A kid who isn’t good enough to get into a top tier school doesn’t NEED a private. The state school will be fine for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that I'd pay for a top tier school or state school, nothing in between. My first got into and attends a top tier school but my second will almost certainly not get into one, yet is interested in a number of second tier schools that have the same hefty price tag. Would you force your kid to attend a state school if they didn't get into a top tier school? With great sacrifice, we can afford to pay the second or third tier price tag but I can't help but think my kid would be better off at a state school and with ~200k (the likely cost difference) in a long-term investment.

This is hard as you invested X in first kid who had the advantage of an easier admission cycle. Do you just want to spend less on the second kid if it’s not top 10? Is your state school in the top 10 or 20?

Would you make the investments equal? Ie put the 200 K immediately into a trust or 529 for graduate school for your second? Or would you redo your kitchen or give it to your first kid for a house down payment?

I understand your point. We did not offer kid #1 the state school+200k option. I doubt he would have taken it but we didn't offer that, so I can see how that could create bad feelings, in addition to the bad feelings kid #2 could have if we went through with this scenario because kid #1 got their choice of school. I just think most non-top tier colleges are a terrible investment (and arguably so are some of the top tier ones) when you can get a good education at state schools but I do understand what you are saying.

Stop thinking about it as ROI. It isn't trade school.

disagree.. Today, colleges are about getting a good paying job after college. You would be stupid to not think about ROI.

I hear ya, OP. But, is the state school good for their major? Is the oos they want to go to considered great for their major with a great alumni network? Then it might be worth it.

Please. People (usually immigrants and Midwesterners who don’t have 529s) tell themselves there’s no advantage to being in a name brand environment because they don’t know any better or, in the case of people like my brother who bought jet skis instead of funding college, because they flat out don’t have the money.

Networks ARE ROI. Especially for $ careers that call on soft skills.

We are paying 2/3 tuition for a top 50. It's private, so more expensive than I'd like, but not the worst case scenario. Kid is going for their sport as well.

Anonymous wrote:If the kid agrees to go to a state school, I bet you will not save the $200k in a “long term “ investment.

OP, answer this poster. Are you really willing to put aside 200k for your second kid? Or are you just BSing us?

Did you tell both your kids ahead of time that you would only pay full costs for private scchools if they were highly ranked? If so, there may not be hard feelings. My parents very much had that policy and there was no hard feelings. Also my parents were clear about that throughout high school (at the time their cutoff was Tufts). THis might be a hard thing to spring on your second kid half way through high school.

Also, I agree with the PPs who mentioned that your kid may get merit at these second tier schools.

I was clear to my kids early on my feelings about this. Top schools, I'll pay. Schools that rank 50 and below, maybe even 40 and below, you'll get some merit. But there's a very narrow band of schools that I won't be willing to pay full price for. Full pay for a school ranked 35 just makes me feel like I've been had. Boston College is a school that felt like a prime example. We even toured - I was willing to wrong - and nope. Not paying that.

Also, if you get merit, you have that money in the 529 to use later.

I honestly think telling your kids you'll pay 95k for only some schools is a perfectly fine thing to say. But be open.

I would never in a million years pay anywhere near full price for a second or third tier private school, especially being Virginia residents, and would only pay for first tier if we were talking top ten or better. No Vanderbilts, Northwesterns, Notre Dames, Wash Us or Emorys over UVA—no way no how—no bullshit liberal arts college over William & Mary, no middling private over JMU, etc.

If I were OP I’d offer exactly what she’s proposing and hope the kid accepts. And I wouldn’t think twice about the first kid. As she said, he wouldn’t have gone for it anyway.

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that I'd pay for a top tier school or state school, nothing in between. My first got into and attends a top tier school but my second will almost certainly not get into one, yet is interested in a number of second tier schools that have the same hefty price tag. Would you force your kid to attend a state school if they didn't get into a top tier school? With great sacrifice, we can afford to pay the second or third tier price tag but I can't help but think my kid would be better off at a state school and with ~200k (the likely cost difference) in a long-term investment.

I had this discussion with my kids pretty early on about what I would be willing to pay for.

Oldest kid wanted to go to NYU but went to UVA and I helped him with law school at NYU. Spreading it out was also a lot less painful. In hindsight he's not sore about it.

Other kids all got into good schools off the bat.

The marginal benefit of your 2nd child going to a good, mid-tier private college may be higher than your already high-achieving oldest child going to a top school. Your oldest probably would have done well anywhere. Think about what's going to move the needle for your 2nd kid academically. State school may be great if they are already motivated. SLAC might be better if they are late to mature and will benefit from small classes where they can't hide.

Anonymous wrote:Do that but do not be surprised when your kid wants nothing to do with you after they graduate.

Then he was a pretty bad parent to begin with.

I have seen this scenario play out and the outcome isn’t good. One kid went to Princeton the other had to go to a local city school. The city school graduate has a very bad relationship with his parents and is resentful that he wasn’t treated equally. Don’t be that parent. If you pay for the first you have to pay for the second. As another poster said, many schools provide merit scholarships. There is a huge difference between a state school and a private liberal arts school. Huge!! Prestige isn’t the only consideration when choosing schools. Fit matters more than that!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that I'd pay for a top tier school or state school, nothing in between. My first got into and attends a top tier school but my second will almost certainly not get into one, yet is interested in a number of second tier schools that have the same hefty price tag. Would you force your kid to attend a state school if they didn't get into a top tier school? With great sacrifice, we can afford to pay the second or third tier price tag but I can't help but think my kid would be better off at a state school and with ~200k (the likely cost difference) in a long-term investment.

This is hard as you invested X in first kid who had the advantage of an easier admission cycle. Do you just want to spend less on the second kid if it’s not top 10? Is your state school in the top 10 or 20?

Would you make the investments equal? Ie put the 200 K immediately into a trust or 529 for graduate school for your second? Or would you redo your kitchen or give it to your first kid for a house down payment?

I understand your point. We did not offer kid #1 the state school+200k option. I doubt he would have taken it but we didn't offer that, so I can see how that could create bad feelings, in addition to the bad feelings kid #2 could have if we went through with this scenario because kid #1 got their choice of school. I just think most non-top tier colleges are a terrible investment (and arguably so are some of the top tier ones) when you can get a good education at state schools but I do understand what you are saying.

If your youngest can get a good education at a state school, so could your oldest, yet you didn't insist on that.

It's not that some schools offer a better or worse education (assuming a minimum level of competence), it's that different schools offer different types of experience. And you let your oldest choose his type of experience.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of second and third tier schools don’t really cost that much. They give merit to nearly everyone they admit. Just don’t tie your hands by applying ED (unless it’s to one of the ones that guarantees merit to ED applicants).

This. My oldest goes to a "second tier" school and we pay far less than I expect we will for my youngest, who is competitive for "top tier" schools.

But I also don't understand why your second child's education would be worth less to you, just because he won't be competitive for highly selective schools. Especially if he wants a different environment than state schools offer and you can afford it.

Anonymous wrote:That works only if the state school has a good reputation for that specific major, OP. My kid is in International Affairs. At UMD, where he was accepted, he would have had to cobble together the classes he wanted. He went to GWU instead, which is known for IA. We can afford it.

? why? the school may be large, but students are able to get classes.

But agree about major and school.

-parent of UMD CS major grad 2026

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that I'd pay for a top tier school or state school, nothing in between. My first got into and attends a top tier school but my second will almost certainly not get into one, yet is interested in a number of second tier schools that have the same hefty price tag. Would you force your kid to attend a state school if they didn't get into a top tier school? With great sacrifice, we can afford to pay the second or third tier price tag but I can't help but think my kid would be better off at a state school and with ~200k (the likely cost difference) in a long-term investment.

This is hard as you invested X in first kid who had the advantage of an easier admission cycle. Do you just want to spend less on the second kid if it’s not top 10? Is your state school in the top 10 or 20?

Would you make the investments equal? Ie put the 200 K immediately into a trust or 529 for graduate school for your second? Or would you redo your kitchen or give it to your first kid for a house down payment?

I understand your point. We did not offer kid #1 the state school+200k option. I doubt he would have taken it but we didn't offer that, so I can see how that could create bad feelings, in addition to the bad feelings kid #2 could have if we went through with this scenario because kid #1 got their choice of school. I just think most non-top tier colleges are a terrible investment (and arguably so are some of the top tier ones) when you can get a good education at state schools but I do understand what you are saying.

Stop thinking about it as ROI. It isn't trade school.

disagree.. Today, colleges are about getting a good paying job after college. You would be stupid to not think about ROI.

I hear ya, OP. But, is the state school good for their major? Is the oos they want to go to considered great for their major with a great alumni network? Then it might be worth it.