Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I have noticed in my state is that towns and cities that have a college or university are decent to excellent places to visit or live, and the few that do not have them are kind of sketch.

Even in a worse case scenario if families are just wasting their money on high end daycare with no guaranteed outcome, it could be a public good because these institutions provide many many jobs in the community. Not just faculty, but all kinds of jobs from administrators to support staff and groundskeepers and maintenance people. It has a ripple effect and seems to facilitate general economic well-being and activity.

Okay, I hear you—so it’s “worth” 90K because it functions as a kind of trickle-down mechanism to extract money from the wealthy. We do need alternative forms of donation and taxation to stimulate the economy and help low SES.

Good to know that people are not paying 90K to gain intellectual capital.

The people who are paying 90k are the ones who can afford it. Not MC, not even most UMC are paying that.

Did you attend college?
If you did, it is surprising that you reduce the experience to “gaining intellectual capital.”
For people who believe in education, whether they are paying 5k a year or 90k, college is about much more than gaining knowledge or intellectual capital.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC (home on break) is currently an undergrad at an Ivy, we are a full pay family that saved in a 529. Yesterday he told me that thinking back to the college process he now finds it funny that he worried about location, school spirit etc, while it has all of that and he loves it he said was he really loves is the academic environment. He said his professors, the labs, the libraries and all of the other students are inspiring and he feels like he learns and grows every day.
To me that is worth it. . .

That’s great that he is happy, but he could have that same level of satisfaction at countless schools. There is no way to know how he’d feel elsewhere - this isn’t a controlled experiment.

No but over the break he has gotten emails from several of his professors commending his work and it occurred to me that probably wouldn’t have happened if he had gone to one of the public flagships he was also accepted to . . . I leave it to the parents with kids at UVA, Cal etc to chime in and correct me if that is also true of the professors at those schools in regards to undergraduates

You don’t think state school professors are ever impressed by students’ work and let them know? Why would you think that?

I can tell you from personal experience that they do - but this is coming from a non-prestigious public university that many in this thread would sneer at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Did you know that in a study participants were presented with two glasses of wine and told one is from a $100 bottle and one is from a $20 bottle (roughly), and they consistently rated the $100 wine much higher across every metric?

The trick? It’s the exact same wine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing I have noticed in my state is that towns and cities that have a college or university are decent to excellent places to visit or live, and the few that do not have them are kind of sketch.

Even in a worse case scenario if families are just wasting their money on high end daycare with no guaranteed outcome, it could be a public good because these institutions provide many many jobs in the community. Not just faculty, but all kinds of jobs from administrators to support staff and groundskeepers and maintenance people. It has a ripple effect and seems to facilitate general economic well-being and activity.

Okay, I hear you—so it’s “worth” 90K because it functions as a kind of trickle-down mechanism to extract money from the wealthy. We do need alternative forms of donation and taxation to stimulate the economy and help low SES.

Good to know that people are not paying 90K to gain intellectual capital.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also no way of knowing if a person who is “successful” (again by some subjective measure you decide is meritorious) can attribute that solely due to where they decided to attend college. There are too many complex interacting factors to determine this.

It’s not ethical to promote “exclusivity” by raising prices and selling the illusion that the investment guarantees better outcomes. Still haven't seen the rational explanation on why this price tag

Maybe because that price is what it takes to operate the college?

But they teach pretty much the same stuff since decades ago, no?

No, while sure there are subjects that still include material from decades, even centuries ago (would be stupid to teach philosophy w/o Plato etc.) that doesn't mean the curriculum doesn't and hasn't evolved. There are also the labs, libraries and facilities to maintain and grow as well as the campuses. Not to mention these schools financially support literally hundreds of student clubs and activities which are key to student life and making the college experience dynamic. Keep in mind, these are residential colleges, not commuter schools, the students truly live there and doing that well takes resources.

The vast majority of colleges and universities offer all of these things, and chemistry isn’t different at a 90K per year school vs a state school.

If chemistry is all the same then why do so many premeds try to game it by taking orgo over the summer at an easier college?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also no way of knowing if a person who is “successful” (again by some subjective measure you decide is meritorious) can attribute that solely due to where they decided to attend college. There are too many complex interacting factors to determine this.

It’s not ethical to promote “exclusivity” by raising prices and selling the illusion that the investment guarantees better outcomes. Still haven't seen the rational explanation on why this price tag

Maybe because that price is what it takes to operate the college?

But they teach pretty much the same stuff since decades ago, no?

No, while sure there are subjects that still include material from decades, even centuries ago (would be stupid to teach philosophy w/o Plato etc.) that doesn't mean the curriculum doesn't and hasn't evolved. There are also the labs, libraries and facilities to maintain and grow as well as the campuses. Not to mention these schools financially support literally hundreds of student clubs and activities which are key to student life and making the college experience dynamic. Keep in mind, these are residential colleges, not commuter schools, the students truly live there and doing that well takes resources.

The vast majority of colleges and universities offer all of these things, and chemistry isn’t different at a 90K per year school vs a state school.

If chemistry is all the same then why do so many premeds try to game it by taking orgo over the summer at an easier college?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC (home on break) is currently an undergrad at an Ivy, we are a full pay family that saved in a 529. Yesterday he told me that thinking back to the college process he now finds it funny that he worried about location, school spirit etc, while it has all of that and he loves it he said was he really loves is the academic environment. He said his professors, the labs, the libraries and all of the other students are inspiring and he feels like he learns and grows every day.
To me that is worth it. . .

That’s great that he is happy, but he could have that same level of satisfaction at countless schools. There is no way to know how he’d feel elsewhere - this isn’t a controlled experiment.

No but over the break he has gotten emails from several of his professors commending his work and it occurred to me that probably wouldn’t have happened if he had gone to one of the public flagships he was also accepted to . . . I leave it to the parents with kids at UVA, Cal etc to chime in and correct me if that is also true of the professors at those schools in regards to undergraduates

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From your personal experience or colleges you toured, which are standouts that really impress you to be worth the full tuition? Less interested in HYPMS, rather ones that are not as prestigious but you think are comparable or even better.

For DC, it's schools that have premed programs having medical acceptance rate > 80%, preferrably > 90%. The brand doesn't matter but schools fit that standard all have a decent brand.

Anonymous wrote:One thing I have noticed in my state is that towns and cities that have a college or university are decent to excellent places to visit or live, and the few that do not have them are kind of sketch.

Even in a worse case scenario if families are just wasting their money on high end daycare with no guaranteed outcome, it could be a public good because these institutions provide many many jobs in the community. Not just faculty, but all kinds of jobs from administrators to support staff and groundskeepers and maintenance people. It has a ripple effect and seems to facilitate general economic well-being and activity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not interested in judging how other people spend their money. Showing off wealth is a life style sure.

I am just really curious why college tuition keep increasing yoy, it is not even tied to any performance benchmark.

Sounds like you aren’t interested in looking further than your navel.

Are you really not aware of how these schools spend money and why tuition has gone up?
Low class ratios and nice facilities don’t grow on trees.
Also, much of the student experience is subjective. It isn’t just what you learn, but how you feel about the experience.
Also, remember most kids are not paying full freight. The rich are subsidizing the less-well-off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We told our child we will pay 90K for T15. After that, we need to discuss whether the cost difference makes sense compared to UMD ( assuming he is admitted).

Why are you impressed with a publication like USNWR stating "T15" is the question you need to answer. In other words, what attributes does your so called "T15" have over UMD. Then you make the decision whether it's worth the additional cost and why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok. The "mingling with rich" and "facilities" are the main reasons?

So then it probably answer OP's question sortof, if you want your kids to mingle with rich and enjoy four years of high end day care. Then it's worth it.

You’ve described High Point University.

Aside from that, how about some real life examples or better yet data that supports this hypothesis?

Data? No, I equally want to know why we need tax payers to bail out student loan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s also no way of knowing if a person who is “successful” (again by some subjective measure you decide is meritorious) can attribute that solely due to where they decided to attend college. There are too many complex interacting factors to determine this.

It’s not ethical to promote “exclusivity” by raising prices and selling the illusion that the investment guarantees better outcomes. Still haven't seen the rational explanation on why this price tag

Maybe because that price is what it takes to operate the college?

But they teach pretty much the same stuff since decades ago, no?

No, while sure there are subjects that still include material from decades, even centuries ago (would be stupid to teach philosophy w/o Plato etc.) that doesn't mean the curriculum doesn't and hasn't evolved. There are also the labs, libraries and facilities to maintain and grow as well as the campuses. Not to mention these schools financially support literally hundreds of student clubs and activities which are key to student life and making the college experience dynamic. Keep in mind, these are residential colleges, not commuter schools, the students truly live there and doing that well takes resources.

The vast majority of colleges and universities offer all of these things, and chemistry isn’t different at a 90K per year school vs a state school.