what are the larger private nonelite universities that this article is talking about?

[Anonymous]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/20/your-money/measuring-college-prestige-vs-price.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&ref=your-money

NYU? GW?

[Anonymous]

They mention NYU several times - if I were NYU, I'd be pissed. This list might be a good place to start.

Www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2011/10/10/americas-most-expensive-colleges

Many of them are around NYC, like Sarah Lawrence, the New School and Fordham, but others are in the Midwest. A couple on the list, like the University of Chicago and Columbia, I think might fit the definition of an elite school that might be worth the money depending on your field of study.

[Anonymous]

I think the University of Chicago and Columbia are not what Lawrence katz had in mind. They are elite by any definition.

NYU probably.

[Anonymous]

How much more expensive are state schools for out-of-state students?

[Anonymous]

Not an NYU alum OR fan of the place but if you grind and network at stern UG, you will get into front-office WS.

I think NYU has a better time placing kids in professions that can justify the cost more than GW.

[Anonymous]

They are the schools that when I see them on a resume, I think rich but average kid. Why not just go state U?

Schools like: Lehigh, BU, AU, etc. Lafayette.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are the schools that when I see them on a resume, I think rich but average kid. Why not just go state U?

Schools like: Lehigh, BU, AU, etc. Lafayette.

I get what you are saying, but I think Lehigh and Lafayette are different from the others, and different from each other. Lehigh is known ad an engineering school, and Lafayette is one of the numerous well-regarded Pa. liberal arts schools - like Gettysburg, Franklin and Marshall, Bucknell, Ursinus - I believe the PA liberal arts schools are a different kettle of fish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are the schools that when I see them on a resume, I think rich but average kid. Why not just go state U?

Schools like: Lehigh, BU, AU, etc. Lafayette.

I get what you are saying, but I think Lehigh and Lafayette are different from the others, and different from each other. Lehigh is known ad an engineering school, and Lafayette is one of the numerous well-regarded Pa. liberal arts schools - like Gettysburg, Franklin and Marshall, Bucknell, Ursinus - I believe the PA liberal arts schools are a different kettle of fish.

A "different kettle of fish" in what way? I grew up in the area and I'm curious to hear an outsider's perdpective.

I agree, Lehigh is a great engineering school, but probably not worth the $$$ to do liberal arts there.

[Anonymous]

These schools - http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/top-public.

Scroll past the first page and you'll see many great public universities located all over the country. Going to the 50th, or 60th or 70th ranked public university in a country with thousands of universities and colleges is nothing to sneeze at, especially when tuition is much lower and you can stay in state. Anyone who pays full price for Ivies or elite publics is either filthy rich or dumb as hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are the schools that when I see them on a resume, I think rich but average kid. Why not just go state U?

Schools like: Lehigh, BU, AU, etc. Lafayette.

I get what you are saying, but I think Lehigh and Lafayette are different from the others, and different from each other. Lehigh is known ad an engineering school, and Lafayette is one of the numerous well-regarded Pa. liberal arts schools - like Gettysburg, Franklin and Marshall, Bucknell, Ursinus - I believe the PA liberal arts schools are a different kettle of fish.

A "different kettle of fish" in what way? I grew up in the area and I'm curious to hear an outsider's perdpective.

I agree, Lehigh is a great engineering school, but probably not worth the $$$ to do liberal arts there.

The PP had a list of what she explained were "large private nonelite" universities. I was noting that the PA liberal arts schools are not "large private nonelite universities" is what I meant. Neither is Lehigh. They might be something else, and I happen to be a big fan of the PA liberal arts schools, but that said, I agree that Boston University, American University, GWU, are all "large private nonelite universities."

To reiterate, I am not making a positive or negative judgment on the post, just that I think that Lafayette doesn't belong on a list of "large private nonelite universities" - it belongs on a list of "liberal arts schools" - the kind of school where they have good swimming and lacrosse teams, the kind of schools where full pay private school tuition kids go to and play lacrosse (among other stereotypes).

[Anonymous]

A lot of students benefit from the small classes taught by professors, not TAs, that a SLAC provides, making them much more worth the money IMO than a large private university that's just as expensive.

[Anonymous]

small classes taught by professors, not TAs, that a SLAC provides,

I don't disagree with you but you're talking about the wrong subject. A SELECTIVE liberal arts college -- S.L.A.C. -- is by definition selective. They turn a lot of applicants away to get the very best class. They're also expensive. "reject most applicants + expensive" = "elite."

If you look up again at the subject heading, you'll find a word: non-elite. Let's stay on topic.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure the NYTimes article or the research it cites support making a distinction between "large private non-elite universities" vs. "small liberal arts colleges" (selective or otherwise. Sure, the article cites NYU several times, and NYU is large. But some of the same arguments in the research (quality of public university education) would still apply in a comparison with a small liberal arts school or even some SLACs.

On another note, "filthy rich" is a fairly useless term in an area like DC where $250K is considered middle class. We know lots of families in this income bracket who are paying for elite and not-so-elite private colleges while still funding their retirement accounts. The tradeof they're (we're) making is not private college vs. retirement, but private college vs. beach house. Does that make all of us filthy rich, or just dumb? Dichotomies like rich/dumb aren't useful in this grey area of income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

small classes taught by professors, not TAs, that a SLAC provides,

I don't disagree with you but you're talking about the wrong subject. A SELECTIVE liberal arts college -- S.L.A.C. -- is by definition selective. They turn a lot of applicants away to get the very best class. They're also expensive. "reject most applicants + expensive" = "elite."

If you look up again at the subject heading, you'll find a word: non-elite. Let's stay on topic.

Whatever header OP bestowed on this thread, the research addresses the value (OK, they call it "payoff") to attending "a more selective college" and the NY Times piece is accordingly entitled, "Revisiting the Value of Elite Colleges." In other words, even if the NY Times chose to beat up on NYU which takes maybe 30% of applicants, it's clear that SLACs are definitely in the orbit of the value question.

You can download the new Dale-Krueger research from NBER.

[Anonymous]

10:28 again. If you look at the NYTimes Economix blog from 2/20/2011, it looks like maybe 30 schools participated in the Dale-Krueger study, and all of these were at least somewhat selective. The least selective in the bunch are places like Penn State, Xavier and Miami U of Ohio, then the list of study participants zooms right up to Oberlin, Smith, Duke and Wesleyan and then Stanford, Yale and Princeton. None of these is exactly "unselective." So they really are comparing a range of schools.