Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

You should read the Chetty study

Citation please.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

+1000

Not if you have to go into debt to do so.

I think the article is saying that even if you don't have to go into debt, those "prestige" schools may not be worth it. For most UMC families, that $80K per year school x multiple kids may not be worth it.

Anonymous wrote:Compromising "a lot" is relative. Maybe they think choosing Vanderbilt or Rice or Duke is compromising "a lot" over Harvard.

And the top schools are cheaper than state schools for the vast majority of Americans

Not for us. We are a donut-hole-family who has had the audacity to live well within our means and save.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

+1000

Not if you have to go into debt to do so.

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

Prestige does not really matter. What matters is what you do while at school and afterwards. The top students will succeed wherever they go. And it's easier to succeed when you are not strapped with $100K+ in student loans when you graduate.

Anonymous wrote:The cost of private universities has changed everything. Two kids equals $800,000.

That is absurd.

There are tons of MC and UMC families choosing state flagships and merit at slightly lower ranked schools over the cost of attending a T20 school without aid.

It’s really only an issue if the kid wants finance or consulting. Those two industries remain stuck in 1990 when it comes to recruiting.

That is the smart choice, unless you can easily pay the $100K/year and/or have it all saved already for college (our kids both had enough for 4 years at "top schools" and professional degrees ) But yes, otherwise, search for merit/go somewhere that is affordable. My own kids found great merit and we were not even searching. one was a 1220/3.5UW/no AP kid and attended a T100 with 35% of tuition as a merit award (had another similar school with same award)---had a T130 with ~70% of tuition award as well. My 1500/3.96UW/8AP kid had multiple great merit awards at T65 schools, including $42K/year at CWRU (a few years ago when all in was ~$80-85K). So step outside your reach schools and your kid can find excellent merit. Both could have attended several in state schools with good merit/low costs as well. Our T120 state U (2nd in state), would have cost the 1500 kid about $15K, and the 1220 kid about $20K. So something the kid alone would pay for 50-80%+ with jobs and federal loans. Very doable and affordable

We are paying for private university because:
1. Our oldest has autism and he was most likely to get academic and residential accommodations at an expensive private.
2. His major was not available at the State flagship, which, given his autism, is critical. He cannot study or work in any field that's not his field of interest, but he will do GREAT in his field of interest. We are not chasing prestige, just financial independence as an adult.
3. Since he's the oldest, it would not be fair to restrict our other children to in-state options.
4. Thankfully, we can afford it.

But I agree that for the average family with neurotypical kids, in-state is usually the best choice!

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

Prestige still matters to who?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

You should read the Chetty study

Compromising "a lot" is relative. Maybe they think choosing Vanderbilt or Rice or Duke is compromising "a lot" over Harvard.

And the top schools are cheaper than state schools for the vast majority of Americans

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

In my own survey of some 3,000 parents, more than a third at the highest income level ($250,000-plus) said they’d compromise “a lot” on prestige if a school cost them half as much as their child’s top choice because of merit aid. That’s largely because families rank prestige lower than other markers of a “good” college: the availability of internships and research projects, the job placement of graduates, the strength of specific majors. More and more families are measuring a school’s worth by what it delivers rather than what it represents.

Anonymous wrote:Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

the point is that the cost of these prestigious universities aren't really worth it.

Prestige still matters, in fact quite a bit, but it is simply not achievable either due to cost or admissions to many. UMC parents who went to prestigious schools are grappling with the downward social mobility their children are facing. Lower ranking schools, more competitive job markets, housing market unaffordable etc. For a parenting generation that threw everything into their kids it’s a deep blow.

They are clinging to this idea that the prestige isn’t worth it. It’s sort of like gazing into a bakery with no money and telling yourself oh it’s probably too sweet or more healthy not to eat it.

Can people succeed from a state school? Of course, as they always have, it’s just harder and requires hustle. Sadly, many UMC lack hustle because their helicopter parents never let them develop it. Instead they were groomed to follow in their parents foot steps to the prestigious legacy or at least an equivalent. Losing stings.

The cost of private universities has changed everything. Two kids equals $800,000.

That is absurd.

There are tons of MC and UMC families choosing state flagships and merit at slightly lower ranked schools over the cost of attending a T20 school without aid.

It’s really only an issue if the kid wants finance or consulting. Those two industries remain stuck in 1990 when it comes to recruiting.

This is a timely article in the midst of college applications. My youngest DC is going through it now.

The vast majority of parents today see college as an investment in the student's future, ie, can they get a good paying job.

I think my older DC would've been like one of these students in the article had DC been accepted to one of the top program for their major. They ended up at the state flagship with merit (which is still T20 for their major) but less intense. The cost differential is no joke, and DC was able to secure some amazing internships from their state flagship.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/best-colleges-aren-t-best-120000222.html