Alabama for free or a more elite school that is less than free-ride?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, what would your financial picture be without scholarships, aid, etc? Do you have the money to send your kid to college now? Will you gave to take out loans, mortgage your home, delay your retirement or otherwise suffer financially?

This. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think we know what OP's situation is like--how much student loans or draining OP's 401(k) plan would be necessary in the non-Bama scenario. Let alone whether OP's kid would be eligible for that mythical full ride at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In response to PP, you seem to be treating schools as fungible. Whether it would make sense to go to Alabama for fine arts etc will depend, at least in part, on the quality of the program at Alabama in those fields. School quality, prestige etc is not fungible and for a kid from MD, graduating from Alabama without any job prospect might make that student loan debt from a better school look pretty sweet.

while prestige is not fungible, some majors are beyond redemption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In response to PP, you seem to be treating schools as fungible. Whether it would make sense to go to Alabama for fine arts etc will depend, at least in part, on the quality of the program at Alabama in those fields. School quality, prestige etc is not fungible and for a kid from MD, graduating from Alabama without any job prospect might make that student loan debt from a better school look pretty sweet.

while prestige is not fungible, some majors are beyond redemption.

+1, phrased a little differently. I know prospective theater majors who went for the great merit aid package at the second tier school over massive student loans at the prestige school.

[Anonymous]

PP, that makes little sense if the second tier school has a second rate program in a competitive field like theater. So one takes a reduced debt load but then faces reduced prospects for a career. If the second tier school has a good program, then it makes sense but taking a chance in a weak or unknown program in a competitive field strikes me as akin to gambling, then again it all depends on what options one has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, that makes little sense if the second tier school has a second rate program in a competitive field like theater. So one takes a reduced debt load but then faces reduced prospects for a career. If the second tier school has a good program, then it makes sense but taking a chance in a weak or unknown program in a competitive field strikes me as akin to gambling, then again it all depends on what options one has.

One who doesnt want to gamble should not major in theater.

[Anonymous]

So which flagship school do people draw the line at? If you know that college will be expensive for your family and you will not get enough aid to ease the stress then which state college is good enough to go to and say no to a school like Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Georgetown, etc. Because many families around the country are facing reality that their child can not go to any dream school they get into.
UC Berkeley
UCLA
UVA
Michigan
UNC
Wisconsin
Texas
U of Washington
Maryland
Ohio
Minnesota
Alabama
Are any of these good enough?
Penn State
And on and on

[Anonymous]

2 years CC and the MD or VA state schools while working. Much better story for employers/grad school than "I could have gone to a more difficult school, but I would have had to get a job and/or take out loans, so instead I took the easy route and coasted through 4 years at Bama and got paid."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: 2 years CC and the MD or VA state schools while working. Much better story for employers/grad school than "I could have gone to a more difficult school, but I would have had to get a job and/or take out loans, so instead I took the easy route and coasted through 4 years at Bama and got paid."

Wait... You chose paying for 2 years of CC and MD over a full ride at Bama because you want a "better" story.

Signed, my kids will go to 2 yrs of CC and MD (but not if they get a full ride to ummm pretty much anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: 2 years CC and the MD or VA state schools while working. Much better story for employers/grad school than "I could have gone to a more difficult school, but I would have had to get a job and/or take out loans, so instead I took the easy route and coasted through 4 years at Bama and got paid."

Wait... You chose paying for 2 years of CC and MD over a full ride at Bama because you want a "better" story.

Signed, my kids will go to 2 yrs of CC and MD (but not if they get a full ride to ummm pretty much anywhere.

Uh yeah I don't get this either. Plus OP never said that he/she couldn't afford state school, just that a full ride to anywhere is understandably attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So which flagship school do people draw the line at? If you know that college will be expensive for your family and you will not get enough aid to ease the stress then which state college is good enough to go to and say no to a school like Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Georgetown, etc. Because many families around the country are facing reality that their child can not go to any dream school they get into.
UC Berkeley
UCLA
UVA
Michigan
UNC
Wisconsin
Texas
U of Washington
Maryland
Ohio
Minnesota
Alabama
Are any of these good enough?
Penn State
And on and on

I was the first PP that posted pages ago regarding that the decision depends highly on what the OP's son's goals are (i.e. medicine, natsec/military, law, or direct-from-ug prestige occupations like consulting or banking).

There really is a simple rule IMO, the more technical and guild-based an occupation, the less school prestige has to do with anything. If my children were dead set on being doctors, and were good standardized test takers, almost any decent four year public school would be more than enough. Why? Because medicine is highly structured in terms of path by the AMA and the licensing requirements make it guild-like, thereby it doesn't really matter where you go for UG as much as it matters what your pre-med course gpa is and your MCAT scores.

Hell it doesn't even matter that much where you go to med school (there is a difference between allopathic and osteopathic), but even a low ranked allopathic school will lead you to a top residency in a highly competitive specialty if you destroy your USMLE's and do well in med school and your rotations.

consulting and banking/trading...and silicon valley/tech marketing do not have the same testing, screening, licensing requirements so UG prestige matters more.

Higher ranked schools (like wealth) allow for greater margin for error and success in a wider range of fields.

That's the trade off for cost.

now given this, i'm going to leave off Georgetown from your list because gtown doesn't open the same doors as H,S, or M. I would turn down Georgetown even if I wanted to work on WallStreet or Mckinsey for Berkeley, UCLA, UVA, or Michigan. Gtown's added prestige is not enough to pay 50-100k more in aggregate over those four schools IMO.

This analysis, mind you, does not take into consideration student fit/happiness.....which I can't give a blanket answer to because one student might be happy in tuscaloossa while another might not and therefore destroy their grades and really shoot themselves in the foot.

but I hope my answer gives a rough idea as to why rankings matter.

I personally would draw the line at Maryland (and put PSU over Wisconsin due to its strength in engineering and the fact that given its ranking it does place decently well in nyc finance).

But even then, I would have a REALLY tough time turning down H,S, or M for MD or PSU (unless I wanted to be a doctor).

[Anonymous]

Why all the drama about colleges? You might think going to school "in Boston" or Princeton will guarantee success in life and graduating from the University of Alaska (assuming they have one) will guarantee a life of long winters and despair.

Let your kids go to college. Live, breath, learn, laugh, experience, and occupy at least one administration building while they are still undergrads.

[Anonymous]

One of the things I find odd about many discussions on this forum is how many people treat public universities as if they were just another school. Public universities are typically designed for the students of the state, and at most, you will find that the students overwhelmingly come from the home state, where tuition is lower. At Alabama, somewhere in excess of 60-70% of the students come from Alabama with most of the others coming from Georgia, MS and other Southern states. At Minnesota, which is an excellent public university, 2/3 come from Minnesota, and another significant chunk come from North and South Dakota. Most of the students who attend these universities end up staying in the state after graduation -- which makes sense since that is where their contacts are (lots of data show the importance of your college connections later in life) and the recruiters are more likely to come from that state or region. There are a handful of Universities that break the mold, are truly international in reputation and draw a diverse student body but you can count them generally on one hand -- Berkeley, Michigan and UVA, and then you might add in UCLA, UNC, Indiana for certain subjects such as music, probably Texas and Minnesota, though Texas is a huge school in a huge state that will have most of its presence and influence in Texas. Most of the rest are really very good state schools but not obvious choices for somewhere from a different part of the country who does not have an interest in staying in the area where they attend college. Btw, University of MD is a very good public school, not that expensive for in-state students, and within the Mid-Atlantic, a much better choice than say Alabama. Penn State, ditto, good state school particularly for the Mid-Atlantic region.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why all the drama about colleges? You might think going to school "in Boston" or Princeton will guarantee success in life and graduating from the University of Alaska (assuming they have one) will guarantee a life of long winters and despair.

Let your kids go to college. Live, breath, learn, laugh, experience, and occupy at least one administration building while they are still undergrads.

How is that worth 200+k? If this the goal they should backpacking around the world, not spending boatloads of money in order to pretend to be advancing careers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why all the drama about colleges? You might think going to school "in Boston" or Princeton will guarantee success in life and graduating from the University of Alaska (assuming they have one) will guarantee a life of long winters and despair.

Let your kids go to college. Live, breath, learn, laugh, experience, and occupy at least one administration building while they are still undergrads.

How is that worth 200+k? If this the goal they should backpacking around the world, not spending boatloads of money in order to pretend to be advancing careers.

I think the PP's point was that it doesn't have to cost 200k+ and that for all of the talk about the "right" place to send your kid, nothing is guaranteed from that degree. Let's be honest - what happens after graduation is sort of a crap shoot anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the things I find odd about many discussions on this forum is how many people treat public universities as if they were just another school. Public universities are typically designed for the students of the state, and at most, you will find that the students overwhelmingly come from the home state, where tuition is lower. At Alabama, somewhere in excess of 60-70% of the students come from Alabama with most of the others coming from Georgia, MS and other Southern states. At Minnesota, which is an excellent public university, 2/3 come from Minnesota, and another significant chunk come from North and South Dakota. Most of the students who attend these universities end up staying in the state after graduation -- which makes sense since that is where their contacts are (lots of data show the importance of your college connections later in life) and the recruiters are more likely to come from that state or region. There are a handful of Universities that break the mold, are truly international in reputation and draw a diverse student body but you can count them generally on one hand -- Berkeley, Michigan and UVA, and then you might add in UCLA, UNC, Indiana for certain subjects such as music, probably Texas and Minnesota, though Texas is a huge school in a huge state that will have most of its presence and influence in Texas. Most of the rest are really very good state schools but not obvious choices for somewhere from a different part of the country who does not have an interest in staying in the area where they attend college. Btw, University of MD is a very good public school, not that expensive for in-state students, and within the Mid-Atlantic, a much better choice than say Alabama. Penn State, ditto, good state school particularly for the Mid-Atlantic region.

This is a good post. And it hints at a related issue that is coming up in this discussion: that people who are looking for cheaper alternatives to elite colleges should look at public schools. Well, yes....but often that makes sense only as long as the public schools in question are in your state of residence. For a Virginia or DC or MD resident, the cost of Berkeley or Michigan will equal that of an elite private university. You would never choose one of those schools over an elite private because of cost. Perhaps for other reasons, but not to save money.