Anonymous wrote:I realize few people on this board have sympathy for those of us who live in DC (despite the name of the site), but it is really hard to figure out a plan for high-stat kids if you live in the district and aren't extremely wealthy.

Top OOS flagships are really hard to get into (even for top students), and they are almost as costly as top private schools. UVa is almost $80k.

We moved here 20 years ago when the gap between in state and out-of-state wasn't that great, and DC TAG covered a sizable amount of it.

It’s not much but even UMC earning up to $500k get that $10k annual DCTAG “scholarship” to help with OOS. It won’t go far at UVA, but will help at a lot of other flagships across the US. Virginia residents have great schools but the good ones are hard to get into. If you have lived in DC for 20 years then you should have a house/condo that has shot up in value, which means you easily have sold and moved to MD or VA and still had an easy commute. So, you probably won’t get too much sympathy here…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is heading to a two tier society. Vote Biden or it gets worse

College tuition increased greatly when the Obama/Biden administration got the government heavily involved in the student loan process.

Citation please.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/see-20-years-of-tuition-growth-at-national-universities

Just look at the chart in article. More pronounced at private colleges and out of state schools.

Anonymous wrote:It's affecting the choices people make. When my kids were little I'd have told you we'd pay for an Ivy/top school, make it a priority. I just don't feel that way anymore. Public colleges offer a great education at a much lower price. I can see around me people are also just doing in-state for their kids, even other umc people with strong students. It has stopped being justifiable unless you get a lot of aid/help or are actually wealthy to the point 1 mil in college education is no big deal to your financial picture.

+100 $200-500k HHI are doing publics more and more now and forgoing T10s for them.

We are a $475k HHI and my kid hit into 6 schools in T1-T20 and will be headed to UVA.

It’s not worth $400k for undergrad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between 1987 and 2017, the cost of attending a public four-year college rose more than 200%.

For the 2024-2025 school year, Tufts’ estimates of expenses for undergraduate programs reaches nearly $96,000, trumping Wellesley — which comes in at about $92,000.

For the year strting this fall, Yale University comes in at almost $91,000, preceding Boston University with around $90,000 for the academic year.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/business/college-tuition-new-england-ninety-thousand/index.html

That is so effed up.

This is how they are affording to give so many kids financial aid. I am not against aid don’t get me wrong - I had it in college but this is what is allowing them to do this. Parents paying full tuition are paying for financial aid. It must be why. There is no other explanation or increase except they are admitting more kids that need more aid.

Other reasons for rising costs:

- increased in non-academic amenities offered by schools, like state of the art wellness centers, improved campus housing, and nicer dining facilities
- a proliferation of majors, requiring more facilities, professors, and staff-- some brand new majors that didn't used to exist, but also greater specialization in majors that used to all be housed in one department
- inflation in administrator salaries (but notably, not in faculty salaries, as schools have actually fought faculty increases and also shifted more work to non-tenure-track teachers, include adjuncts and graduate students, who are dirt cheap)

Yes, some are f the money also pays for aid to students who cannot afford it. But this is only true at schools without large endowments.

One thing we can do to better understand college costs is look outside the US. In Germany, for instance, public colleges are all free to students, and still manage to offer a very good education. But in most cases, they do not offer a campus experience like in the US. They don't have dorms or dining halls, students generally live near school in privately procured housing. All of the school's funding goes to professors, classrooms, and administration of education. It's a more efficient model that does not romanticize "the college experience" as we do in the US.

I'm not saying we should adopt that model for all schools, but it might be worth it to think about what we spend money on in higher education and why. What is our goal? For MC, UMC, and wealthy families, often the goal an "experience" more that education or training for a profession, and the image people have for that experience seems to get more expensive every year.

But in Germany not everyone can go to college. Your teacher decides for you at age 12. Guess who they pick? Hint, not the poor, minority or non-native German speakers. My kid is studying German in college and they were just discussing this in class and she called me horrified that in Germany she would have been tracked out of college in 7th grade or so and put on a trade school track. She is an amazing student but had late diagnosed LDs so we not so amazing until high school.

Sort of, but you are missing all the many MANY differences with the German system. Here are a few details of nuance:

- It's true that students are tracked into college-eligible and vocational track during grade school. However, a student tracked to the vocational track can still go to college. They would need to do some additional schooling first, but it's possible.

- The "vocational" track includes A LOT of what we consider "college careers" in the US. Accountants, nurses, many office professionals. You can go into management and beyond from the vocational track. This is a huge difference between Germany and the US -- they do not require a college degree for anywhere near as many careers and industries. College is really mostly for people who, in the US, would require a post graduate degree to do their jobs -- doctors, lawyers, scientists, academics. It also includes primary school teachers. As a result, fewer people go to college overall, but also not going to college in Germany is not some black mark on you that you are not employable or intelligent. Vocational schools in Germany are VERY highly regarded.

- This is an interesting nuance: vocational track can sometimes be more lucrative than college track, because in Germany people get paid during training for a lot of jobs. Jobs like being an accountant or working in the medical field involve apprenticeships as part of the vocational trainings and you get paid during your apprenticeship. So you could be making a salary by the time you are 19 or 20 years old, in a legit job with a career track and plenty of promotional potential if you are interested and want to work your way up. So many families actually view vocational track education as more economically viable, because apprenticeship programs allow you to earn money more quickly, without heavily depressing your overall career earnings (unlike in the US, where the number of jobs you can do at 19 or 20 are very limited with a very low earning ceilings, stuff like retail or construction).

Anyway, it's a totally different system. I'm not suggesting we adopt the German system. But the more you learn about how other countries approach education and career training, the more you tend to see real inefficiencies and problems with the American system. For me, one the biggest is that we require students to get 4-year college degrees to do things like marketing, business accounting, human resources, event stuff like event planning. It's genuinely hard to get jobs in those fields without a college degree, but... why? These jobs are not deeply academic. You don't need to learn theory to do them. Unlike something like medicine, you don't need this basis of deep knowledge in something like chemistry or biology before you learn there technical aspects of the job. This isn't me putting down these jobs. It's just questioning whether we are approaching the training for them in a way that makes sense either for employers OR students. Could we do this differently to create a workforce ready for the jobs we need them to do, without saddling like 70-80% of high school graduates with a 4 year education that costs an increasingly ridiculous amount of money, delays their entry into the job market, and may have very little, ultimately, to do with what they actually do for a living later?

^our

Anonymous wrote:I realize few people on this board have sympathy for those of us who live in DC (despite the name of the site), but it is really hard to figure out a plan for high-stat kids if you live in the district and aren't extremely wealthy.

Top OOS flagships are really hard to get into (even for top students), and they are almost as costly as top private schools. UVa is almost $80k.

We moved here 20 years ago when the gap between in state and out-of-state wasn't that great, and DC TAG covered a sizable amount of it.

I feel for you. We moved 1.5 miles from NW into Nova when are first was a toddler and pregnant with second. A large part were the in-state schools VA offers.

I realize few people on this board have sympathy for those of us who live in DC (despite the name of the site), but it is really hard to figure out a plan for high-stat kids if you live in the district and aren't extremely wealthy.

Top OOS flagships are really hard to get into (even for top students), and they are almost as costly as top private schools. UVa is almost $80k.

We moved here 20 years ago when the gap between in state and out-of-state wasn't that great, and DC TAG covered a sizable amount of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between 1987 and 2017, the cost of attending a public four-year college rose more than 200%.

For the 2024-2025 school year, Tufts’ estimates of expenses for undergraduate programs reaches nearly $96,000, trumping Wellesley — which comes in at about $92,000.

For the year strting this fall, Yale University comes in at almost $91,000, preceding Boston University with around $90,000 for the academic year.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/business/college-tuition-new-england-ninety-thousand/index.html

That is so effed up.

This is how they are affording to give so many kids financial aid. I am not against aid don’t get me wrong - I had it in college but this is what is allowing them to do this. Parents paying full tuition are paying for financial aid. It must be why. There is no other explanation or increase except they are admitting more kids that need more aid.

Other reasons for rising costs:

- increased in non-academic amenities offered by schools, like state of the art wellness centers, improved campus housing, and nicer dining facilities
- a proliferation of majors, requiring more facilities, professors, and staff-- some brand new majors that didn't used to exist, but also greater specialization in majors that used to all be housed in one department
- inflation in administrator salaries (but notably, not in faculty salaries, as schools have actually fought faculty increases and also shifted more work to non-tenure-track teachers, include adjuncts and graduate students, who are dirt cheap)

Yes, some are f the money also pays for aid to students who cannot afford it. But this is only true at schools without large endowments.

One thing we can do to better understand college costs is look outside the US. In Germany, for instance, public colleges are all free to students, and still manage to offer a very good education. But in most cases, they do not offer a campus experience like in the US. They don't have dorms or dining halls, students generally live near school in privately procured housing. All of the school's funding goes to professors, classrooms, and administration of education. It's a more efficient model that does not romanticize "the college experience" as we do in the US.

I'm not saying we should adopt that model for all schools, but it might be worth it to think about what we spend money on in higher education and why. What is our goal? For MC, UMC, and wealthy families, often the goal an "experience" more that education or training for a profession, and the image people have for that experience seems to get more expensive every year.

But in Germany not everyone can go to college. Your teacher decides for you at age 12. Guess who they pick? Hint, not the poor, minority or non-native German speakers. My kid is studying German in college and they were just discussing this in class and she called me horrified that in Germany she would have been tracked out of college in 7th grade or so and put on a trade school track. She is an amazing student but had late diagnosed LDs so we not so amazing until high school.

It's affecting the choices people make. When my kids were little I'd have told you we'd pay for an Ivy/top school, make it a priority. I just don't feel that way anymore. Public colleges offer a great education at a much lower price. I can see around me people are also just doing in-state for their kids, even other umc people with strong students. It has stopped being justifiable unless you get a lot of aid/help or are actually wealthy to the point 1 mil in college education is no big deal to your financial picture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between 1987 and 2017, the cost of attending a public four-year college rose more than 200%.

For the 2024-2025 school year, Tufts’ estimates of expenses for undergraduate programs reaches nearly $96,000, trumping Wellesley — which comes in at about $92,000.

For the year strting this fall, Yale University comes in at almost $91,000, preceding Boston University with around $90,000 for the academic year.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/business/college-tuition-new-england-ninety-thousand/index.html

That is so effed up.

This is how they are affording to give so many kids financial aid. I am not against aid don’t get me wrong - I had it in college but this is what is allowing them to do this. Parents paying full tuition are paying for financial aid. It must be why. There is no other explanation or increase except they are admitting more kids that need more aid.

+1
Except I am against it. It should not be on other families to provide the FA but that is how it works right now and absolutely has driven costs way up.

On top of that, at least at my kid’s school, the FA kids are rude and aggressive to the full pay kids and treat them as if they should pay for everything (for example, voting to make laundry free and covered by a fee that only full pay kids pay).

How are they rude and aggressive to the full-pay kids? How do they even know who is full-pay and who isn't?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between 1987 and 2017, the cost of attending a public four-year college rose more than 200%.

For the 2024-2025 school year, Tufts’ estimates of expenses for undergraduate programs reaches nearly $96,000, trumping Wellesley — which comes in at about $92,000.

For the year strting this fall, Yale University comes in at almost $91,000, preceding Boston University with around $90,000 for the academic year.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/27/business/college-tuition-new-england-ninety-thousand/index.html

That is so effed up.

This is how they are affording to give so many kids financial aid. I am not against aid don’t get me wrong - I had it in college but this is what is allowing them to do this. Parents paying full tuition are paying for financial aid. It must be why. There is no other explanation or increase except they are admitting more kids that need more aid.

+1
Except I am against it. It should not be on other families to provide the FA but that is how it works right now and absolutely has driven costs way up.

On top of that, at least at my kid’s school, the FA kids are rude and aggressive to the full pay kids and treat them as if they should pay for everything (for example, voting to make laundry free and covered by a fee that only full pay kids pay).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is heading to a two tier society. Vote Biden or it gets worse

College tuition increased greatly when the Obama/Biden administration got the government heavily involved in the student loan process.

Citation please.

Anonymous wrote:America is heading to a two tier society. Vote Biden or it gets worse

College tuition increased greatly when the Obama/Biden administration got the government heavily involved in the student loan process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it about matches inflation.

No. The college inflation rate was almost 2x the overall inflation rate. The overall was 115%. Compared to the 200% in the OP. You cannot seriously think the cost of American colleges is defensible? US policy created a knowledge economy where most jobs require a degree. Then gave govt subsidized loans to help people pay for it. Okay, fine. THEN states cut education spending especially for college during the Great Recession and most never returned those levels. So we have inelastic demand because 3 generations have been told you’ll be left behind without a degree and the colleges know public and private loans are available, so jack up tuition accordingly. Then there’s also perception. No college wants to cut tuition below its peers because people conflate cost with quality. A college doesn’t want to be perceived as the low rent version. But something will have to be done. As these inflation rates are not sustainable

The bolded is definitely true of most colleges, and it's also true that a lot of consumers of college education (and yes I chose the word consumer intentionally here) think that price and value are correlated.

But there is also a growing population of people who look for good value in schools, and there are schools seeking to serve those families. Some of it is hidden because some of these schools will still have high sticker prices, but are well known for giving considerable aid to students with great grades and scores, because they use the discount to lure higher quality students, which also helps them attract higher quality faculty. I suspect we'll see more of these schools, and more families looking for them, moving forward, because as you say, we cannot sustain the current trajectory.

I actually think one of the best things that could happen to colleges would be for us to do a collective reframe on non-college career paths. There is still so much resistance to this in American culture and it's bad for everyone because (1) not all kids belong in or are happy in college, (2) a huge number of jobs really do not benefit from a college degree and in some cases I think it's a detriment, and (3) there are plenty of careers with decent earning potential that don't require specialized academic knowledge, so the link between college and earnings does not have to be nearly as close as it currently is.

Not only does this situation hurt students and families who are wasting money on college when it's not a good fit and might be superfluous to their future, but it's also bad for all the kids who really belong in college and are pursuing fields where college is a true necessity, because it means they are at universities with a lot of kids who don't want or need to be there, undercutting one of the best things about college for truly academic people -- being surrounded by like minded students and professors for four or more years.

This is so true. In my line of work they love to see a bunch of letters behind your name, yet some of the wisest and most productive employees around me have never taken a college course and one I love to work with has a GED. Where our MBAs can't string a few sentences together in an email and are flummoxed by the simplest things.

Anonymous wrote:The problem is the international students driving the prices up. Why are Americans having to compete with so many international students?

Eh, this cuts both ways. International students are almost always full pay, and subsidize lower costs for American students. Especially true at state schools where international students can help make up the loss in state funding to keep instate tuition reasonably low.

European universities do it too, especially the graduate programs. Americans pay through the nose for those programs, many of which are free or close to free for students who are from there.