Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven sisters schools

Sad but true

Especially the non-Wellesley/Barnard ones. Smith, MoHo, and Bryan Mawr are nothing like the used to be.

Disagree. They are great places to be an interested, curious student.

No one said they’re garbage but instead that they have dimmed which is absolutely true for obvious reasons.

Since the top universities are open to women and have been for decades now, the caliber of student going to a seven sisters school is just lower than it used to be since top students have more options. Most Bryan Mawr students now wouldn’t have gotten in 50 years ago. The women who would have gotten in then, go to Penn now.

Anonymous wrote:Returning to the original question, I would not spend out of state tuition to send my kids for undergraduate studies at one of University of California schools (such as Berkeley or UCLA) due to terrible budget concerns and overcrowding that cause kids to take 6 years to graduate, on average.

That’s 6 yrs of instate tuition including room and board, rivaling OOS price.

Returning to the original question, I would not spend out of state tuition to send my kids for undergraduate studies at one of University of California schools (such as Berkeley or UCLA) due to terrible budget concerns and overcrowding that cause kids to take 6 years to graduate, on average.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a lot of talk about schools that are on the come up. What are some schools that are honestly past their prime? Don’t use this thread to bash on your least favorite school. What schools used to be great but are now living mostly on old prestige?

Just about every thread on this forum is about bashing schools that are rival institutions or that did not admit posters' kids. You are delusional.

This. I can always tell who's bitter about rejections (theirs or their kids') when they bash schools for no reason.

This site would get no traffic without it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a lot of talk about schools that are on the come up. What are some schools that are honestly past their prime? Don’t use this thread to bash on your least favorite school. What schools used to be great but are now living mostly on old prestige?

Just about every thread on this forum is about bashing schools that are rival institutions or that did not admit posters' kids. You are delusional.

This. I can always tell who's bitter about rejections (theirs or their kids') when they bash schools for no reason.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seven sisters schools

Sad but true

Especially the non-Wellesley/Barnard ones. Smith, MoHo, and Bryan Mawr are nothing like the used to be.

Disagree. They are great places to be an interested, curious student.

No one said they’re garbage but instead that they have dimmed which is absolutely true for obvious reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All LACs below the top 20

Based on what, exactly?

Yeah didn’t think so.

Anonymous wrote:I think every private school outside the top 30 Research unis and top 10 LAC's are in a bit of trouble due to covid. If you can't get into one of these then parents would want their kids to go to their instate flagship.

Hm. So, say, the University of Richmond with its billions of endowment is in trouble? Like they’re going to close their doors? Hard to understand why people get on here and type straight-up stupid things. Honestly. I’ll wait you you hem and haw and backpedal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is charging 80K? I remember being shocked at 72K two years ago!!

Almost all the SLACs. GO to the "cost of attending" page and add everything up. My Slac is now $83K a year. This doesn't pertain to instate schools.

At the tippy top privates, only about half of the kids are paying sticker price.

This. It's a high-cost, high-discount model that's been in place for years.

The people it screws is those who make $250,000 so would never get FA but can’t afford to pay 80k a year for school. Those people are the ones whose kids go to UMD.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is charging 80K? I remember being shocked at 72K two years ago!!

Almost all the SLACs. GO to the "cost of attending" page and add everything up. My Slac is now $83K a year. This doesn't pertain to instate schools.

At the tippy top privates, only about half of the kids are paying sticker price.

This. It's a high-cost, high-discount model that's been in place for years.

Pomona.

Not worth $70,000+ per year, $280,000 for 4 yrs - for a mere liberal arts degree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is charging 80K? I remember being shocked at 72K two years ago!!

Vassar is 75k next year (or was pre-covid?)

Columbia and Barnard were 78 this year

Columbia will be $84202 for 2020-2021.

I think every private school outside the top 30 Research unis and top 10 LAC's are in a bit of trouble due to covid. If you can't get into one of these then parents would want their kids to go to their instate flagship.

Anonymous wrote:Harvey Mudd = over $80K. And don't give me the "well the 'average' students pays ___ line If your EFC is high, you are going to pay full freight, as we did". "https://www.hmc.edu/admission/afford/cost-of-attendance/

The average award (for those who receive Fa) is 43k. If your efc is beyond Fa limits of course this doesn’t apply.

Anonymous wrote:All LACs below the top 20

Based on what, exactly?