Of the top private colleges, which ones do you think are worth $57,000 a year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have kids at two schools on the Forbes list. They each borrow 3,500/year in subsidized loans. We pay 10K for one and 12K for the other. The rest is covered by the schools in scholarships and need-based aid. It's doable.

+1 very few people pay full freight. Ask the admission office what the discount rate is and how much aid you can expect, then go from there.

Agree, many do not pay sticker price whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it ain't Ivy, it ain't worth it. Next question.

Agree. DD is a sophomore at Harvard so we're comtent with value. . But I do worry about all those families with kids at lesser colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have kids at two schools on the Forbes list. They each borrow 3,500/year in subsidized loans. We pay 10K for one and 12K for the other. The rest is covered by the schools in scholarships and need-based aid. It's doable.

+1 very few people pay full freight. Ask the admission office what the discount rate is and how much aid you can expect, then go from there.

Agree, many do not pay sticker price whatsoever.

For non-FA families, the colleges that offer big discounts and/or merit aid are generally 2nd or 3rd- tier schools looking to attract high-caliber students. DC got an letter offer of $15K/year for four years from one 3-4th tier school DC hadn't even heard of, let alone applied to. The Ivies by convention do not offer merit aid to middle-class, non-FA families (although there are a few unpublicized pockets of cash for a very few kids at some Ivies). I'm not sure about merit aid at other highly selective unis. These discounts at lower-tier schools do increase the rate of return at these schools compared to paying the full sticker price at the same school, although a discount of $5K might not make a huge difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it ain't Ivy, it ain't worth it. Next question.

Agree. DD is a sophomore at Harvard so we're comtent with value. . But I do worry about all those families with kids at lesser colleges.

Thanks for your concern....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it ain't Ivy, it ain't worth it. Next question.

Agree. DD is a sophomore at Harvard so we're comtent with value. . But I do worry about all those families with kids at lesser colleges.

Honey, it's your mom. I need you to get off the computer and mow the lawn. Love you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it ain't Ivy, it ain't worth it. Next question.

Agree. DD is a sophomore at Harvard so we're comtent with value. . But I do worry about all those families with kids at lesser colleges.

Honey, it's your mom. I need you to get off the computer and mow the lawn. Love you!

Oh, phew -- it's YOUR kid, no mine. What a relief!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it ain't Ivy, it ain't worth it. Next question.

Agree. DD is a sophomore at Harvard so we're comtent with value. . But I do worry about all those families with kids at lesser colleges.

Hope she's a better typist than you.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, it depends on what major, and a number of factors that are difficult to quantify. If the extra tuition buys the perfect fit in atmosphere or a very strong program for making connections / getting into graduate school, it's worth it. But if the school offers no particular advantage save location or prestige, might as well cut costs/loans. No loans, University of Maryland Honors College, and some well-chosen internships > just taking classes at Super Selective U.

But... the devil is in the details!

And in the FA package. The sticker price is never just the sticker price. Even if you don't qualify for a dime of need-based aid, the expensive colleges often have big fat merit or sports scholarships to lower the overall cost.

Apply everywhere, then get the bottom line, then compare what you are really getting for the investment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the majority of posts here are ludicrous. Why the surprise and outrage? Why the assumption that all students have the same aptitude or drive? Anyone could see this coming 20 years ago. Our financial advisor suggested saving $250,000 for each child. Expensive colleges aren't for everyone, but if your kid has the ability to do top notch work (and not spend college at a frat or sorority in a drunken stupor going to football games and taking watered down preprofessional coursework like business, communication, hospitality or sports management) the economic payoff, not to mention the self-improvement, can be well worth it. I suspect that the majority of posters here would also contend that there's no value to private secondary school.

Are private colleges way expensive? Yes. Should certain students forget a pricey college and go instead to a community college or a state school (and don't get me wrong, some of them are fine schools)? Yes. Not all students are the same. Know your kid and know the requirements of certain sectors of the workplace. One size doesn't fit all.

Your post is what's ludicrous. I've worked in higher ed, including for one of these expensive colleges. To suggest that one cannot receive academically rigorous coursework outside of a $50K+ per year school is the height of arrogance and ignorance. But hey, if you have the money to waste and you think it's worth it, go for it. I'm sure the facts won't stop you from assuming that everyone who doesn't go to an "elite" school is an idiot who is drunk for four years. Enjoy life in your bubble, PP!

Why don't you read carefully before you post? Did you get your pants in a twist before you read the second paragraph and then just quit reading and posted?Good thing you don't work in higher ed any longer if that's your level of reading comprehension. What part of "some of them are fine schools" is unclear? By the same token some of them are no better than costly, 4-year, young adult party and sports venues. I have no problem with party hardy, but I do take issue with watered down curricula. It serves no one.

Oh please. Your entire post smacked of snooty elitism and you know it. So STFU about my reading comprehension. I gathered your meaning perfectly.

No you did not gather my meaning. Continue to stay out of higher education, you clearly do not have the requisite intellect.

[Anonymous]

My, my! People are very sensitive here. One shoe does not fit all for college as some earlier posters have said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a kid living with a single parent we were poor also and moved from one dumpy apartment to another. I never desired to be rich as a child just "normal" and out of poverty. I considered rich to be like the Howells on Gilligan's Island(before they were shipwrecked!) I thought luxury items were fancy cars, jewelry, butlers, maids, mansions. Now as an adult I have made it to the middle/upper- middle class. But it seems that the new luxuries of out time are a house in a good school district, college, and a family vacation. Elizabeth Warren was right in "The Two Income Trap". We are pricing ourselves out of what seem to be normal family desires-home and education.

The Two Income Trap made some good points. We're all stretched so thin, yet we feel we're falling behind on things like college, and a health or job setback spells disaster.

Elizabeth Warren made $350,000 per year as a professor. Ironic that she's writing (and making more money) about how hard it is for "normal" families to afford college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a kid living with a single parent we were poor also and moved from one dumpy apartment to another. I never desired to be rich as a child just "normal" and out of poverty. I considered rich to be like the Howells on Gilligan's Island(before they were shipwrecked!) I thought luxury items were fancy cars, jewelry, butlers, maids, mansions. Now as an adult I have made it to the middle/upper- middle class. But it seems that the new luxuries of out time are a house in a good school district, college, and a family vacation. Elizabeth Warren was right in "The Two Income Trap". We are pricing ourselves out of what seem to be normal family desires-home and education.

The Two Income Trap made some good points. We're all stretched so thin, yet we feel we're falling behind on things like college, and a health or job setback spells disaster.

Elizabeth Warren made $350,000 per year as a professor. Ironic that she's writing (and making more money) about how hard it is for "normal" families to afford college.

Elizabeth Warren is a highly-trained lawyer who does really interesting work on family bankruptcy and consumer issues. Since when does having first-rate knowledge of an issue, plus a great intellect, disqualify anyone from doing academic research?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was a kid living with a single parent we were poor also and moved from one dumpy apartment to another. I never desired to be rich as a child just "normal" and out of poverty. I considered rich to be like the Howells on Gilligan's Island(before they were shipwrecked!) I thought luxury items were fancy cars, jewelry, butlers, maids, mansions. Now as an adult I have made it to the middle/upper- middle class. But it seems that the new luxuries of out time are a house in a good school district, college, and a family vacation. Elizabeth Warren was right in "The Two Income Trap". We are pricing ourselves out of what seem to be normal family desires-home and education.

The Two Income Trap made some good points. We're all stretched so thin, yet we feel we're falling behind on things like college, and a health or job setback spells disaster.

Elizabeth Warren made $350,000 per year as a professor. Ironic that she's writing (and making more money) about how hard it is for "normal" families to afford college.

Right about Warren. For teaching four credit hours, as I understand it. I attended Harvard for grad school and law school and saw first hand how little many faculty members worked, compared to the faculty at the SLAC I attended for undergrad. If what you value is the learning experience, and not the connections, a SLAC with small class sizes and no TAs is worth way more than Harvard for college, where there are big lecture courses and TAs who sometimes can't speak English very well (not to mention we're never screened for teaching ability),

[Anonymous]

We're = were sorry autocorrect

[Anonymous]

@09:36 who cares about the quality of the teaching? It's Harvard diploma. You're paying for the name.