduating, so yes, should they choose to go to a $90k/year university with no real thought to how they're going to provide for themselves afterwards...yea, that's a problem. also, if my kids are incapable of "connecting with friends, faculty, and the whole thing" or growing as a person unless they're attending some exclusive $90k/year school, i'd feel like i had failed as a parent. raising independent children/adults who can bloom where they are planted is a big deal to me. to each his own though.

Not mutually exclusive, but I seldom see people on here with what I consider to be a more grounded view.

To help me not solely focus on ROI, I work at a university that will pay 55% of my kids' tuition at any school. There are ways to take the pressure off of your kids if you strategize a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad that students no longer pursue education for education’s sake. Instead, we are all so concerned about earning potential because the middle class has been hollowed out and job security is nonexistent. Our grandparents could go to college and study Philosophy or Religion and still get a decent job with good benefits and a pension.

I think most people would be willing to do this if costs weren’t so high.

I got a fairly “useless” BA at a good state school 20 years ago, and don’t do a job job directly related to that major. I maintain that my studies made me a decent critical thinker and I enjoyed my college experience a lot. I did leave with about 17k in student loans but always considered it worth it as it got me my first job and foot in the door.

Tuition is up 300% since then and that first salary is up about 30-40%

I may have chose a different path knowing I was going to have 50-75k in student loans.

It just isn’t smart to major in sociology or English anymore unless you have some kind of financial backing. Most middle class parents won’t invest 200k in humanities for their two kids. At least I won’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To most parents, college is basically a trade school to which you daily commute to get your free or cheap STEM degree from, preferably in three years. That's it.

Good. It is not cheap.

[Anonymous]

College in general works out for any kid as long as they graduate, ideally on time in four years if not early in three years (more likely at a state school that accepts all the APs). Most kids have a ton of fun, mature into adults, make a bunch of lifelong friends, most marry someone they met from or through that college social circle in their 20s, and ultimately have a solid career.

A parent is only going to look back and regret where their child began college five or 10 years ago or wonder 'what if' if things did not work out for their kid -- ex. failed out, bounced around with transfers, fell in with the wrong crowd, terminally single, wasted years with some loser they met at said college -- and they want to find something to blame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad that students no longer pursue education for education’s sake. Instead, we are all so concerned about earning potential because the middle class has been hollowed out and job security is nonexistent. Our grandparents could go to college and study Philosophy or Religion and still get a decent job with good benefits and a pension.

Cause now students go to college to get a job that pays enough to then save for their own child's college. Don't blame the students, blame the system.

[Anonymous]

It's pretty cringy when people throw around Cost of Attendance to exaggerate costs. Unless you're super rich you're not paying $85,000 a year for UChicago, nor are middle class people taking out "six figures" of loans for their child's undergrad. Most financial aid students at flagship state schools leave with $30k or so in loans. That's frankly not a big deal -- unless your kid flunks out. I believe the starting median salary for a bachelor's is now around $60k (?), so an average kid can easily pay off $30k in loans living at home for a year after graduation. Or even faster if they get an engineering degree or any other path that leads to a six-figure starting salary ex. nursing, tech, finance, or consulting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College in general works out for any kid as long as they graduate, ideally on time in four years if not early in three years (more likely at a state school that accepts all the APs). Most kids have a ton of fun, mature into adults, make a bunch of lifelong friends, most marry someone they met from or through that college social circle in their 20s, and ultimately have a solid career.

A parent is only going to look back and regret where their child began college five or 10 years ago or wonder 'what if' if things did not work out for their kid -- ex. failed out, bounced around with transfers, fell in with the wrong crowd, terminally single, wasted years with some loser they met at said college -- and they want to find something to blame.

Or if the parent took out Parent Plus Loans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I find odd is how much parents on here think of college as trade school. College was such an important coming of age time in my life. I am so glad I went where I went and met my dearest friends. If my parents had just been focused on ROI I think it would have taken a lot away from it. I did well enough, went to la good aw school, and have had a successful life, but it was never totally about that. I hope my teenagers find a place where they can connect with friends, faculty, and the whole thing, and learn and grow as people. I am not obsessed with the ROI equation.

Did the parents on here have fun in college?

I went to a top public before anyone chimes in with how I am just a product of privilege.

The thing is, you can get this is so, so many places so having a budget for college does not also preclude growing as a person and finding your people.

I mean, it depends on your budget, right? For many schools, it's not so much the tuition that's a killer as room/board. It's definitely a different experience being a commuter vs. living there. Not saying it's bad by any means, but it's different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty cringy when people throw around Cost of Attendance to exaggerate costs. Unless you're super rich you're not paying $85,000 a year for UChicago, nor are middle class people taking out "six figures" of loans for their child's undergrad. Most financial aid students at flagship state schools leave with $30k or so in loans. That's frankly not a big deal -- unless your kid flunks out. I believe the starting median salary for a bachelor's is now around $60k (?), so an average kid can easily pay off $30k in loans living at home for a year after graduation. Or even faster if they get an engineering degree or any other path that leads to a six-figure starting salary ex. nursing, tech, finance, or consulting.

There are such things as Parent Plus and private loans that allow you to take out more than that, and plenty families do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty cringy when people throw around Cost of Attendance to exaggerate costs. Unless you're super rich you're not paying $85,000 a year for UChicago, nor are middle class people taking out "six figures" of loans for their child's undergrad. Most financial aid students at flagship state schools leave with $30k or so in loans. That's frankly not a big deal -- unless your kid flunks out. I believe the starting median salary for a bachelor's is now around $60k (?), so an average kid can easily pay off $30k in loans living at home for a year after graduation. Or even faster if they get an engineering degree or any other path that leads to a six-figure starting salary ex. nursing, tech, finance, or consulting.

There are such things as Parent Plus and private loans that allow you to take out more than that, and plenty families do.

Very high default rates.

[Anonymous]

It depends. As a general rule, I'm a huge believer in community college + transfer to an inexpensive 4-year. For most people in most fields in most parts of he country, this is the most affordable and smartest way to get the paper.

However, since moving to DC, I have encountered SO MUCH college snobbery. I had no idea employers and colleagues might judge you as less bright for not having gone to a name-brand college, let alone a community college. But they do. And very little you can do on the job to change the perception when you start 30 feet behind the line.

So, my advice is to go to the college that has the best rep + social network in the field you want to work. So, USC + UCLA if you want to go into film; Harvard + Yale if you want to go into law; etc., etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got sucked into the name/selectivity craziness of this board with my first child and they wisely blew me off and took a full ride to a school this board mocks. Now DC is headed to an Ivy for grad school. DC made the best choice and this board is toxic.

So your kid blew you off and four years later has such raging Ivy envy they're immediately headed to an Ivy to add some prestige to their CV (and presumably go into some debt for it)? And you're such an insecure striver (while you claim you're not) you're on here bragging about the Ivy. Got it. If the kid had the prestige BA they probably wouldn't be so hard up for the Ivy MA. And no matter, there's no substitute for lacking an elite BA. MA programs are largely cash cow scams, for sale to anyone who wants to buy one; they don't confer what you think it confers. The mediocre BA will be on their CV for the rest of their life, they keep that same college social circle, dating pool and memories from their mediocre college campus. Trying to buy your way into that prestige orbit with an MA never works. Only sometimes works if you get into like elite of the elite, ex. Yale Law School.

Why are you criticizing someone for admitting to being formerly prestige-driven and "insecure" when you are openly and explicitly denigrating this young person's alma mater and circle of college friends as "mediocre"? Let them live their life, especially if they had practically zero expenses for undergrad. People also attend Ivy grad schools to work with specific professors or on research projects and attend for these opportunities associated with elite schools but Ivy prestige is not necessarily the only reason why they decide to attend. The reason that people are insecure is because of criticism from people like you who do mock their undergrad education. People take different paths to arrive in the same place, so who cares if you wouldn't have made the same decision - that's the whole point of this thread, for people to share their own experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty cringy when people throw around Cost of Attendance to exaggerate costs. Unless you're super rich you're not paying $85,000 a year for UChicago, nor are middle class people taking out "six figures" of loans for their child's undergrad. Most financial aid students at flagship state schools leave with $30k or so in loans. That's frankly not a big deal -- unless your kid flunks out. I believe the starting median salary for a bachelor's is now around $60k (?), so an average kid can easily pay off $30k in loans living at home for a year after graduation. Or even faster if they get an engineering degree or any other path that leads to a six-figure starting salary ex. nursing, tech, finance, or consulting.

No there are actually people/parents who take out $150-200K+ for their kids to attend an elite school. Not very smart, but there are people who do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College in general works out for any kid as long as they graduate, ideally on time in four years if not early in three years (more likely at a state school that accepts all the APs). Most kids have a ton of fun, mature into adults, make a bunch of lifelong friends, most marry someone they met from or through that college social circle in their 20s, and ultimately have a solid career.

A parent is only going to look back and regret where their child began college five or 10 years ago or wonder 'what if' if things did not work out for their kid -- ex. failed out, bounced around with transfers, fell in with the wrong crowd, terminally single, wasted years with some loser they met at said college -- and they want to find something to blame.

That was our generation. Not this generation. NONE of my younger cousins are married or have kids except one. None of them met their significant other in college or grad school. Most of them have decent jobs, but sometimes very far removed from what they initially majored in. And these are people in their 30s and 40s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s sad that students no longer pursue education for education’s sake. Instead, we are all so concerned about earning potential because the middle class has been hollowed out and job security is nonexistent. Our grandparents could go to college and study Philosophy or Religion and still get a decent job with good benefits and a pension.

This is completely wrong.

The modern university system is outdated and the idea that education for education’s sake could only be pursued at university is a huge part of the problem. In a world without the printing press or today’s modern forms of mass communication, centralizing the educators in one location and bringing the students to the educators is the ideal model. We live in a world where ideas and knowledge can be efficiently disseminated. Yet we’re stuck with with an Oxford university model that’s nearly 1000 years old. Your children can pursue education for education’s sake in the modern world. That goal is not exclusive to the university model of education any more.