Anonymous wrote:I'll never forget getting accepted at U Chicago (my dream school) in 1994 and being offered ... a measly $5k in grant aid. I chose a lesser ranked SLAC and emerged with 1/10 the debt I would have at Chicago.

I was going to say, I know a brilliant kid who got in. His parents have three kids, and he is the oldest. The other two are in high school and they make about $140k/year. UChicago expected his family's contribution (no loans or aid offered), to be $52k/year. He's going to a state school.

I'm not scapegoating UChicago, many schools are just as bad or worse, but unless their offer means that kids can afford to go in the first place, it's kind of meaningless for a big chunk of the population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Selective applicants for selective schools are choosing those that offer no loans (i.e. Princeton).

UChicago wants a piece of the action.

Think you meant to say "(e.g., Princeton)."

what's the differnce between i.e and e.g?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Selective applicants for selective schools are choosing those that offer no loans (i.e. Princeton).

UChicago wants a piece of the action.

Think you meant to say "(e.g., Princeton)."

Oops, sorry grammar police. Hopefully, the rest of you understood my statement.

I'm guessing not.

I hear you -- and you are right -- it is hard for middle class folks DC area folks to swing these schools, but it is a bit ironic that UChicago becomes the scapegoat for why all colleges cost so much since they are actually the only school ranked in the USN top 5 or 10 that as of this year still offered some merit regardless of financial need to students (I think I read last year the average merit award was about $10,000 or so, but don't know how many were given out). (of course, what many of us see as middle class in DC area is seen as affluent in other parts of the country - Princeton touts some financial aid is available for families making over $180,000 per year).

Why do schools cost so much? I don't know, but I've heard for some, look at the unnecessary new dorms, fancy cafeterias, etc. Then there are schools losing money on sports programs or building state of the art facilities. For others, they are competing for top salaries of superstar professors. More generally, I assume people of love literature or biology and teach want to make a reasonable living after years and years to get a phd, when their private sector professional counterparts make far more.

I'll never forget getting accepted at U Chicago (my dream school) in 1994 and being offered ... a measly $5k in grant aid. I chose a lesser ranked SLAC and emerged with 1/10 the debt I would have at Chicago.

It's nice, but so what? Even if my kid gets in to UChicago, we won't get any financial aid, so he can't go there.

It is to be hoped they did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Selective applicants for selective schools are choosing those that offer no loans (i.e. Princeton).

UChicago wants a piece of the action.

Think you meant to say "(e.g., Princeton)."

Oops, sorry grammar police. Hopefully, the rest of you understood my statement.

Anonymous wrote:Selective applicants for selective schools are choosing those that offer no loans (i.e. Princeton).

UChicago wants a piece of the action.

Think you meant to say "(e.g., Princeton)."

That is very cool. They are waiving application fees.

Selective applicants for selective schools are choosing those that offer no loans (i.e. Princeton).

UChicago wants a piece of the action.

Another school joins the ranks to end loan policy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/01/university-of-chicago-student-loans_n_5917772.html