Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

+1 This is why there are now barbell families like mine. If I'm going to spend $400K for undergrad for each of my kids, then it's going to be a top 20-ish that has superior job placement. Otherwise my kids are going to state schools or privates with significant merit $.

I'm not reducing our lifestyle to send my kids to a tier 2 or 3 private instead of a great State school with equivalent or even better career placement.

Different strokes for different folks.

My parents made the opposite choice in your situation, maintaining a modest lifestyle in order to pay for for me and my sibling to go to University of Rochester, which is private and not tier 1. Great outcomes for both of us.

A generation later, we would not hesitate to make a similar choice for our kids if we were in the same situation.

I say this in part because it's very difficult to predict ROI in advance for any invidual kid, and in part because my sibling and I both levereged the benefits of our high-touch private university to the point where neither of us is situated in the middle of the barbell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

+1 This is why there are now barbell families like mine. If I'm going to spend $400K for undergrad for each of my kids, then it's going to be a top 20-ish that has superior job placement. Otherwise my kids are going to state schools or privates with significant merit $.

I'm not reducing our lifestyle to send my kids to a tier 2 or 3 private instead of a great State school with equivalent or even better career placement.

So, that’s a lot of pressure on your kids no? Given that T20 is a crapshoot?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are full pay and cost is not an issue. My DD will apply only to privates in that range and we will happily send her to Wake or Tulane or even Bucknell before we send her to a big state school. We are happy to pay for the smaller campus, smaller classes, advising and career services. Money is not an issue so it’s all about size and services. I believe that’s a common thought among my income bracket.

Well, someone is very impressed with themself. 😃

What makes you say that?

They're just sharing their perspective from their particular point of view, which is high income.

If they were low income and shared the opposite perspective, would you have posted to say they thought little of themself and had low self-esteem?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, UF, UVA , Georgetown, WashU students are about the same caliber.. could there be some who are T10 caliber ? Of course. But the vast majority aint…

No they are not. By test score its
WashU>Emory>Georgetown>UVa>>UF

The gap between WashU and Emory is tiny, statistically not a difference.
1490-1550/33-35
1470-1540/33-35

Georgetown is lower than UVa although it is TR and UVa is TO.
It should look like this
WashU=Emory>>UVa>Georgetown>>UF
UF is no where near Emory or WashU.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

+1 This is why there are now barbell families like mine. If I'm going to spend $400K for undergrad for each of my kids, then it's going to be a top 20-ish that has superior job placement. Otherwise my kids are going to state schools or privates with significant merit $.

I'm not reducing our lifestyle to send my kids to a tier 2 or 3 private instead of a great State school with equivalent or even better career placement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, UF, UVA , Georgetown, WashU students are about the same caliber.. could there be some who are T10 caliber ? Of course. But the vast majority aint…

No they are not. By test score its
WashU>Emory>Georgetown>UVa>>UF

Georgetown doesn’t allow test optional applications. The rest of the school is on your list do. If the rest of the schools required all their applicants to submit their scores, then Georgetown would almost certainly come out on top.

Highly doubt that, Georgetown had lower test scores pre test optional as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

This. 100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, UF, UVA , Georgetown, WashU students are about the same caliber.. could there be some who are T10 caliber ? Of course. But the vast majority aint…

No they are not. By test score its
WashU>Emory>Georgetown>UVa>>UF

Georgetown doesn’t allow test optional applications. The rest of the school is on your list do. If the rest of the schools required all their applicants to submit their scores, then Georgetown would almost certainly come out on top.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, UF, UVA , Georgetown, WashU students are about the same caliber.. could there be some who are T10 caliber ? Of course. But the vast majority aint…

No they are not. By test score its
WashU>Emory>Georgetown>UVa>>UF

Sigh. Georgetown is the only school in that list that does not allow super scoring. It also requires applicants to submit every single SAT or ACT score they have. You can’t fairly compare it’s SAT scores to the rest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are comfortably full pay, it's all about fit. And BC and Wake in particular are very solid schools and their graduates tend to do very well.

If money is an issue - like it is for the 95 percent of Americans who think 100 grand a year for college is ridiculous - it becomes a different calculation. And it's hard to justify Tulane, BC, or Wake at $90,000 over UMD and UVA at $38,000. None of those private schools are worth going into debt over a couple of very good in-state options.

+1 We technically have the money to send our three kids to these $95K/year schools, but we would really feel it. We would sacrifice to pay for HYPPSM, but these NESCACs and the like just aren't worth it to us. The career outcomes aren't the same.

I could see how it's worth it to families with more money or if they could quality for FA though. We have some very good in-State schools or our kids can chase merit.

I went to Wake Forest. My parents were happy to pay. But if money were an issue, I could have gone to UNC and done just fine. Not everyone is so lucky to live in a state with an excellent flagship.

Places like Wake Forest, Davidson, Richmond, etc. also used to cost $25k/year all in. The cost has increased dramatically relative to incomes.

Wake went up to $25k/year when the class of 2000 started and they started handing out laptops to everyone.

It was ~$20k/year for anyone before that.

There is no way my parents could have sent me there at today’s rates without aid and/or scholarships.

For our own child, $40k/year was top of budget.

Anonymous wrote:Won’t close down because some families will continue to pay big bucks for absolute mediocrity.

Is this anti-Catholic hate or just ignorance?

Anonymous wrote:We are full pay and cost is not an issue. My DD will apply only to privates in that range and we will happily send her to Wake or Tulane or even Bucknell before we send her to a big state school. We are happy to pay for the smaller campus, smaller classes, advising and career services. Money is not an issue so it’s all about size and services. I believe that’s a common thought among my income bracket.

Well, someone is very impressed with themself. 😃

Anonymous wrote:I always see these threads as opportunities for those who can’t afford these tuitions to make themselves feel better.

I always see these kinds of responses as evidence that the prosperity gospel is alive and well! Glory hallelujah! Sing it!

Anonymous wrote:There are Georgia parents who send their kids to Emory. Emory is not GA Tech which is not UGA. Not anyone’s place to judge if the family can afford it.

Due to Zell Miller Gatech and UGA are free for every Georgia parent as long as their DCs grads remain high. Paying 80k for Emory vs GT for free is a no brainer for UMC families its not really a fair comparison as opposed to a Rice vs UT or something similar.

Anonymous wrote:Emory, UF, UVA , Georgetown, WashU students are about the same caliber.. could there be some who are T10 caliber ? Of course. But the vast majority aint…

No they are not. By test score its
WashU>Emory>Georgetown>UVa>>UF