Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There have been some very good posts on this thread -- I found the posts talking about MoCo and DC costs thought-provoking.
I do think that, for some of the best known schools, they can probably keep hiking tuitions and their reputations will be enough to fill the seats with the children of the very affluent and about 25% receiving financial aid. However, this is not sustainable for every school. I know a lot of DC lawyer types, even at big firms, who just never got on the private school train -- and the private schools need those lawyers' kids.
I recall reading that one small college (maybe Sewanee?) cut it's tuition by 10% -- I'd like to see a school try something like that (but realize its probably unrealistic). Thoughts for savings (and some are controversial, and maybe some remove the advantages of private schools!), interested in hearing others viewpoints:
--Increase enrollment (tough bc of facility constraints);
--Decrease the size of the faculty (through attrition followed by elimination of the position) by increasing class section size modestly and/or having teachers teach 5 class sections instead of 4 (which is, I think, the norm) (but a teaching load of 80 students may mean, in the humanities for example, a drop in writing assignments which would be a costly side effect);
--Eliminate more of the non-teaching admin jobs (deans and assistant headmasters and division heads should also teach some classes);
--Cap out teaching salaries like the Government GS scale; once you hit a certain level you are limited to COLA increases and not substantive raises each year (this old increase faculty turnover);
--Grandfather out automatic tuition remission for faculty children;
--Eliminate full time positions for things like international programs, environmental, or diversity coordinators, and offer existing faculty a fair stipend to pick up the responsibility
--Moratorium on facility additions/upgrades and do a capital drive to endow more of the financial aid
All of these things pretty clearly would have costs/byproducts. Are there better options out there? Where do people see the real waste or, to be less negative, the non-essential elements that could be cut? Is it just the new facilities?
Anyone have thoughts on the points raised above?
Anonymous wrote:17:45 again. If OP will just identify a school where the tuition has doubled in the past 6 years, then we call can look at the school's 990, to see exactly where the money is going.
Anonymous wrote:different poster -- I don't CARE where anyone's kid goes to school and don't believe this debate hinges upon proving whether a person is an illegal immigrant or allowed the benefits of this discussion as a legal citizen in this forum.
This is very important because the middle class is getting squeezed out and into the public school system. The private schools receive tax benefits so that make this forum open to anyone who pays taxes and anyone who pays tuition. Stop trying to distract readers and the main contributors. This is important to many of us!
Anonymous wrote:It's a good thing your children are not at private school, so none of this applies to you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Your question is intrusive, the answer is irrelevant to the point, again you fall back on personal attacks. Suffice it to say, that yearly uition hikes are pricing out the mc and umc and, worse, stressing the families who are trying to hold on. Your efforts to attack me personally will not distract me.
So just tell us what tuition was at your child's school for the past 6 years. That way, we all can see how big the hikes you're facing really are. You say tuition doubled in the past six years; I'd like to see the numbers.
Your refusal to provide info is baffling to me.
Anonymous wrote:There have been some very good posts on this thread -- I found the posts talking about MoCo and DC costs thought-provoking.
I do think that, for some of the best known schools, they can probably keep hiking tuitions and their reputations will be enough to fill the seats with the children of the very affluent and about 25% receiving financial aid. However, this is not sustainable for every school. I know a lot of DC lawyer types, even at big firms, who just never got on the private school train -- and the private schools need those lawyers' kids.
I recall reading that one small college (maybe Sewanee?) cut it's tuition by 10% -- I'd like to see a school try something like that (but realize its probably unrealistic). Thoughts for savings (and some are controversial, and maybe some remove the advantages of private schools!), interested in hearing others viewpoints:
--Increase enrollment (tough bc of facility constraints);
--Decrease the size of the faculty (through attrition followed by elimination of the position) by increasing class section size modestly and/or having teachers teach 5 class sections instead of 4 (which is, I think, the norm) (but a teaching load of 80 students may mean, in the humanities for example, a drop in writing assignments which would be a costly side effect);
--Eliminate more of the non-teaching admin jobs (deans and assistant headmasters and division heads should also teach some classes);
--Cap out teaching salaries like the Government GS scale; once you hit a certain level you are limited to COLA increases and not substantive raises each year (this old increase faculty turnover);
--Grandfather out automatic tuition remission for faculty children;
--Eliminate full time positions for things like international programs, environmental, or diversity coordinators, and offer existing faculty a fair stipend to pick up the responsibility
--Moratorium on facility additions/upgrades and do a capital drive to endow more of the financial aid
All of these things pretty clearly would have costs/byproducts. Are there better options out there? Where do people see the real waste or, to be less negative, the non-essential elements that could be cut? Is it just the new facilities?
Anonymous wrote:
Someone keeps posting this. Which of these schools charged only $16,000 five years ago?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The PP has no dog in this fight yet hovers on this thread, posts distortions and tries to pass them off as fact( such as posting 990's that were 5-6 years old as if they were reflective of current situation or his recent post in which he culls data from the one school in town that is absolutely rolling in it, and tries to convince us all that Sidwell 's financial picture is "typical" LOL.
When he is called out on these distortions, he engages in ad homonym attacks
PP, you do NOT have a kid in private so you have NO IDEA the kind of strain this ever sky rocketing hiking of tuition is causing family's who do. Take your egoism elsewhere.
I am honestly curious, why do you keep repeating that the 990s are 5-6 years old when they are available by link and they are from 2010-2011 (two and three years ago)? If you think others are lying to you about the age of the 990s, why would you not check yourself? If you haven't checked, why not, when others have contradicted your repeated assertions that those 990s are 5-6 years old? If you have checked them, why repeat an intentional falsehood? Is it because you assume (probably correctly) that most people won't click on the link or won't notice the date and will therefore just accept your inaccurate characterization?
What's going on? It's really odd to keep saying things from 2010 and 2011 are "5-6 years old" when that is verifiably untrue.
I am honestly curious, why do you keep repeating that the 990s are 5-6 years old when they are available by link and they are from 2010-2011 (two and three years ago)? If you think others are lying to you about the age of the 990s, why would you not check yourself? If you haven't checked, why not, when others have contradicted your repeated assertions that those 990s are 5-6 years old? If you have checked them, why repeat an intentional falsehood? Is it because you assume (probably correctly) that most people won't click on the link or won't notice the date and will therefore just accept your inaccurate characterization?Anonymous wrote:PP, you do NOT have a kid in private so you have NO IDEA the kind of strain this ever sky rocketing hiking of tuition is causing family's who do. Take your egoism elsewhere.
Anonymous wrote:Thank you. The PP has no dog in this fight yet hovers on this thread, posts distortions and tries to pass them off as fact( such as posting 990's that were 5-6 years old as if they were reflective of current situation or his recent post in which he culls data from the one school in town that is absolutely rolling in it, and tries to convince us all that Sidwell 's financial picture is "typical" LOL.
When he is called out on these distortions, he engages in ad homonym attacks
PP, you do NOT have a kid in private so you have NO IDEA the kind of strain this ever sky rocketing hiking of tuition is causing family's who do. Take your egoism elsewhere.