As schools near $100K/year when will that affect the pool of students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

Parent plus loans, more specifically. Traditional undergraduate students can only borrow up to $27k TOTAL throughout 4 years of college in their own name. Doesn’t matter what the school’s COA is. That $27k number hasn’t changed since 2007, if I recall correctly.

To be blunt, if you can’t pay off only $27k in federal student loans on a 10 year repayment plan, your degree wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

You’re equating stafford loans (which have a limit) and parent plus (which don’t)

I’m aware, and that’s not what I was doing. The PP I replied to said the “fed student loan program” in general was the problem, and I explained the distinction.

Parent plus are part of the federal student loan program. If they were just private loans, they would be dischargale and much harder to get

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think its a tipping point. This question has been asked every year when tuition rises. The answer is that it affects a few more families every year, which is why you have also seen a much larger interest in merit-award giving schools than you did in the past. But its incremental.

I think the tipping point is long past.
All of my children attended or attend in-state schools for one reason only: Price.
My children are top students, but they were not eligible for FA at top 20 schools that interested them. When we did the FA calculators, we got zero FA. Our accountant told us in no uncertain terms that to take out loans to send our kids to college would be insane given our ages (we are older parents) and income.
Those competitive colleges lost out on our kids because of price. We refused to pay the outrageous prices of these private schools, so our kids did not apply.
The price of American private education will continue to rise as long as wealthy parents continue to pay it. We dropped out.

Even as Top students, there is a good chance your kids would not have even gotten into a T20 school---acceptance rates are single digits for most. Majority get REJECTED.
And your accountant is right, taking PPL would not be smart. Your kids are smart, they got a great education and will do just fine in life. Once you realize it's much better to graduate debt free or at most with the $27K of student loans, you can be much happier in life. Your life is not over if you can't attend a T20 school---fact is majority of top students will be turned away even if they are full pay. Too many smart kids, not enough spaces. But there are plenty in the 30-60 range that give great merit and if your kids had wanted a smaller private school, they could have chased merit and likely found a great school that cost same or less than your instate schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

Yeah, but this pool of people is not that large. OP here and my kids go to a $50K private (on aid) in DC. There are about 500 kids in DC who attend $50K schools and at least 1/3 are on aid. So say 300 kids in DC who are paying $50K for high school (many of whom live in MD and VA).
That's not a whole lot of kids. It's only one city but ultimately there aren't that many boarding schools and other $50K high schools (plus the top boarding schools (Andover, Exeter, etc) have 50% of the kids on aid).
Yes, there are a lot of rich people out there but the pool is not endless.

Your math is terrible...just GDS, Sidwell, STA and Maret have over 2,000 kids just in HS. Add in Potomac, Bullis, St Andrews, Episcopal, Flint Hill, Holton Arms, NCS...I have to be missing probably 5+ other schools. Sure...there are kids with aid, though 1/3 are not receiving a full tuition break...I think the average aid is like $15k per year...again only for the 1/3 of the kids getting any aid.

Maybe you are being literal in how many kids attend schools with $50k+ tuitions...but I guess I don't see much difference is tuition is $55k or $48k in terms of the point you are trying to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

Parent plus loans, more specifically. Traditional undergraduate students can only borrow up to $27k TOTAL throughout 4 years of college in their own name. Doesn’t matter what the school’s COA is. That $27k number hasn’t changed since 2007, if I recall correctly.

To be blunt, if you can’t pay off only $27k in federal student loans on a 10 year repayment plan, your degree wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

You’re equating stafford loans (which have a limit) and parent plus (which don’t)

I’m aware, and that’s not what I was doing. The PP I replied to said the “fed student loan program” in general was the problem, and I explained the distinction.

Parent plus are part of the federal student loan program. If they were just private loans, they would be dischargale and much harder to get

Private loans are as easy to get & and are very, very difficult to discharge. Ex. Sallie Mae, College Avenue, Discover student loans.

People choose PPLs over private loans because PPLs have more favorable repayment plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

There will always be wealthy smart students who can afford the elite schools. Just look at the elite HS in NYC where people pay $50K+/year. Same for all the elite boarding schools in the Northeast. People paying $75 k+ for a year of HS will have the money for college

Yes, there are rich people with smart kids, but my point is, if the smart but less rich kids are all choosing public universities, eventually, the "name brand" private colleges will be diluted with rich but less smart kids, and then what advantage will that name have? I mean, I don't see this happening soon, but as another PP pointed out, back in our day, UMD was an easy, guaranteed admit, and now it's coveted. Plus, Gen Z is just a lot smarter about not leaving college in debt.

You just described Harvard/Yale/Princeton for 300 years of their existence. They will be fine educating smart (but not the smartest) rich kids

+1

Besides, given the privilege of growing up wealthy, those kids attending H/Y/P are not any less smart---they started their education on 2nd base in preschool and have grown up in a home that values education and they have had the best available to them since birth.

The difference is more people prepare to go to college now. When my parents were kids, women did not really go to college (at least not lower or middle income---that was reserved for the wealthy). Many men did not go to college either---they went staight to work in the factory/store/farm/whatever their parents and uncles worked in their town. Now many more kids grow up expecting to attend college. This means there are more kids applying for not as many more spots....H/Y/P have not doubled their class size in the last 30 years, they just have triple the number of students applying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

My kid would not in a billion years want to go to any of these schools. Never.

Lol? You think everyone going to Big State U across the country is happy about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

Parent plus loans, more specifically. Traditional undergraduate students can only borrow up to $27k TOTAL throughout 4 years of college in their own name. Doesn’t matter what the school’s COA is. That $27k number hasn’t changed since 2007, if I recall correctly.

To be blunt, if you can’t pay off only $27k in federal student loans on a 10 year repayment plan, your degree wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

You’re equating stafford loans (which have a limit) and parent plus (which don’t)

There ideally should be a limit on PPL for undergrad. If people are not able to save for $20-30K/year for their kid to attend college, it's not likely they are really qualified to take out loans for that amount at age 50. So we shouldn't give the loans in the first place for undergrad (grad is different---med school/dental school is expensive and we need doctors who are not wealthy)

Just like I cannot get a mortgage for $1.5M for a house if I only make $200K/year, most of these parents should not be allowed to take $200K in PPL with their income and their inability to save over the past 18 years for college. So if a student is only allowed $27K over the 4 years---which is reasonable---most should be able to pay those back in 10 years--just keep living frugally for 4-5 years. There should be a cap of maybe $20K/year for PPL for a family. Since people are too dumb to restrain themselves and not get into massive debt, we need a plan in place that wont allow them to do that. It's ridiculous when there are plenty of schools that are affordable (defined by $25-30K/year) and with searching you can find lower with good merit awards to reduce the cost.
However, it is never smart to pay full price at any school (including T20) if you don't have most of it already saved/cannot cash flow it. If your kid can get into a T20, they can find a school somewhere for $20-30K/year, probably even less if you want less debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

My DC is at a public college. Many of her classmates are from similar "donut hole" families. Very smart kids (in honors), but their families, like ours, balk at the crazy price of private schools. The private schools, no matter how many applications they get, are not getting applications from the very best and brightest kids from donut hole families. The wealthy and the poor will fill the colleges with $100k tuition. The rest of us will send our kids to public colleges.

This. Is. How. It. Has. Always. Been.

+1000

Nothing new here. Smart parents will send their kids to a college they can AFFORD with minimal debt. Their kids will go far for many reasons. Plenty of highly successful people do NOT attend a T20 school for undergrad. Just look around you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

My kid would not in a billion years want to go to any of these schools. Never.

Lol? You think everyone going to Big State U across the country is happy about it?

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

My kid would not in a billion years want to go to any of these schools. Never.

And they do NOT need to. There are plenty of good schools (not bottom of the barrel like that list) that can be affordable. Attending your in-state honors program is not a huge step down from a T20---your kid will be surrounded by very smart kids, likely many who also are smart enough to realize no college is worth massive debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just read on another post that someone is paying $95K/year for USC.
Several kids from my kids' schools are starting there this fall.

I know most on DCUM can pony up $400K for 4 years but how many people like this are really out there?
I also know these schools have 40% (or whatnot) that pay $0/year.
At what point will the price of some of these schools begin to effect the size of their applicant pool?
Either because people don't have the cash or say "that is insane--screw it".

When you’re no longer allowed to take out Parent Plus Loans up to the cost of attendance. NYU & USC graduates are #1 for PPL debt.

Or how about when the schools are on the hook when people default on loans? At the moment, the schools risk nothing when they jack up costs.

What? Why would schools be "on the hook when people default on loans?" Schools do NOT take the loans. Plenty of people go to these schools withOUT PPL.
If parents are dumb enough to take PPL, then they need to deal with the repayment. Nobody is forcing you to do this. There are literally hundreds of schools you can attend that will be affordable and not require more than regular student loans that max out at 27K for 4 years

How can the PPL even work? If you assume that most of these parents are 50+ years old at the time of signing the loan (and don't have cash in hand at the time) how the heck are they going to pay back $200-300K by the time
they retire at age 65? And yes, they can work until they're 80 but realistically not a huge percentage of people have significant earning power over the age of 65 (or are even employable!!)
And not to be too macabre but some (not an insignificant number) will be dead by 65.

I can't imagine 95% of these loans are paid back in full (and many go completely unpaid).
Does the school eat this cost or the federal government?

The federal government. The school gets off scot-free.

+1 The Fed student loan program is the reason college tuition exponentially increased so quickly. As students could borrow more, the schools hiked tuition. They could care less about student debt (the colleges). They get more $$$$$.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition.

Parent plus loans, more specifically. Traditional undergraduate students can only borrow up to $27k TOTAL throughout 4 years of college in their own name. Doesn’t matter what the school’s COA is. That $27k number hasn’t changed since 2007, if I recall correctly.

To be blunt, if you can’t pay off only $27k in federal student loans on a 10 year repayment plan, your degree wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

You’re equating stafford loans (which have a limit) and parent plus (which don’t)

There ideally should be a limit on PPL for undergrad. If people are not able to save for $20-30K/year for their kid to attend college, it's not likely they are really qualified to take out loans for that amount at age 50. So we shouldn't give the loans in the first place for undergrad (grad is different---med school/dental school is expensive and we need doctors who are not wealthy)

Just like I cannot get a mortgage for $1.5M for a house if I only make $200K/year, most of these parents should not be allowed to take $200K in PPL with their income and their inability to save over the past 18 years for college. So if a student is only allowed $27K over the 4 years---which is reasonable---most should be able to pay those back in 10 years--just keep living frugally for 4-5 years. There should be a cap of maybe $20K/year for PPL for a family. Since people are too dumb to restrain themselves and not get into massive debt, we need a plan in place that wont allow them to do that. It's ridiculous when there are plenty of schools that are affordable (defined by $25-30K/year) and with searching you can find lower with good merit awards to reduce the cost.
However, it is never smart to pay full price at any school (including T20) if you don't have most of it already saved/cannot cash flow it. If your kid can get into a T20, they can find a school somewhere for $20-30K/year, probably even less if you want less debt.

I agree 100%.

Schools would never agree to your proposal because it would turn the spigot of nearly infinite, consequence-free money off. Revenue would drop like a hot potato.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It already is. In theory, we could "afford" to send our kids anywhere. In practice, DC1 chose to stay instate (where we get a tuition break on top of lower tuition anyway, due to one parent's job). Total for DC1 for 4 years should be around $100K, which is about what it was for me to go to an expensive private college back in the early 90's.

It's truly hard to imagine how it would be "worth" $300K more for an undergraduate education. We're already seeing more and more great students choosing public colleges and universities, and that helps to make those schools better. I think the tipping point will eventually be that if costs of private keep rising, the best students will be choosing public, and then the whole system will implode.

My DC is at a public college. Many of her classmates are from similar "donut hole" families. Very smart kids (in honors), but their families, like ours, balk at the crazy price of private schools. The private schools, no matter how many applications they get, are not getting applications from the very best and brightest kids from donut hole families. The wealthy and the poor will fill the colleges with $100k tuition. The rest of us will send our kids to public colleges.

Everyone loves to say they are a "donut hole" family which is why they aren't applying to the top private schools. The reality is that the Top 15 schools give varying amounts of aid even for families earning as much as $300k per year (with only one kid in college...aid goes up a bunch if you have two)...so much so that a VA resident with that income accepted at a top school has a total COA not much different than in-state UVA for engineering or business.

It is all the other private schools that won't or can't play the merit game that provide nothing...I think Tulane is an example of a school that would give a $300k HHI student $0 and I don't think plays the merit game much.

The very top schools with huge endowments continue to see applications from folks from a variety of backgrounds because even relatively high HHI families get some aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

My kid would not in a billion years want to go to any of these schools. Never.

Nobody is forcing them to. But nobody is forcing you to send your kid to a $50k+/year school, either.

Tons of options in between that.

[Anonymous]

The average student loan debt at Pitt in 2019 was $40,000, so it’s not just privates with these issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are cheap schools out there, but they tend to be much more spartan. Students usually want the full four-to-six year cruise experience and... well, there's a reason that credit card companies really want students as clients.

New College Franklin (very small, classical Christian liberal arts): $12,500

Deep Springs (very small two-year elite): $0

Webb Institute (very small, elite naval engineering): ~$16,000

Williamson (three-year vocational, for low income): $0

Berea (for low income, Christian work college): $11,000-ish COA or lower

Apprentice School (vocational + engineering): Negative tuition. They pay you, but you are building ships for the Navy.

College of the Ozarks (Christian, conservative work college): ~$15,000 COA

Colleges that use English for instruction in Puerto Rico. e.g. Interamerican's program ($20,000, room+ board).

My kid would not in a billion years want to go to any of these schools. Never.

Lol? You think everyone going to Big State U across the country is happy about it?

Huge difference---the Big State U are actually great schools offering a good education. That list is bottom of the barrel, barely accredited colleges.

IN my state there are 2 extremely easy to get into State schools (as our state flagship is challenging for anything STEM especially) that cost only $25-30K all in. If your kid is a good student, the will easily get $4-8K merit (my 25 ACT, 3.5UW got 5K at both as an indicator). There are another 3 universities a step/tier below that that are similar priced, where I'm told you can get more merit if a good student (think avg gpa is 3.0 UW---so your 3.8UW kid can get a full tuition award fairly easily). These can be affordable for most. You will get a great education. What you won't get is massive debt.
Join the honors program at any of these schools and you will be able to find your cohorts/like minded students.