Does everyone on here with kids applying to top 50 schools really have the $80K per year to spend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn't read this entire thread but my kid who currently attends a top 50 school got a scholarship worth more than half of tuition - so not one of the full rides, but very substantial help. Also was offered a spot at a T25 that was 85K per year so not attending that one. Many of my kids' school friends are also on partial scholarships of varying degrees - not everyone is paying full freight.

What kind of scholarship? Very few (if any) T30 colleges offer merit scholarships, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that applies to T60.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You had 18 years to save. Plus cash flow some now. What have you been doing all this time? You knew this expense was coming.

What I’ve run across is people who assume state school will be as affordable as it was for their parents, coupled with some magical thinking that their DC will be the one to receive scholarships.

It would be better to understand sooner, but these are often households that can cash flow 30K for in state tuition.

But the flip side families spending willy nilly on private school, big houses, vacations, they do know what college costs and do tend to pay when the time comes. There’s some myth around here that these are the families posting, not IME.

If you have kids, shouldn't you know what college costs? Or do you assume you are going to be getting handouts? Most of us can not afford the latter.

I have never heard of a top school offering merit scholarships - some kids attend where they are accepted. Period. Which is fine, but don't try to tell people that they are attending because of scholarships that don't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Midwest in an area where going to college was the expectation, but very little prestige given to this school over that. People mostly went public.

But .. there was also an expectation that kids got cars over their own in their teen years (new, nice cars). People cared indeed about brand names. People got married pretty young, bought an home at 30, and had their 3 or 4 kids by the time they were in their mid 30.

My parents were east coast transplants and we had to use the family car when it was free and applied to colleges further afield. We all went to Ivy League schools (in the day when it wasn’t that hard for full pay kids).

And now I live in Brooklyn and see this mania up close.

But as I watch my Midwest friends repeating this cycle I think, that’s a better way. It’s weird how this college thing overtakes a childhood. My old friends had more kids, roomy houses, less financial stress, got a lake house in MI or WI, are on track for retirement, and their kids had carefree childhoods. They all have fulfilling jobs. Their kids will too.

Why do we do this?

This is so interesting. What do you think is going on?

Same. I actually think my senior DD would love the midwestern university in the town I grew up in. She has toured and does like it but is influenced by the culture here and thinks that because it has a high acceptance rate it isn’t as good as schools with a lower acceptance rate. She could just pick this school and enjoy her senior year and also enjoy her college experience.

She is correct in that her academic cohort at a lower ranked / acceptance rate college is definitely for the most part, going to be inferior, regardless of the standard of teaching / research at the college.

You are completely wrong about this. Most students attend the big school in their hometown or state no matter how smart they are. It is ridiculous to assume that the kids who chose their state college with a high acceptance rate are therefore all less intelligent than the handful of kids who got pulled from the lottery pool of applicants to a college with a tiny number of seats.

Having hired a lot of kids straight out of college, I can attest that this is true. Many students accepted to the Ivy League are average smart kids who are grinders and have good organizational skills. There’s this myth that they’re all brilliant, and it’s just not true. In fact, I’d say the resume that gets you into an Ivy these days is likely to screen out the brilliant kid who has a burning intellectual interest in one area, but really doesn’t care about making a 100% in an area they aren’t interested in. Ivy’s say they want “pointy” kids, but they really don’t. The only group it seems true of is MIT PhDs. Other than that, I know more truly brilliant people who went to lower ranked schools.

Pointy v. well rounded are not consistently defined - and also definitions of each vary per school, and different schools value different levels of each. To say one school prefers one or the other is to not know what really happens behind closed doors (admissions).

The proof is in the pudding.

Say wut?

Don’t look at what they say, look at who they accept.

That is exactly what I am saying - I know who is accepted.

NP here. Do you really know STEM-oriented kids with Bs in high school English who’ve been accepted to Ivies? Because that’s what the PP is talking about.

Not every kid is the same, surely OP must know that. There are so many contingencies about colleges admissions these days that no one person can possibly list all of them. I think so many posters are just looking for definitive information which does not exist. The admission person would literally have to have that applicants file in front of them to answer any kinds of odds.

If that’s true, surely it confirms the point that there are a lot of super smart kids who are not going to Ivies these days.

Of course there are, and there always have been. Lots of super smart kids don't even apply to Ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't read this entire thread but my kid who currently attends a top 50 school got a scholarship worth more than half of tuition - so not one of the full rides, but very substantial help. Also was offered a spot at a T25 that was 85K per year so not attending that one. Many of my kids' school friends are also on partial scholarships of varying degrees - not everyone is paying full freight.

What kind of scholarship? Very few (if any) T30 colleges offer merit scholarships, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that applies to T60.

There are four UCs ranked in the 40s (SB, SD, Irvine, and Davis) that together take a huge number of California students out of the market. Most (maybe all?) privates ranked below that are offering merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are so, soooo dumb.

Draining their entire life savings to pay for college.

Morons.

Send your damn kid to the community college for 2 years then transfer to a state school with living from home arrangements for the last 2 years.

You idiots wipe out your entire savings so your stupid kids can have the 'college experience' and get the same damn basic education your state and community colleges offer. A BS degree matters so sooooooooo little over the longrun. Just get the cheapest one possible. I can't believe there are still millions of really stupid people out there willing to pay over $100k for a useless BS degree.

One thing they apparently don’t teach at state and community colleges is how to make a very good point without being a total a-hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't read this entire thread but my kid who currently attends a top 50 school got a scholarship worth more than half of tuition - so not one of the full rides, but very substantial help. Also was offered a spot at a T25 that was 85K per year so not attending that one. Many of my kids' school friends are also on partial scholarships of varying degrees - not everyone is paying full freight.

What kind of scholarship? Very few (if any) T30 colleges offer merit scholarships, and I don't think it is a stretch to say that applies to T60.

There are four UCs ranked in the 40s (SB, SD, Irvine, and Davis) that together take a huge number of California students out of the market. Most (maybe all?) privates ranked below that are offering merit.

Sorry, I meant four UCs ranked in the 30s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Midwest in an area where going to college was the expectation, but very little prestige given to this school over that. People mostly went public.

But .. there was also an expectation that kids got cars over their own in their teen years (new, nice cars). People cared indeed about brand names. People got married pretty young, bought an home at 30, and had their 3 or 4 kids by the time they were in their mid 30.

My parents were east coast transplants and we had to use the family car when it was free and applied to colleges further afield. We all went to Ivy League schools (in the day when it wasn’t that hard for full pay kids).

And now I live in Brooklyn and see this mania up close.

But as I watch my Midwest friends repeating this cycle I think, that’s a better way. It’s weird how this college thing overtakes a childhood. My old friends had more kids, roomy houses, less financial stress, got a lake house in MI or WI, are on track for retirement, and their kids had carefree childhoods. They all have fulfilling jobs. Their kids will too.

Why do we do this?

This is so interesting. What do you think is going on?

Same. I actually think my senior DD would love the midwestern university in the town I grew up in. She has toured and does like it but is influenced by the culture here and thinks that because it has a high acceptance rate it isn’t as good as schools with a lower acceptance rate. She could just pick this school and enjoy her senior year and also enjoy her college experience.

She is correct in that her academic cohort at a lower ranked / acceptance rate college is definitely for the most part, going to be inferior, regardless of the standard of teaching / research at the college.

You are completely wrong about this. Most students attend the big school in their hometown or state no matter how smart they are. It is ridiculous to assume that the kids who chose their state college with a high acceptance rate are therefore all less intelligent than the handful of kids who got pulled from the lottery pool of applicants to a college with a tiny number of seats.

Having hired a lot of kids straight out of college, I can attest that this is true. Many students accepted to the Ivy League are average smart kids who are grinders and have good organizational skills. There’s this myth that they’re all brilliant, and it’s just not true. In fact, I’d say the resume that gets you into an Ivy these days is likely to screen out the brilliant kid who has a burning intellectual interest in one area, but really doesn’t care about making a 100% in an area they aren’t interested in. Ivy’s say they want “pointy” kids, but they really don’t. The only group it seems true of is MIT PhDs. Other than that, I know more truly brilliant people who went to lower ranked schools.

Pointy v. well rounded are not consistently defined - and also definitions of each vary per school, and different schools value different levels of each. To say one school prefers one or the other is to not know what really happens behind closed doors (admissions).

The proof is in the pudding.

Say wut?

Don’t look at what they say, look at who they accept.

That is exactly what I am saying - I know who is accepted.

NP here. Do you really know STEM-oriented kids with Bs in high school English who’ve been accepted to Ivies? Because that’s what the PP is talking about.

Not every kid is the same, surely OP must know that. There are so many contingencies about colleges admissions these days that no one person can possibly list all of them. I think so many posters are just looking for definitive information which does not exist. The admission person would literally have to have that applicants file in front of them to answer any kinds of odds.

If that’s true, surely it confirms the point that there are a lot of super smart kids who are not going to Ivies these days.

Yep. The Ivies keep their numbers artificially low to preserve the mystique.

Harvard had a freshman class size of 1700 people in 2021 as per USNWR. You can find 1,000-1500 smart kids with high stats in most state university honors programs. But maybe the state university students didn’t have the $80,000, etc.

Full pay is a hook.

I knew people at my college who transferred to Ivies. There’s a thin line between a student here
or a student there. Subjective…

Full pay is no hook, without the stats, including grades, test scores, entire gamut of what it actually takes to be admitted to that particular school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Midwest in an area where going to college was the expectation, but very little prestige given to this school over that. People mostly went public.

But .. there was also an expectation that kids got cars over their own in their teen years (new, nice cars). People cared indeed about brand names. People got married pretty young, bought an home at 30, and had their 3 or 4 kids by the time they were in their mid 30.

My parents were east coast transplants and we had to use the family car when it was free and applied to colleges further afield. We all went to Ivy League schools (in the day when it wasn’t that hard for full pay kids).

And now I live in Brooklyn and see this mania up close.

But as I watch my Midwest friends repeating this cycle I think, that’s a better way. It’s weird how this college thing overtakes a childhood. My old friends had more kids, roomy houses, less financial stress, got a lake house in MI or WI, are on track for retirement, and their kids had carefree childhoods. They all have fulfilling jobs. Their kids will too.

Why do we do this?

This is so interesting. What do you think is going on?

Same. I actually think my senior DD would love the midwestern university in the town I grew up in. She has toured and does like it but is influenced by the culture here and thinks that because it has a high acceptance rate it isn’t as good as schools with a lower acceptance rate. She could just pick this school and enjoy her senior year and also enjoy her college experience.

She is correct in that her academic cohort at a lower ranked / acceptance rate college is definitely for the most part, going to be inferior, regardless of the standard of teaching / research at the college.

40% of kids at Williams, Amherst etc all recruited athletes. Why do people still buy this?

But Williams and Amherst are D3 which means they value academics and those athletes have to get in first. They're not dumb University of Alabama jocks. My DD was recruited at Johns Hopkins. The coach told her if she didn't have a 1460 SAT he couldn't even begin conversations with her. And conversations with her did not mean she'd get in. Just that he wasn't about to waste his time. These top LACs are like that with their athletes. She had to get a pre-read and then apply. These schools don't admit athletes who cannot cut it academically. You're thinking of D1 and D2.

Nope, I'm thinking of what I heard from both Williams and Amherst AOs. That roughly 80-90% of applicants are academically qualified. Academically speaking, the kids who are applying to these schools are as impressive as kids who get into these schools. The difference for athletes? That's it. They're athletes .. and in many cases not the best .. those kids went D1. Athletes are no different than development cases. They got the 1450 on the SAT so they don't bust the numbers (and now with TO .. they don't even need that) and they can play a ball game. Do you really think that 1460 is an SAT score that gets non-athletic kids past the first round? I'm astounded by this naiveté. The median 50% at JHU is 1520 to 1560. The SAT isn't that hard and it's highly prep-able. A 1450 is like saying your kid needed a 3.2. Not a flex!

Well u are wrong about that. My kid got D1 offers, but the academic caliber of some of the D3s was way above the D1 schools that offered a spot in his sport. Would you turn down a #7 school (6% acceptance rate to attend a #120 (85% acceptance rate)? No way! And the caliber of D3 in this sport is very high for that reason.

It’s going to depend on the sport. If kids are looking at million dollar NFL, NBA, etc contracts it’s one thing. Some sports there isn’t a lucrative future- so college is the end of the road.

The top athletes in the county look to a future in .. athletics. At least part time. So yes, the d3 athletes are usually not the top in the country. Not always even the top in their high school.

You would be completely wrong in men’s soccer. Pipe dream.

I don’t follow. D3 soccer players are not even remotely close to the best in the country. Many soccer players go pro and skip college altogether, so wouldn’t even say D1 are the best.

Much like baseball…1/2 the 1st round MLB draft picks are HS kids. The best players don’t go to college either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many people on this board assume people had the funds for a 529 all these years. Many people did not. Also, community college is not a second chance for academic failures. Jeez. Many successful students have started there and continued their education, while working an almost full time job to save for future education after CC.

The people on DCUM who claim they wouldn’t contribute *anything* to a 529 from birth, but now are full-pay families, are lying. I’m sure you felt “DCUM poor” when your kid was little but you had some budget wiggle room back then and it grew. You let lifestyle inflation eat your raises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Midwest in an area where going to college was the expectation, but very little prestige given to this school over that. People mostly went public.

But .. there was also an expectation that kids got cars over their own in their teen years (new, nice cars). People cared indeed about brand names. People got married pretty young, bought an home at 30, and had their 3 or 4 kids by the time they were in their mid 30.

My parents were east coast transplants and we had to use the family car when it was free and applied to colleges further afield. We all went to Ivy League schools (in the day when it wasn’t that hard for full pay kids).

And now I live in Brooklyn and see this mania up close.

But as I watch my Midwest friends repeating this cycle I think, that’s a better way. It’s weird how this college thing overtakes a childhood. My old friends had more kids, roomy houses, less financial stress, got a lake house in MI or WI, are on track for retirement, and their kids had carefree childhoods. They all have fulfilling jobs. Their kids will too.

Why do we do this?

This is so interesting. What do you think is going on?

Same. I actually think my senior DD would love the midwestern university in the town I grew up in. She has toured and does like it but is influenced by the culture here and thinks that because it has a high acceptance rate it isn’t as good as schools with a lower acceptance rate. She could just pick this school and enjoy her senior year and also enjoy her college experience.

She is correct in that her academic cohort at a lower ranked / acceptance rate college is definitely for the most part, going to be inferior, regardless of the standard of teaching / research at the college.

You are completely wrong about this. Most students attend the big school in their hometown or state no matter how smart they are. It is ridiculous to assume that the kids who chose their state college with a high acceptance rate are therefore all less intelligent than the handful of kids who got pulled from the lottery pool of applicants to a college with a tiny number of seats.

Having hired a lot of kids straight out of college, I can attest that this is true. Many students accepted to the Ivy League are average smart kids who are grinders and have good organizational skills. There’s this myth that they’re all brilliant, and it’s just not true. In fact, I’d say the resume that gets you into an Ivy these days is likely to screen out the brilliant kid who has a burning intellectual interest in one area, but really doesn’t care about making a 100% in an area they aren’t interested in. Ivy’s say they want “pointy” kids, but they really don’t. The only group it seems true of is MIT PhDs. Other than that, I know more truly brilliant people who went to lower ranked schools.

Pointy v. well rounded are not consistently defined - and also definitions of each vary per school, and different schools value different levels of each. To say one school prefers one or the other is to not know what really happens behind closed doors (admissions).

The proof is in the pudding.

Say wut?

Don’t look at what they say, look at who they accept.

That is exactly what I am saying - I know who is accepted.

NP here. Do you really know STEM-oriented kids with Bs in high school English who’ve been accepted to Ivies? Because that’s what the PP is talking about.

Not every kid is the same, surely OP must know that. There are so many contingencies about colleges admissions these days that no one person can possibly list all of them. I think so many posters are just looking for definitive information which does not exist. The admission person would literally have to have that applicants file in front of them to answer any kinds of odds.

If that’s true, surely it confirms the point that there are a lot of super smart kids who are not going to Ivies these days.

Yep. The Ivies keep their numbers artificially low to preserve the mystique.

Harvard had a freshman class size of 1700 people in 2021 as per USNWR. You can find 1,000-1500 smart kids with high stats in most state university honors programs. But maybe the state university students didn’t have the $80,000, etc.

Full pay is a hook.

I knew people at my college who transferred to Ivies. There’s a thin line between a student here
or a student there. Subjective…

You don’t appear to know what you are talking about.

The ivies are all need blind for admissions. Full pay is not only not a hook, it is not considered.

Ivy League transfer rates are lower than their RD rates. Cornell takes a reasonable number of transfers. The rest are nearly impossible and are usually special skill candidates. Students are not transferrin in there and I doubt you know any let alone many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in the Midwest in an area where going to college was the expectation, but very little prestige given to this school over that. People mostly went public.

But .. there was also an expectation that kids got cars over their own in their teen years (new, nice cars). People cared indeed about brand names. People got married pretty young, bought an home at 30, and had their 3 or 4 kids by the time they were in their mid 30.

My parents were east coast transplants and we had to use the family car when it was free and applied to colleges further afield. We all went to Ivy League schools (in the day when it wasn’t that hard for full pay kids).

And now I live in Brooklyn and see this mania up close.

But as I watch my Midwest friends repeating this cycle I think, that’s a better way. It’s weird how this college thing overtakes a childhood. My old friends had more kids, roomy houses, less financial stress, got a lake house in MI or WI, are on track for retirement, and their kids had carefree childhoods. They all have fulfilling jobs. Their kids will too.

Why do we do this?

This is so interesting. What do you think is going on?

Same. I actually think my senior DD would love the midwestern university in the town I grew up in. She has toured and does like it but is influenced by the culture here and thinks that because it has a high acceptance rate it isn’t as good as schools with a lower acceptance rate. She could just pick this school and enjoy her senior year and also enjoy her college experience.

She is correct in that her academic cohort at a lower ranked / acceptance rate college is definitely for the most part, going to be inferior, regardless of the standard of teaching / research at the college.

You are completely wrong about this. Most students attend the big school in their hometown or state no matter how smart they are. It is ridiculous to assume that the kids who chose their state college with a high acceptance rate are therefore all less intelligent than the handful of kids who got pulled from the lottery pool of applicants to a college with a tiny number of seats.

Having hired a lot of kids straight out of college, I can attest that this is true. Many students accepted to the Ivy League are average smart kids who are grinders and have good organizational skills. There’s this myth that they’re all brilliant, and it’s just not true. In fact, I’d say the resume that gets you into an Ivy these days is likely to screen out the brilliant kid who has a burning intellectual interest in one area, but really doesn’t care about making a 100% in an area they aren’t interested in. Ivy’s say they want “pointy” kids, but they really don’t. The only group it seems true of is MIT PhDs. Other than that, I know more truly brilliant people who went to lower ranked schools.

Pointy v. well rounded are not consistently defined - and also definitions of each vary per school, and different schools value different levels of each. To say one school prefers one or the other is to not know what really happens behind closed doors (admissions).

The proof is in the pudding.

Say wut?

Don’t look at what they say, look at who they accept.

That is exactly what I am saying - I know who is accepted.

NP here. Do you really know STEM-oriented kids with Bs in high school English who’ve been accepted to Ivies? Because that’s what the PP is talking about.

I’m the PP with a DD who I think would love the university in my hometown. So many smart people from my high school went there and they are all successful now.

[Anonymous]

Willingness to pay is definitely a hook. Colleges can say they’re “need blind” until they’re blue in the face. If your parents make $200k-400k and refuse to borrow or spend more than 20% of annual HHI on college, elite colleges will not allow you to enroll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Willingness to pay is definitely a hook. Colleges can say they’re “need blind” until they’re blue in the face. If your parents make $200k-400k and refuse to borrow or spend more than 20% of annual HHI on college, elite colleges will not allow you to enroll.

‘Hook” is a reference to admissions decisions, not enrollment. Sorry. You are incorrect. The ivies are need blind for admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Willingness to pay is definitely a hook. Colleges can say they’re “need blind” until they’re blue in the face. If your parents make $200k-400k and refuse to borrow or spend more than 20% of annual HHI on college, elite colleges will not allow you to enroll.

‘Hook” is a reference to admissions decisions, not enrollment. Sorry. You are incorrect. The ivies are need blind for admissions.

+1. Wealthy donor (7 figures minimum) is a hook; regular old full pay is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Willingness to pay is definitely a hook. Colleges can say they’re “need blind” until they’re blue in the face. If your parents make $200k-400k and refuse to borrow or spend more than 20% of annual HHI on college, elite colleges will not allow you to enroll.

‘Hook” is a reference to admissions decisions, not enrollment. Sorry. You are incorrect. The ivies are need blind for admissions.

People who think like you are the reason kids keep applying to schools they have no intention of attending, just to say they got in.