Jeff Selingo on people skipping "target schools"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Markets will adjust and Ivy-plus will begin offering more made or reducing cost of attendance in other ways.

+1 This!

At some point the 'bubble' will burst and even the Ivy-plus schools will have to adjust as there won't be enough people with the requisite stats and also wealthy enough to pay for 5%+ expense increases per year. Either they'd have to significantly lower standards to let in others who can afford it or get creative with pricing and aid (eg. do what Purdue U. is doing) in order to maintain standards. Bubbles eventually burst no matter how long it takes, circa 2008 Real Estate.

Ivy+ are need blind and meet 100% need. So don't hold your breath for anything to change.

Yes but following that model they will end up with a barbell model, demographically speaking. There are consequences to that, many of which do not bode well for the schools.

You could probably draw a direct line from the result of the barbell model (a student body of either Pell or full-pay wealthy and none in between) and the "cultural" issues we're currently seeing on elite college campuses. As someone stated upthread there are URMs who have never seen/met a non-wealthy white person in their college lives and vice versa. Can't help but color their views on society (ie. either you're wealthy or poor, and resulting views on privilege, equity, etc..etc..).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d say Case is a merit- giving school. It was actually slightly less for my engineering student to go there (with merit) than Pitt OOS.

W&M is another odd one on that list--it's a public school that attracts a lot of UMC families.

[Anonymous]

NP from CA here. DC is currently a high school junior and we’re thinking the same thing: happy to full pay for T20 should DC be fortunate enough to be accepted; otherwise state school at a fraction of the price or full/close to full merit aid at a lower tier private it is.

[Anonymous]

This isn’t new to all of us.

When my kids were applying to college quite a few years ago we were making close to $1 million a year. Yet, there was no way we were going to throw money away on a second tier private school. We lived in VA, and if a kid got in there great, off they went (and two did) but if they didn’t it was another VA state school. We had one kid who turned down W&M for a substantial merit scholarship to Grinnell, and we were ok with that even though it still cost a little more even with the aid, but that’s only because Grinnell is a first tier college.

We never played the merit game. We always “skipped over” the second tier. It didn’t matter that we could afford to do otherwise. You don’t do something stupid just because you can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the public and private “slip over schools”? Do they become wealthier and fancier with time?

NYU
BC
Tufts
BU
Lehigh
Wake
Case Western
Northeastern
W&M
Brandeis
Santa Clara
GW
Syracuse
U-Miami
Villanova
Tulane
Pepperdine

If so, these are the private schools ranked between 35 and 80 that I think he is referring to? Or maybe is it a more narrow set?

Interestingly, these are the schools where a lot of middle of the pack (3.7uw) private school kids that are full pay, apply early and get in from our private school

But GW is known for giving lots of merit aid--brining the sticker price down the $40k range.

Even without merit, some of these private schools could be cheaper than your state school, depending on your income level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Truthfully, as a slightly higher than donut hole range family---it's hard to justify $85k-90k year at even the top 10 schools. It's gotten way out of hand!

This! I’ll never understand it. No place is worth that much.

It's worth it to us. You don't need to understand.

Care to elaborate? How is it worth it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the public and private “slip over schools”? Do they become wealthier and fancier with time?

NYU
BC
Tufts
BU
Lehigh
Wake
Case Western
Northeastern
W&M
Brandeis
Santa Clara
GW
Syracuse
U-Miami
Villanova
Tulane
Pepperdine

If so, these are the private schools ranked between 35 and 80 that I think he is referring to? Or maybe is it a more narrow set?

Interestingly, these are the schools where a lot of middle of the pack (3.7uw) private school kids that are full pay, apply early and get in from our private school

I don't think 3.7 at a big 3 private is "middle of the pack."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the public and private “slip over schools”? Do they become wealthier and fancier with time?

NYU
BC
Tufts
BU
Lehigh
Wake
Case Western
Northeastern
W&M
Brandeis
Santa Clara
GW
Syracuse
U-Miami
Villanova
Tulane
Pepperdine

If so, these are the private schools ranked between 35 and 80 that I think he is referring to? Or maybe is it a more narrow set?

Interestingly, these are the schools where a lot of middle of the pack (3.7uw) private school kids that are full pay, apply early and get in from our private school

I wouldn't include public schools in this list--there are different dynamics at work.

My kid was accepted to one of the schools listed above, four years ago. I was unwilling to spend nearly $300k on a BS in Finance, so he followed the merit to a regional school, where we paid slightly more than 1/2 the amount his dream school wanted (See US News top regional schools). There he busted his ass and last summer interned with a company that in August offered him $100k plus $10k bonus beginning in mid-June. That is MORE money than the average Finance grad’s salary package from one of the top schools listed above. They are touting $85k salaries for finance grads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Truthfully, as a slightly higher than donut hole range family---it's hard to justify $85k-90k year at even the top 10 schools. It's gotten way out of hand!

This! I’ll never understand it. No place is worth that much.

It's worth it to us. You don't need to understand.

Care to elaborate? How is it worth it?

For one, stock market gains have greatly enhanced our kids' 529s, so the money is there. DH told them they could go to any college they could get into (they were A-/B+ high school students). 2 of them were accepted to 40-50 ranked colleges that were very reach-y. In state option would have been JMU at best. (The third was always a great student and thrilled to be accepted to UVA). For the 2 pricey full pays, they just love/d their college experience and I think the new environment really motivated them to push hard in college. They had better connections, better internships, better job opportunities. Overall, they were just much better-suited, better grades, better students and happier kids in college than high school. Sure, lots of factors, but that's why it was worth it for us. If it had been costing us our retirement or food on the table, they'd be going to JMU and hopefully grateful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Truthfully, as a slightly higher than donut hole range family---it's hard to justify $85k-90k year at even the top 10 schools. It's gotten way out of hand!

This! I’ll never understand it. No place is worth that much.

It's worth it to us. You don't need to understand.

Care to elaborate? How is it worth it?

For one, stock market gains have greatly enhanced our kids' 529s, so the money is there. DH told them they could go to any college they could get into (they were A-/B+ high school students). 2 of them were accepted to 40-50 ranked colleges that were very reach-y. In state option would have been JMU at best. (The third was always a great student and thrilled to be accepted to UVA). For the 2 pricey full pays, they just love/d their college experience and I think the new environment really motivated them to push hard in college. They had better connections, better internships, better job opportunities. Overall, they were just much better-suited, better grades, better students and happier kids in college than high school. Sure, lots of factors, but that's why it was worth it for us. If it had been costing us our retirement or food on the table, they'd be going to JMU and hopefully grateful.

Thanks for answering! You sound refreshingly normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree - this is our plan.

I have been saying for a few years that I think grad school is the new college, so it makes sense to go to a state college and save some $ for grad school.

I honestly don't understand this logic at all. So many grad schools / grad degrees produce kids with poor outcomes. So many jobs/industries don't care about a grad degree whatsoever.

This is another skewed DMV perspective that worked for you, but you can't rely on it holding going forward.

I don't interact with too many people without post-grad degrees. Came to DC from NYC, so I guess it’s the crowd. My oldest is interested in engineering - and my dad and his dad were engineers and both had master’s. My dad’s company paid for him to get it (probably my grandfather’s did too). But I don’t think either of them thought it was worthless.

You are right...but unclear if they would have thought it worth paying for that master with their own nickel. I get anyone pursuing a grad degree for free. In which case...nobody had to save anything for their Masters.

Most CEOs have nothing more than a Bachelor's (60%) and of course, there are plenty of folks starting and running tech companies that either dropped out of college or never went to college at all.

I just don't understand the rationale that graduate school is the new college.

I don’t think college differentiates as much as it used to - because so many go now - I guess is my rationale. But I am aware of Mark Zuckerberg.

[Anonymous]

DC ended up applying ED and getting in with no merit at T30/T40 SLAC but got merit awards before then from T60/70 SLACS that would have saved us a lot of money. To some extent, it feels dumb to pay the premium, and if it represented any kind of financial strain on us, it would be dumb. But the difference in total cost for 4 years would be like 2% our net worth, so whatever. But the idea that parents are borrowing money for their kid to attend a second tier school instead of a less expensive but probably basically as good third tier school is kind of insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree - this is our plan.

I have been saying for a few years that I think grad school is the new college, so it makes sense to go to a state college and save some $ for grad school.

I honestly don't understand this logic at all. So many grad schools / grad degrees produce kids with poor outcomes. So many jobs/industries don't care about a grad degree whatsoever.

This is another skewed DMV perspective that worked for you, but you can't rely on it holding going forward.

I don't interact with too many people without post-grad degrees. Came to DC from NYC, so I guess it’s the crowd. My oldest is interested in engineering - and my dad and his dad were engineers and both had master’s. My dad’s company paid for him to get it (probably my grandfather’s did too). But I don’t think either of them thought it was worthless.

You are right...but unclear if they would have thought it worth paying for that master with their own nickel. I get anyone pursuing a grad degree for free. In which case...nobody had to save anything for their Masters.

Most CEOs have nothing more than a Bachelor's (60%) and of course, there are plenty of folks starting and running tech companies that either dropped out of college or never went to college at all.

I just don't understand the rationale that graduate school is the new college.

I don’t think college differentiates as much as it used to - because so many go now - I guess is my rationale. But I am aware of Mark Zuckerberg.

not just Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs & Gates. There's more of them than you'd think.
Dorsey-Twitter, Ellison-oracle, Park-Fitbit, Mullenweg-Wordpress, Collison-Stripe, Parker-napster, Koum-whatsapp, Ferdowski-Dropbox, Kalanick-Uber, Pittman-iHeartMedia, Karp-Tumblr, Dell-Dell, you get the picture. Could name another 20 off-hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is another reason they might be skipping over target schools: they don’t even know what the term means these days. The rising number of deferrals and outright rejections we’re seeing right now at campuses that would have been a target school two or three years ago—places like Florida State, Clemson, Furman, U. of South Carolina, for instance—illustrates “there’s no such thing as a target school anymore,” Allison Slater Tate, a college counselor in Florida told me.

This part is so real. If you’ve found safeties you love, and you’re already coping with the crazy ED1/ED2/lottery situation for your reaches, what role are targets supposed to play? It used to be that a target was a better school than a safety, but with fairly predictable admission odds given your grades and test scores. But with grade inflation and test optional, everything seems random. And nowadays every safety has an honors college and plenty of strong kids who are there on merit. So what are target schools supposed to be for anymore anyway?

My kid was deferred ED at a t10 then rejected, WL at a t30 reach, year abroad at another reach, accepted at all 3 targets and accepted at all 3 safeties. Choose from two targets and a safety (with safety ranked #3). Ultimately went to the top target which was a best fit for them

It worked as it should. Got into all targets and safeties and didn’t get into reached (but was wl/go aboard freshman year so not completely rejected)

[Anonymous]

Many don't want a SLAC, at any cost, but understand the cachet of the Ivys