schools w/ no merit aid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Some lawyers are elitist snobs that absolutely do look at undergrad - heck, they'd look at high schools if they could.

I am 20+ years out of law school. A few years ago, I was sitting in a conference room with many similarly experienced/old lawyers. Each person introduced himself and included what law school he went to (and undergrad if it was prestigious) AND WHAT JOURNAL HE WAS ON IN LAW SCHOOL. This is a bunch of 40- and 50-year old attorneys still talking about having been on Harvard or Yale Law Review. In our rounds of attorney hiring over the past few years, the selected finalists all have been from elite schools (both undergrad and law school). Attorneys from ordinary schools who used to form the backbone of government practice now would not even be considered.

This is why kids apply to the same top 25 colleges. This is why kids are stressed out and anxious and feel like they have failed before they even turn 20. Go back and read the post by the miserable Columbia student who wanted to transfer, and all of the posters who told her to gut it out even though she felt suicidal and would incur debt, because "prestige." This is why there is so much student loan debt! This is why people have written books about "opportunity hoarding" and how assortative mating perpetuates economic inequality. It's not the same as buying BMW vs. Toyota, or whatever the comparison was, because because people truly believe that the name and rank of your college confers intellectual and moral superiority. This follows you your entire career, so much so that rich people are willing to commit crimes to get their kids that advantage. It is a crappy, morally objectionable reality that I wish did not exist, but it does.

And then people come on here and yell at OP because she is lamenting that her kid won't have those advantages. Privileged? Yes, incredibly so. But many of us feel the same way.

+1

So many people who claim it doesn't matter and who also jockey to get their kids into T20 schools "because the name matters."

So which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Some lawyers are elitist snobs that absolutely do look at undergrad - heck, they'd look at high schools if they could.

I am 20+ years out of law school. A few years ago, I was sitting in a conference room with many similarly experienced/old lawyers. Each person introduced himself and included what law school he went to (and undergrad if it was prestigious) AND WHAT JOURNAL HE WAS ON IN LAW SCHOOL. This is a bunch of 40- and 50-year old attorneys still talking about having been on Harvard or Yale Law Review. In our rounds of attorney hiring over the past few years, the selected finalists all have been from elite schools (both undergrad and law school). Attorneys from ordinary schools who used to form the backbone of government practice now would not even be considered.

This is why kids apply to the same top 25 colleges. This is why kids are stressed out and anxious and feel like they have failed before they even turn 20. Go back and read the post by the miserable Columbia student who wanted to transfer, and all of the posters who told her to gut it out even though she felt suicidal and would incur debt, because "prestige." This is why there is so much student loan debt! This is why people have written books about "opportunity hoarding" and how assortative mating perpetuates economic inequality. It's not the same as buying BMW vs. Toyota, or whatever the comparison was, because because people truly believe that the name and rank of your college confers intellectual and moral superiority. This follows you your entire career, so much so that rich people are willing to commit crimes to get their kids that advantage. It is a crappy, morally objectionable reality that I wish did not exist, but it does.

And then people come on here and yell at OP because she is lamenting that her kid won't have those advantages. Privileged? Yes, incredibly so. But many of us feel the same way.

Shorter answer: Do not, under any circumstances, let your child become a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The reality is that a wonderful college education is available in the United States at reasonable prices to most students, our university system is the envy of the world. Some of the options are very high cost, but not all.

NP. I agree, but here is my frustration: when you are on a hiring panel, will you fairly consider someone who spent the first two years at NOVA and then graduated from Mason because that was all she could afford without debt? Or will you pick the Harvard/Yale/Wellesley grad who had the option to go to Harvard/Yale/Wellesley without debt because her parents were high earners? Be honest. We all know how this goes. I practice law, and I absolutely know the real answer to this one.

That is why OP is upset.

Honestly, I don’t think Wellesley is in the same league as Harvard and Yale and I’m wouldn’t be particularly impressed by it on a resume because it’s a very limited group seeking admission to the all women’s school these days. And no one knows where someone goes for the first two years, only the school of graduation goes on a resume.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Some lawyers are elitist snobs that absolutely do look at undergrad - heck, they'd look at high schools if they could.

I am 20+ years out of law school. A few years ago, I was sitting in a conference room with many similarly experienced/old lawyers. Each person introduced himself and included what law school he went to (and undergrad if it was prestigious) AND WHAT JOURNAL HE WAS ON IN LAW SCHOOL. This is a bunch of 40- and 50-year old attorneys still talking about having been on Harvard or Yale Law Review. In our rounds of attorney hiring over the past few years, the selected finalists all have been from elite schools (both undergrad and law school). Attorneys from ordinary schools who used to form the backbone of government practice now would not even be considered.

This is why kids apply to the same top 25 colleges. This is why kids are stressed out and anxious and feel like they have failed before they even turn 20. Go back and read the post by the miserable Columbia student who wanted to transfer, and all of the posters who told her to gut it out even though she felt suicidal and would incur debt, because "prestige." This is why there is so much student loan debt! This is why people have written books about "opportunity hoarding" and how assortative mating perpetuates economic inequality. It's not the same as buying BMW vs. Toyota, or whatever the comparison was, because because people truly believe that the name and rank of your college confers intellectual and moral superiority. This follows you your entire career, so much so that rich people are willing to commit crimes to get their kids that advantage. It is a crappy, morally objectionable reality that I wish did not exist, but it does.

And then people come on here and yell at OP because she is lamenting that her kid won't have those advantages. Privileged? Yes, incredibly so. But many of us feel the same way.

As someone who attended T10 for undergrad and law school and worked at two Vault T10 law schools, this is unequivocally false. My Ivy League law school had kids from schools all over the country, including a number of state schools not in the T30. With on or two exceptions, the top New York law firms have their share of Fordham and other local law schools. The top Boston firms have lawyers from Harvard and Yale and lawyers from BU and Suffolk University. I can go on and on . . What matters is grades and LSAT for law school admission and grades and journal membership for legal employment. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The reality is that a wonderful college education is available in the United States at reasonable prices to most students, our university system is the envy of the world. Some of the options are very high cost, but not all.

NP. I agree, but here is my frustration: when you are on a hiring panel, will you fairly consider someone who spent the first two years at NOVA and then graduated from Mason because that was all she could afford without debt? Or will you pick the Harvard/Yale/Wellesley grad who had the option to go to Harvard/Yale/Wellesley without debt because her parents were high earners? Be honest. We all know how this goes. I practice law, and I absolutely know the real answer to this one.

That is why OP is upset.

Elite schools might give a slight advantage for someone's first job, but after that majority of employers care about your experience and references from your job.

Law might be slightly different, but I find it a bit odd that you care about undergrad rather than where the employee went to LAW SCHOOL. Harvard Law takes kids with a variety of undergrad experience---it is definately not limited to T20 schools/SLAC. Here's the list for this year's first year law students at Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/jdapplicants/hls-profile-and-facts/undergraduate-institutions/

I see a wide variety of schools represented, demonstrating that attending even a SUNY or Cal State U, Northridge can get you into Harvard Law.

Personally, I wouldn't want to be employed at a law firm that cares so much about status that does NOT matter---it matters where you went to Law School and what you did while attending law school.

I think the list of Harvard Law first year student's undergrad demonstrates really well that where you go does not matter that much. The avg SAT at Cal State U Northridge is 1030 and the WGPA is 3.3----not exactly above average stats, yet somehow someone (obviously smart) attended there (likely because that's what they could afford) and is now attending Harvard Law.

I would much rather hire someone who attends a school they can afford (even if they are "much smarter and could get into an elite school") and does great things while attending and is motivated to find a way to the nations top law school

I hate when people say this. My first job out of my Big 10 flagship paid $35k and was for a crappy local company. The experience I then had for my second job sucked and was hard to leverage into more money. While you’re right that experience is important, you don’t just make experience out of thin air.

At that point it’s about what the person does. You have to work to market yourself

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Some lawyers are elitist snobs that absolutely do look at undergrad - heck, they'd look at high schools if they could.

I am 20+ years out of law school. A few years ago, I was sitting in a conference room with many similarly experienced/old lawyers. Each person introduced himself and included what law school he went to (and undergrad if it was prestigious) AND WHAT JOURNAL HE WAS ON IN LAW SCHOOL. This is a bunch of 40- and 50-year old attorneys still talking about having been on Harvard or Yale Law Review. In our rounds of attorney hiring over the past few years, the selected finalists all have been from elite schools (both undergrad and law school). Attorneys from ordinary schools who used to form the backbone of government practice now would not even be considered.

This is why kids apply to the same top 25 colleges. This is why kids are stressed out and anxious and feel like they have failed before they even turn 20. Go back and read the post by the miserable Columbia student who wanted to transfer, and all of the posters who told her to gut it out even though she felt suicidal and would incur debt, because "prestige." This is why there is so much student loan debt! This is why people have written books about "opportunity hoarding" and how assortative mating perpetuates economic inequality. It's not the same as buying BMW vs. Toyota, or whatever the comparison was, because because people truly believe that the name and rank of your college confers intellectual and moral superiority. This follows you your entire career, so much so that rich people are willing to commit crimes to get their kids that advantage. It is a crappy, morally objectionable reality that I wish did not exist, but it does.

And then people come on here and yell at OP because she is lamenting that her kid won't have those advantages. Privileged? Yes, incredibly so. But many of us feel the same way.

As someone who attended T10 for undergrad and law school and worked at two Vault T10 law schools, this is unequivocally false. My Ivy League law school had kids from schools all over the country, including a number of state schools not in the T30. With on or two exceptions, the top New York law firms have their share of Fordham and other local law schools. The top Boston firms have lawyers from Harvard and Yale and lawyers from BU and Suffolk University. I can go on and on . . What matters is grades and LSAT for law school admission and grades and journal membership for legal employment. That’s it.

Thank you for this insight!

The link above indicates kids get into Harvard from many many schools most have not even heard of.

Point us tge slight advantages a t20 school gives you is minimal for most—-a smart, dedicated. Motivated kid will still achieve99% of that no matter where they ho.
So obsessing/complaining you can’t afford a t20 is a waste of time/energy. Instead focus on finding a great school that’s right hit you anc you can afford. And focus on what you can achieve.

[Anonymous]

First, if OP's DD has all the desirable qualities OP describes plus $160K in her 529, she is going to have some excellent choices for college, including many reputable SLACs that give merit aid to strong students, just not top 5. She is not going to be spending 2 years at CC and transferring to state U flagship (which would be fine by the way).

My experience as a lawyer is that law school matters, not undergrad. If you have a student that is looking at law school, I would go a step further and suggest it is worth considering saving the money on undergrad (meaning go to a school that offers merit aid or a solid in state public) even if you have the cost of private undergrad saved and use the money for law school, which is more expensive that private undergrad these days and law school rank absolutely matters for job opportunities.

However, assuming that there would be a cognizable advantage provided to OP's daughter by attending Wellesley, then OP may want to consider whether the benefit is worth the loss of "wiggle room" in their family budget. It is indeed a privilege to have that choice.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I guess I should have been smart enough not to acquire nearly $150K in medical bills due to cancer, as well?

Why don't you just stop with the speculation about what I should have done. We did all we could. And we saved a lot, notwithstanding that.

I never said my child did not have other options and wasn't considering other options. As I said, I grew up dirt poor and went to a non-elite school. I simply lamented HAVING to cross off schools -which are a perfect fit for her- solely based on finances. Especially when we saved aggressively for it. It sounds like people in the middle (too much money, but not enough) just can't go to these schools.

The shocking thing is that this a surprise to you. Did you never run a college cost calculator when your kids were little? Or read a newspaper? There are lots of schools that are a perfect fit, and you need to find some that are affordable. There is no guarantee she would get in these "dream" schools anyway. My DS has worked extremely hard through high school and has the high stats/test scores/ECs so that lots of Ivy schools seem like a perfect fit. We are full pay. Guess what? He still probably won't get to go to any of these schools and that's life! So our job has been to get him excited about other schools that can also be a great fit.

Read some of these posts carefully. The person with the car analogy made a great point. Just because you think a Mercedes SUV would be the perfect fit for your family does not mean you can afford it. The same principle applies to college. Why don't you understand that?

[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:Long story short: we will not get any financial aid. We make too much for help but don't make enough to go full pay at a private in a way that leaves any wiggle room.

We are just starting this process, and child is an athlete that is in the midst of recruiting (only D3 at this point b/c of NCAA limits- and FTR I don't care if DC plays a sport or not but she does). I'm looking at the finances of the various schools and was shocked to learn that some of the schools she's been talking to give NO MERIT aid. DC has excellent grades, community service, ECs, and athletics.

I get she's one of many like man others . . . and I know at DC there are no athletic scholarships. But, how are people affording places like Wellesley? Their website and what I'm finding says they give ZERO aid on the basis that, essentially, "everyone there is special."

Yes, she can look elsewhere. And she is. But it is so sad to have to shut down a possibility that would, honestly, be such a perfect fit for her in every way. With room and board, etc. the cost per year is nearly $80K!!!! Two years would eat up more than our 529 has in it. Super bummed to have to limit her.

They are either poor enough to get a lot of aid, rich enough to not need it, or had parents putting away a lot of money from conception.

Well it is no shock that top schools would cost ~$80K/year when my kid would enter college. So we did plan for that and sock away as much as we could from an early age, as we knew we wouldn't qualify for any FA. Had we not been able to do that, our kid would have had to search out more affordable schools.

Congratulations on making enough money to save 320k per kid?

No, it's congratulation on planning. Anyone smart enough to save $160K should be smart enough to know that college will be up to $80K/year in 2022. SO if attending those "Top schools" is important you plan accordingly.
Had we not been able to save enough, I would have set the mindset with my kids that while you can apply to T40 schools, we might not be able to afford them. So, you need to have a balanced list of college choices. To me, the most important part is finding great schools that are affordable to YOU. And there are many, many, many choices available for everyone. The OP has ~$40K/year saved for DD. There are literally hundreds of amazing options that will allow DD to graduate debt free. If only the OP would change their mindset and focus on what's available instead of complaining.

Similarly, I don't buy a house/car/vacation that I can't afford. I live within my means, or deal with the consequences. I don't expect others to compensate me for my lack of planning. OP could likely now cash flow another $10K+/year if they wanted to, based on their statements. So if the Top college is that important, they can do that and take parent loans and pay them off now that they have a higher income. (not saying I'd recommend that, as I actually think that's a bad idea----no school is worth going into debt for). But there are options. Smartest option (IMO) is to find a great school list that is affordable....and many many exist, just not T20 schools.

This is such an uber-American, "personal responsibility" thought pattern. So when college costs $200K/year in the future, anyone who didn't "plan" should just be shut out? How about when it gets to a million dollars a year? Are we all good with it only being for the children of Elon Musk and the like and if we can't do it, well then the fault is somehow our own?

It has not always been like this. Private schools have always been more expensive than public, but not to the degree they are now.



Instead of pointing fingers at people for "lack of planning" by saving $300K+ / child, why aren't we demanding to know why the costs are so outrageously impossible for even wealthy people to handle?

You are NOT SHUT OUT. You are simply shut out of the “luxury” product version of college. You feel entitled to a Louis Vuitton degree for your kid on your Coach budget. I’m sorry that you’ve bought into the idea that admissions are the ultimate arbiter of your kids’ merit but there are plenty of affordable options including community college.

That is your reaction to these graphics?

I'm not the PP, but basically yes. College costs are crazy and, being a former FAFSA kid, I'm kinda shocked that OP, who also claims to have been on FA in college, didn't realize that the costs were outpacing inflation and wasn't setting expectations accordingly with their DCs. The number of parents who get to their kids' junior or senior years and have absolutely no idea on how financing college works is stunning.

OP, you have enough money set aside that your DC can land a merit scholarship, attend a great school, and graduate debt free. That would be so great for your kid and an opportunity neither you nor your husband were able to have. Rather than focusing on what probably cannot happen, lean in to the fabulous opportunities your DC can have that many kids are not able to experience.

GL to your DC!

You just breezed past this part.

You think it's A-OK that college costs are crazy and continue to be crazy for the indefinite future? You're good with that?

I agree college costs are crazy. But in most states there are several options that cost ~$25K or less per year. Or there are plenty of good schools with merit awards that will be similarly priced. In fact, there are far more options that are "affordable" than the elite/$80K schools. So instead of lamenting you can't afford ~50 schools, find the 200+ that you can afford and find the best fit. In reality, your kid will get an education and do well in this world.

25k a year? Even in Virginia, you have to drop pretty far down the list of state schools to get to 25k a year

https://www.schev.edu/financial-aid/in-state-tuition-and-fees

Make the cutoff 30K and in 2020/21 everything except W&M was under $30k.

It's the mentality that you have to "drop pretty far down the list" that gets people into trouble. Every state school is less than $30K except W&M. A kid can earn $8-10K/year by working summers/breaks/part time during School year for 10-12 hours/week. That leaves ~$20K---take $5.5K in federal loans. Now you are at $15K. That's $60K for the 4 years. That's less than 50% of what the OP has in their 529. I'd argue most people making $150-200K have probably saved close to $60K in their kids 529, and if not could find a way to pay $5-10K per year cash flowing it.

If that education is beneath you, then it's your choice to go into major debt. But the fact is it can be done affordably, just not the elite schools. And once again, it comes down to choices in life. But the smart people will find a way to do college with minimal debt. And there are obviously many choices, just not the ones you seem to want.

That's not cost of attendance. They are off by about 10k a year for at least UVA

No, it's close. The current tuition at UVA is $15,850. Then you add fees of $3,120, $2,000 of which you can save if you keep your kid on your medical insurance policy, which we did. Then add $12,350 for room and board for a total of $29K for in-state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, if OP's DD has all the desirable qualities OP describes plus $160K in her 529, she is going to have some excellent choices for college, including many reputable SLACs that give merit aid to strong students, just not top 5. She is not going to be spending 2 years at CC and transferring to state U flagship (which would be fine by the way).

My experience as a lawyer is that law school matters, not undergrad. If you have a student that is looking at law school, I would go a step further and suggest it is worth considering saving the money on undergrad (meaning go to a school that offers merit aid or a solid in state public) even if you have the cost of private undergrad saved and use the money for law school, which is more expensive that private undergrad these days and law school rank absolutely matters for job opportunities.

However, assuming that there would be a cognizable advantage provided to OP's daughter by attending Wellesley, then OP may want to consider whether the benefit is worth the loss of "wiggle room" in their family budget. It is indeed a privilege to have that choice.

OP never talked about their kid going to law school, so not sure how that was inserted into the discussion. The below list represents where Yale law school students went to undergrad (this was from 2020). The list below represents 397 kids out of total enrollment of 676 (so 59% of the class). The top 10 schools sending kids to Yale law school represent 46% of the entire school. Just so happens those are all Ivy League + Stanford + UChicago. Sure, you will now argue that it is not the undergraduate school that mattered, just that those kids were very motivated but just happened to pick those schools.

Yale (90)
Harvard (54)
Columbia (34)
Princeton (31)
Stanford (22)
Dartmouth (21)
Cornell (19)
UChicago (18)
Brown (17)
Pennsylvania (16)
Georgetown (13)
Berkeley (13)
Duke (10)
Northwestern (8)
USC (8)
Michigan (8)
JHU (7)
UVA (7)
Amherst (6)
Swarthmore (6)
Bowdoin (5)
NYU (5)
Tufts (5)
UCLA (5)
UConn (5)
UNC-Chapel Hill (5)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First, if OP's DD has all the desirable qualities OP describes plus $160K in her 529, she is going to have some excellent choices for college, including many reputable SLACs that give merit aid to strong students, just not top 5. She is not going to be spending 2 years at CC and transferring to state U flagship (which would be fine by the way).

My experience as a lawyer is that law school matters, not undergrad. If you have a student that is looking at law school, I would go a step further and suggest it is worth considering saving the money on undergrad (meaning go to a school that offers merit aid or a solid in state public) even if you have the cost of private undergrad saved and use the money for law school, which is more expensive that private undergrad these days and law school rank absolutely matters for job opportunities.

However, assuming that there would be a cognizable advantage provided to OP's daughter by attending Wellesley, then OP may want to consider whether the benefit is worth the loss of "wiggle room" in their family budget. It is indeed a privilege to have that choice.

We are doing this. DD went to UVA and we banked the difference between that and the cost of a private. Because the market was (then) strong, we can now afford to send her to Oxford for an MPhil and perhaps Law after that. Harvard Law is now a whopping 107K a year for a total of $321,000 . . . probably $350K by the time DD applies to any law schools. It's insane. We also sent DS to a public Virginia school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, if OP's DD has all the desirable qualities OP describes plus $160K in her 529, she is going to have some excellent choices for college, including many reputable SLACs that give merit aid to strong students, just not top 5. She is not going to be spending 2 years at CC and transferring to state U flagship (which would be fine by the way).

My experience as a lawyer is that law school matters, not undergrad. If you have a student that is looking at law school, I would go a step further and suggest it is worth considering saving the money on undergrad (meaning go to a school that offers merit aid or a solid in state public) even if you have the cost of private undergrad saved and use the money for law school, which is more expensive that private undergrad these days and law school rank absolutely matters for job opportunities.

However, assuming that there would be a cognizable advantage provided to OP's daughter by attending Wellesley, then OP may want to consider whether the benefit is worth the loss of "wiggle room" in their family budget. It is indeed a privilege to have that choice.

OP never talked about their kid going to law school, so not sure how that was inserted into the discussion. The below list represents where Yale law school students went to undergrad (this was from 2020). The list below represents 397 kids out of total enrollment of 676 (so 59% of the class). The top 10 schools sending kids to Yale law school represent 46% of the entire school. Just so happens those are all Ivy League + Stanford + UChicago. Sure, you will now argue that it is not the undergraduate school that mattered, just that those kids were very motivated but just happened to pick those schools.

Yale (90)
Harvard (54)
Columbia (34)
Princeton (31)
Stanford (22)
Dartmouth (21)
Cornell (19)
UChicago (18)
Brown (17)
Pennsylvania (16)
Georgetown (13)
Berkeley (13)
Duke (10)
Northwestern (8)
USC (8)
Michigan (8)
JHU (7)
UVA (7)
Amherst (6)
Swarthmore (6)
Bowdoin (5)
NYU (5)
Tufts (5)
UCLA (5)
UConn (5)
UNC-Chapel Hill (5)

Now let’s see the other half the class which I assume is 1 or 2 kids from another hundred or so schools.

Also worth noting that Wellesley isn’t even on this part of the list, op is not talking bout sending her kid to Harvard or Yale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The reality is that a wonderful college education is available in the United States at reasonable prices to most students, our university system is the envy of the world. Some of the options are very high cost, but not all.

NP. I agree, but here is my frustration: when you are on a hiring panel, will you fairly consider someone who spent the first two years at NOVA and then graduated from Mason because that was all she could afford without debt? Or will you pick the Harvard/Yale/Wellesley grad who had the option to go to Harvard/Yale/Wellesley without debt because her parents were high earners? Be honest. We all know how this goes. I practice law, and I absolutely know the real answer to this one.

That is why OP is upset.

+1
human nature in general makes this true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The reality is that a wonderful college education is available in the United States at reasonable prices to most students, our university system is the envy of the world. Some of the options are very high cost, but not all.

NP. I agree, but here is my frustration: when you are on a hiring panel, will you fairly consider someone who spent the first two years at NOVA and then graduated from Mason because that was all she could afford without debt? Or will you pick the Harvard/Yale/Wellesley grad who had the option to go to Harvard/Yale/Wellesley without debt because her parents were high earners? Be honest. We all know how this goes. I practice law, and I absolutely know the real answer to this one.

That is why OP is upset.

If they both went on to attend UVA law school after their undergrad then I'd pick the NoVA kid.

-law partner

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, if OP's DD has all the desirable qualities OP describes plus $160K in her 529, she is going to have some excellent choices for college, including many reputable SLACs that give merit aid to strong students, just not top 5. She is not going to be spending 2 years at CC and transferring to state U flagship (which would be fine by the way).

My experience as a lawyer is that law school matters, not undergrad. If you have a student that is looking at law school, I would go a step further and suggest it is worth considering saving the money on undergrad (meaning go to a school that offers merit aid or a solid in state public) even if you have the cost of private undergrad saved and use the money for law school, which is more expensive that private undergrad these days and law school rank absolutely matters for job opportunities.

However, assuming that there would be a cognizable advantage provided to OP's daughter by attending Wellesley, then OP may want to consider whether the benefit is worth the loss of "wiggle room" in their family budget. It is indeed a privilege to have that choice.

OP never talked about their kid going to law school, so not sure how that was inserted into the discussion. The below list represents where Yale law school students went to undergrad (this was from 2020). The list below represents 397 kids out of total enrollment of 676 (so 59% of the class). The top 10 schools sending kids to Yale law school represent 46% of the entire school. Just so happens those are all Ivy League + Stanford + UChicago. Sure, you will now argue that it is not the undergraduate school that mattered, just that those kids were very motivated but just happened to pick those schools.

Yale (90)
Harvard (54)
Columbia (34)
Princeton (31)
Stanford (22)
Dartmouth (21)
Cornell (19)
UChicago (18)
Brown (17)
Pennsylvania (16)
Georgetown (13)
Berkeley (13)
Duke (10)
Northwestern (8)
USC (8)
Michigan (8)
JHU (7)
UVA (7)
Amherst (6)
Swarthmore (6)
Bowdoin (5)
NYU (5)
Tufts (5)
UCLA (5)
UConn (5)
UNC-Chapel Hill (5)

Sure, but Yale lawyers end up notoriously miserable and unhappy for the rest of their careers, so it’s not really that much of a win in the end.