Jeff Selingo on people skipping "target schools"

[Anonymous]

If you were new to this forum and just read this post, it would cover 80%ish of the discourse that occurs in all the posts. Plus it has the added bonus of a similar level of pettiness and ad hominem attacks that also frequently occur in the posts.

It's the perfect representative post of this whole forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My older child went to a lower-ranked SLAC with a lot of merit after the higher-ranked SLACs did not offer any. Now that it is my next child's turn, we are skipping over a lot of target SLACs because I knew they will not offer any money. There was no use getting hopes up or wasting valuable time applying. They also applied to a lot more state schools than their older sibling. I just don't think those second-tier SLACs are worth the full-pay cost when there are lots of great SLACs offering merit.

I feel like a lot of 3rd tier and below SLACs...the whole "merit" aid is BS. Basically, they quote a rack rate and give literally everybody merit aid. For some reason, they still want to keep that rack rate high.

I guess, if you are fine skipping over 1st tier and 2nd tier SLACs...why not just pick a Bridgewater College that decided to drop their tuition by 60% because they were literally giving everyone a 60% discount anyway.

Because generally schools that have tried this have not had success. Some people think they can't be "good" if their sticker price is low, you don't make kids feel good the way a "scholarship!" does, and you lose the money from the handful of families who will pay full or close to sticker price.

Except literally with a bunch of these schools they give 100% some form of merit aid. I would be shocked if people applied and didn't know they would get $$$s. I guess maybe it is better to get someone to pay 80% to subsidize the ones that only pay 20%.

No, they do not give that discount to foreign students who are not on the level to make it at the more competitive places, but want to have a US diploma. They post those prices on the off chance that some oil tycoon’s son will be interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

[Anonymous]

lost decade was 99-09. down -1%.

https://wealth.amg.com/blog/the-lost-decade-revisited/

we were lucky our kids were born in 2005-2010.

of course, Japan has had a lost generation. nothing is guaranteed.

dont confuse luck w skill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

If you want value, internet, Youtube, and ChatGTP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid got a substantial merit package at a SLAC in the T50-100 range and we could not justify the price difference with the higher ranked but not T20 schools. The gap was substantial.

Same. And it was a great fit school in every way. Happy kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

.
She didn’t say there is no value. She said some don’t see it. Read thoroughly before you post people.

You need to read thoroughly before you post. She said she didn’t see the appeal. That is precisely a failure of education, if she is truly unable to comprehend the appeal of an educational experience that isn’t a state school. Obviously there is a large and competitive market for SLACs — and I say that as someone with no ties to SLACs. I can see the appeal even if I don’t want to go to one or my kids don’t want to go.

It is continually bizarre to me how some DCUM posters, some presumably well-educated, are utterly unable to comprehend that their personal feelings are not the same as everyone else in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

The market doesn't agree with you much.
It all depends on the kids. My kids would not like SLACs.

[Anonymous]

Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

My DC’s stats make group 3 closer to targets but after running NPC on many, we’ve ruled most of them out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here are the US News Top 100 National Universities (private only). Not talking SLACs. I broke them into three groups but they stay in ranking order, all of group 2 is higher ranked than group 3.

If you could, almost all would pay for Group 1.
I agree that Group 2 is more and more popular, with UMC families and they are often choosing ED to lock in a slot, when they think they won't get into Group 1.
Of Group 3, which would you pay full price? I think this is the group that Jeff Selingo is talking about people preferring a state school, though some of these schools are extremely popular.

Group 1: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Penn, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth,MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, U Chicago, Rice

Group 2: Vanderbilt, ND, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory, WashU St.Louis, USC, NYU, BC, Tufts, BU

Group 3: Lehigh, Rochester, Wake Forest, CWRU, Northeastern, Brandeis, RPI, Santa Clara, GW, Syracuse, Villanova, Tulane, Pepperdine, Stevens Inst. Tech, WPI, Marquette, Fordham, SMU, Baylor, Gonzaga, LMU, Drexel, RIT, TCU, USD

High Bret worth/full pay easily here.

In group 3, I’d only pay for the below. Otherwise state flagship or OOS public’s.

Lehigh
Wake
CWRU
Tulane

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

Same here, with kid at SLAC. Very happy with the situation. Frankly, Princeton was SLAC-ish. Obviously bigger but same emphasis on teaching and tight knit community.

[Anonymous]

I’m not paying for 90% of group 2. NFW for group 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of us went to state schools and don't see the appeal of the SLAC. Read that again - don't see the appeal. It's not that they cost too much.
The environment is not what we want for our kid.

If kid got into an Ivy, had worked so hard that they succeeded in getting into an Ivy, I think that's the tipping point. We would accept that they know more than we do.

I went to both HYPS and flagship state schools and absolutely see the value of a SLAC. If you are unable to see the appeal of a SLAC for some students, that speaks to a gap in your education rather than reflecting the actual value of a SLAC.

I went to Duke and wholeheartedly agree. I look at the amazing experience that my DC is having at a top SLAC and compare it to my own. I’d choose a top-ranked SLAC over Duke without question if given the opportunity. Yale alum husband feels the same. IYKYK

Princeton alum here and I agree. Would rather see both my kids at SLACs.

The market doesn't agree with you much.
It all depends on the kids. My kids would not like SLACs.

The imaginary market in your head, maybe?