posted
I have a close friend who was accepted into Georgetown, Yale, and Harvard.
She will be going to Kennesaw State -- the small, local community college.
Why? Because she simply cannot afford to pay upwards of $32,000 per year for a six to eight year education.
I have another friend at MIT who scored a perfect 1600 on the SATs. She has just finished her first year there and has estimated that it will take her three years of working after college to work off the debts incurred <i>this</i> year.
Is this right? Is this really condusive to an educated populus? Is this appropriate in a society that values innovation and intellectualism?
Posts: 515 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never even considered applying to private or out-of-state colleges for just that reason - I couldn't afford to pay a middle-class salary every year, and didn't want to graduate miles deep in debt.
On the other hand, I think I got a quite decent education at the school I went, which was free for me. The others may be the "best" schools, but they aren't the best at everything and it is possible to get a good education at many schools.
Added: The Atlantic had an article on this phenomon - on whether education is actually 1500% better at the schools that charge 1500% more. Their conclusion (I have no way of verifying this) after their research was that it used to be, that before the GI Bill and the explosion of state colleges and before the tuition disparity got as high as it is now, it did used to be worth it. Now, by the measure of lifetime salaries and continuing education, it is not worth it nearly as much. Many schools now offer the kind of education that only the ivy leagues used to offer.
posted
Hrmm My sister is currently going to Texas Tech Law school for what I am sure is a fraction of the price it would cost to go to Harvard.
But Texas Tech beat out Harvard in the mock trial cases last year to take the top spot.... good thing Harvard had all that money to prepare their students.
Truthfully school is what you make of it, and most companies will recognize talent when they see it. If your friends are only worried about getting into high society jobs where everything must be cream of the crop or its crap, then sure go to Harvard, but if they want a good education, well thats really up to the person.
I am sure your friend knows this though Posts: 232 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My family could barely afford our rent every month, but I went to Columbia and only had $10K in student loans (which I'll have paid off by next year - yay). The other $110,000 was covered by grants and scholarships, which I found through painstaking research. I knew I couldn't pay for college, so I began doing research my freshman year of high school. There are more scholarships out there than ever before. I've never hear of someone who got a perfect score on his/her SATs and had to pay for college. HRE, I just don't understand why your friend doesn't have a scholarship. Either of them, for that matter.
Also, as someone who did attend an Ivy League college, I can tell you that it is possible to get the same or a similar education at a state school. I certainly don't consider myself better, smarter, or more educated that anyone else. However, I did get an excellent education and there are tremendous advantages from having gone to Columbia. First, I have a great network should I ever decide to go back to work. Second, it'll be easier for me to get into grad school, should I decide to go. Third, it gets me to the head of the line with job applications. I have never not gotten a job that I applied for. That might not be fair, but it's the way things are.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chaz, as a Texas Tech Alumni, I must admit I laughed when I heard the mock trial outcomes.
I agree with the sentiment that your education is what you make it. I don't believe I would have had a better education had I attended some school that would have put me in debt for decades instead of just years. In fact in addition to a very similar education, I would likely have enjoyed it much less. I suppose the name does continue to open doors for people pretty effectively, but I wonder how long that will continue.
Semi-related topic... How relevant do you all feel that grade inflation has become in the past decades? Is it a myth? Is it a fact? If it's a fact, is it speared towards certain colleges / majors / discipline?
posted
I'm starting college in the fall so this is something I've given a lot of thought to recently. I know, for me at least, I'm "only" paying 7,000 out of 38,000 and I know I wouldn't have gotten that sort of deal anywhere in Virginia or the rest of the DC area. Most of my friends going to the in-state schools are actually paying either more than me or only about 1 or 2K less. I very much agree with Chaz that it all depends on what you make of it, although I would urge your friend to contect the schools and explain the situation. They just might be lenient. I have one friend who did that and now has the equivalent of what is very nearly a full-scholarship .
Edit: And ditto everything Mrs. M said Posts: 1548 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember when I went to college (Bentley College) 20 years ago and tuition increases then were ranging around 10% a year. I always found that mind boggling how they could charge those kind of percentage increases when the cost of living annual increase was no where near that. Not to mention, the alumni donations and drives that put all kinds of money into the coffers and endowments.
Posts: 117 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm surprised that Georgetown, Yale, or Harvard didn't say they would meet demonstrated financial need. I just checked on Harvard's web page and they say they their financial aid program "is designed to meet 100% of a family's demonstrated need". However I'm pretty sure they use the expected family contribution from the FAFSA to determine that, and I think something is seriously wrong with how they calculate that. When I filled it out a few months ago my expected family contribution was around $15,000 when we can't even afford to replace our deck that's falling down. I guess they expected my parents to sell the house and move into a hotel room or something.
quote: I've never hear of someone who got a perfect score on his/her SATs and had to pay for college.
I got very nearly a perfect score (1580), and I've had a very hard time finding scholarships that I'm eligible for. Most of the ones around now are at least partly need based, and that automatically eliminates me. The only one that I applied for that I actually got involved some formula based on your SAT scores and your class rank. My parents are taking out an insane amount of loans to pay for college (though I plan to help out as much as I can), but with two older brothers (one in college, one graduated), a mortgage, and car payments, it's not going to be easy. It doesn't matter how good my grades and my scores are, on paper it doesn't look like I need the money, even though I do. There may be more scholarships out there than ever before, but they are by no means easy to get.
[/rant]
That said, I agree with the overall sentiment here. Ivy league educations aren't necessarily better than those of other colleges. However, they do have advantages (though you can find most of the same things at any large university these days).
Edit:
quote: However I'm pretty sure they use the expected family contribution from the FAFSA to determine that, and I think something is seriously wrong with how they calculate that.
Most of the scholarships also base financial need on the FAFSA nowadays.
Posts: 1547 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The cost of a college education is outrageous. Even the regional private I teach at is over 20K a year now. The question is whether it is "better" than the local community college or "not as good" as Northwestern (46K/yr.), which is nearby. I think the answer to both is no. We are different than the others as much as they are different than us, but that doesn't make one better than the other.
The difference in colleges and universities are a function of many things, the most important of which are the STUDENTS! What makes an Ivy League experience so special is that there are classrooms full of students who got 30+ ACT scores. The actual teaching that goes on is very often the same at every college, and in fact will likely be better at the local community college since that is their main focus; while the focus at the Ivy's is research.
Consider that at the larger more "prestigious" schools you will spend less and less time with the professors and more time with their graduate students. You are expected to do more work independently at these schools, which given the creditials of the students is perfectly reasonable.
The greatest benefit of the Ivy League schools or their main competitors is the environment. These places are intellectual nirvanas that one can soak up in so many ways. For example, you are likely to find stimulating world class speakers at least a couple of times a month. You will certainly not get that at your local or regional school, even if it a private. A student will likely have greater opportunities for travel and will certainly meet a more international group of students in the residence halls.
The bottom line is you will get the same "book education" at just about any undergraduate school, and will likely have better teachers at the schools at the "lower end" of the spectrum. The "high end" schools have the resources to provide you with more opportunities and have the benefit of a very intellectually stimulating student body. What every student and family has to decide is what you want to gain from your education. Then the student has to go and make the best of the opportunities presented to them. If you sit on your butt and do nothing, then you will get little out of your college experience. However, if you fully engage yourself then no matter where you go you will be richer for it and will most certainly be able to fulfill your life's goals.
Posts: 514 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
College financial aid offices use a very strict formula and include the responses your parents gave on the FAFSA. The great secret of paying for college is that it is better to be very poor and have no saving or assets that can be used to pay for your education. The money that you or your parents "saved for college" is deducted right off the top! It is better to save that money another way and "hide it" so that your award can be larger. This might seem unethical, but it is a reality. Any money that the college doen't have to give you to attend their school is a benefit for the college. It changes the "discount rate" for the school, which is the money discounted from tuition and contributed by the college's financial aid, and the Trustees of all colleges like to see low discount rates.
Most of the schools with big endowments don't worry abouyt this so much, which is why it can be easier (financially) to go to Harvard than it is to go to your local private or state school.
Posts: 514 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Consider that at the larger more "prestigious" schools you will spend less and less time with the professors and more time with their graduate students.
That is not necessarily true at all. It all depends on your major. In the larger majors, in any school, you will get more grad students teaching. For example, when Andrew was a philosophy grad student, he taught 100, 200, and 300 level classes and so did the other grad students. And this was at a public city university (CCNY). I only had 3 grad students in my entire time at Columbia - even for my core classes I had mostly professors and I only had professors in my major classes.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: That might not be fair, but it's the way things are.
*nod* It's been my observation that what you're really paying for at most Ivy League schools -- but not MIT, mind you -- is the network of employment contacts.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never even considered anything other than my local community college and then the University of Alabama. Mainly because of where I am in my life right now, I can't go away to school.
I can assure you unless they get a full ride, none of my kids will go to an Ivy League school, in fact I expect them to all attend state schools.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The emphasis in high school to get into the best, most expensive college is ridiculous. It doesn't take most freshman long to realize that its all a joke.
I'm a student at a small college of 200 students hosted by a larger state university. I'm receiving a wonderful education in liberal arts for $1,000 a semester after scholarships. My classes have on average 15 students and each is headed by a degree-credited professor. All classses incorporate a seminar-based learning style. This isn't the average university setting where a TA lectures to a room of 200+ students of varying academic achievement. Its a small, personal system where the professors will remember the paper I wrote two years before and I can participate in research projects if I'm interested.
Can I mention again that this is all for $2,000 a year and I didn't even bother applying for scholarships besides those that the school offered me?
Ivy League is great, but you'd be surprised what great programs you can find if you dig through the more obscure schools.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm pretty sure they use the expected family contribution from the FAFSA to determine that, and I think something is seriously wrong with how they calculate that. When I filled it out a few months ago it my expected family contribution was around $15,000 when we can't even afford to replace our deck that's falling down.
FAFSA is indeed rather... unforgiving.
Of the Ivies, the best school as far as financial aid is concerned is, by far, Princeton. Which is strange considering that the atmosphere of old money is much worse here than it is at Harvard and Yale. Anyway, Princeton doesn't offer loans -- they provide grants and scholarships to cover all student financial need. That turns into a big advantage for graduates who don't have to pay down huge debts.
quote:It's been my observation that what you're really paying for at most Ivy League schools -- but not MIT, mind you -- is the network of employment contacts.
It all depends. You certainly can get a network of contacts from an Ivy League school. You can also build a lot of skills. Students tend to focus on whichever of these is most important to their chosen path in life, which means that a lot of future professionals mostly network.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Harvard, I know, is working on pumping up their financial aid - at some point, I think, they want to fully cover everyone under a certain income level. But then, they've got the largest endowment, but far, in the nation. I happen to be at Georgetown right now, and their endowment is pretty stretched at the moment, which severely limits the amount of financial aid they can cover. I went to a state school for my undergrad, and came out debt free. I'm at Georgetown for grad school, and have had to take out student loans (not nearly full tuition, thankfully). However, I'm still in a better debt situation than most in my entering class. And, of seventeen people, I'm one of two from west of the Mississippi (the other went to the Air Force Academy) and the only one from a state school that's not in Chapel Hill or Charlottesville. There's clearly a glass ceiling of sorts operating - if you want to go to grad school, in most cases the undergrad school you choose puts you on the track to a grad program of a similar tier. Like MrsM said, you pay for the access the name gets you as much as anything else.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it depends on the school. I went to a top liberal arts college that cost a ton of money.
But I had access to my professors that public schools simply can not give. Classes of 4 people. Open door policies where you could stop in for help any time between 9am and 5pm, Monday-Thursday. Most professors gave their home phone numbers if you had a question. No TAs.
Everyone who wanted to do a summer internship for a non-profit got $3000 to support them through the summer. No school-sponsored event charged.
Any kind of health problem, mental or physical, you just went to health services and they took care of you. You could "rent" a car from school for $1/hour.
Plus you have a much more diverse range of people than a local community college. People from all over the U.S. and all over the world. Many more cultures, languages, etc.
I would agree that the big universities don't give you much better in the way of teaching, although probably a little.
But there is certainly a huge chunk of the college experience that you miss if you live in the area that you grew up in and go to school with people like the people you grew up with.
Posts: 289 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd certainly agree that the "book education" you get from an Ivy League institution isn't going to differ greatly from that you'd get from a small regional college, especially at the introductory levels.
I agree with johnsonweed, though, about the difference in the student bodies between the two. At my university, unmotivated, immature, and uneducated students were a tiny minority that were largely ignored by the rest of the population. When I took classes at the local state college, we were lucky if half of our class even showed up to the seminars, and the half that did were usually either hung over or on their way to being intoxicated again. It was a crappy learning environment, and had a lot to do with my decision to choose a more prestigious school.
Also, I like the old buildings. They're neat. Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Student loans, scholarships, and (for grad students) assistantships. They're out there.
I administer a small scholarship grant at the college where I teach. We have *always* had more scholarships than applicants. Your friends may find something similar. Good luck to them!
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also wanted to point out that research is not the polar opposite of teaching. Someone who does research on a subject and knows it very well, will be better able to teach it and better able to teach the "cutting edge" in the sciences.
Posts: 289 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Minerva: I also wanted to point out that research is not the polar opposite of teaching. Someone who does research on a subject and knows it very well, will be better able to teach it and better able to teach the "cutting edge" in the sciences.
MAY be better able to teach it.
I have had research professors who were excellent teachers, and some who were incredibly awful.
Research and teaching are different skill-sets, and having one is no guarantee of having the other.
Also, in regard to state colleges. Keep in mind that they vary greatly from state to state -- and often even within a state. Especially in those states with a multi-tier system.
UCLA is considerably cheaper than any Ivy (for state residents, at least), but the education and alumni connections are comparable.
The other UCs vary -- Berkley is ranked quite high, but UCSB is well known as a party school. Which is not to say that you cannot get a good education there (I have a number of friends who did). Just that you're likely to have a much higher percentage of slackers in your classes.
The CS system (second tier) has its share of slackers, but far more people who are trying to balance full-time jobs and/or families with their classes.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can go to a good school for very little --you just have to be willing to look long and hard for either outside scholarships or schools which offer good merit money. I structured my college search that way, and ended up with two full-ride offers, a few full-tuition offers, and some other colleges offering random scholarships. Add that to an outside scholarship I recieved... I'm attending a first-tier liberal arts school, and paying about $300 a semester TOTAL out of my own pocket (excluding travel costs, since I go home irregularly).
I'm not trying to brag--while I was a good student, I didn't do anything that different from thousands of other high school students. Except that I put a lot of effort into my college and scholarship search; probably more effort than I put into any one class during high school.
Just wanted to say that it's possible...
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a feeling that students with great numbers (GPA, class rank, standardized tests) will have a much better chance of getting merit-based full rides from second tier private schools than from first tier private and public schools. Look at the rankings in US World & News Report. I'm willing to bet that every private college ranked below 15 is willing to give lots of $$$$ to kids who will raise their average SAT score.
Places like Harvard don't need to give anyone any money to raise their average numbers. Places like Wake Forest do.
On a more personal note, my husband will be beginning seminary full time in the fall, so I just completed the FAFSA. I think our EFC was based on selling our house, our kidneys, and eating beans for three years.
posted
I don't know how to quote, but rivka, sure. Research does not make you a better teacher, necessarily. But people who just teach and don't do research can become out of touch. A little too "academic" and not practical enough.
Posts: 289 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Minerva: I don't know how to quote, but rivka, sure. Research does not make you a better teacher, necessarily. But people who just teach and don't do research can become out of touch. A little too "academic" and not practical enough.
See the little quote marks on my post? (top bar) Use those, and then edit if/as necessary.
I teach (HS) and don't do research. I don't consider myself "out of touch" -- but I do put a fair amount of effort into staying up to date.
However, being in research is no guarantee of staying up to date in anything other than the very narrow parameters of your research subject, neh?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Liz B: The vast majority of colleges don't give merit scholarships--certainly the ivy league schools don't. However, if you search around you can find hidden gems that do. Also, a number of the larger, lower-tier publics (and maybe some of the privates) have honors colleges that offer excellent scholarships, a chance to be around other high-quality students, and a lot of attention from professors. Cal State Fresno, for one, offers an awfully attractive package (perhaps only to students in-state, though).
You're right, though, that numbers mean a great deal when it comes to merit scholarships from colleges.
Outside scholarships tend to be a bit more "personal," meaning that they care more about recommendations, your essay, extracurricular activities, and/or interviews.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: However, being in research is no guarantee of staying up to date in anything other than the very narrow parameters of your research subject, neh?
My advisor and I are doing economic research this summer into something that is pretty narrow: foreign direct investment into developing nations. But the paper we write on the topic is probably going to be discussed in three different classes this coming year: International Economics, Developing Economies, and Comparative Economic Systems. Additionally, the data that we've purchased/created for our research is going to to be used not only in those classes, but also in the Econometrics and Quantitative Analysis classes. Some Poli Sci professors want to look at it too (it's some very interesting data, as data goes ).
So* while some research is so focused it's almost absurd, a lot of research that may seem quite narrow can be applied to a large number of subjects.
Plus there are the millions and millions of articles you have to read in order to have a proper understanding of the literature on the subject that's already out there...
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with Chaz back there, a college education should be what you make of it. I don't know about anyone else, but the planning for college I did in high school was worthless by my third semester. I've had to stop and start and mix up school with other life experiences to better understand what I need to learn- I'm not at all where I expected to be at 24 when I was 18. I think the bottom line is schools alone don't make people into what they're going to be.
Then again, I have a friend who graduated from Princeton this year as a history major and will move right into a job making 80K a year at some investment firm he interned at- a career fasttrack which he said is pretty much reserved for ivy leaguers.
Posts: 377 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Actually, I think that the vast majority of colleges DO offer some sort of merit-based aid. The Ivies (as I mentioned), don't, because they don't have to. They already attract the top students. Meanwhile, private schools that don't have quite the name recognition (like Tulane, for example), DO offer merit scholarships in order to create an incentive for the best and brightest to go to school there rather than in the northeast.
That said, you usually have to complete an extra application form to be considered for these scholarships -- and you have to be good.
So my point is simply that if you want a merit scholarship, you have to know where to apply. If you want an Ivy League school or nothing, you're going to have to pay for it. But there's certainly a range of options for the talented student -- you don't have to choose between going to your nearby "small, local community college" and burdening yourself with $100k in debt to go to a prestigious Ivy.
posted
Jhai - I would love to hear more about your research, particularly any parts that relate to Latin America. I'm actually doing research on a somewhat related, but much more specific topic (emigrant investment in Mexico).
I don't want to derail this thread too much, so maybe we could start another thread or you can email (in the profile).
*returns thread to regularly scheduled topic*
Posts: 959 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lara: I don't know about anyone else, but the planning for college I did in high school was worthless by my third semester.
All the planning I did in high school was out the window in my first semester of college. Everything I learned in high school accounting was covered in the first 4 chapters of my first accounting class. I switched majors pretty rapidly when I saw what accounting was really about. (I still suffer from narcolepsy to this day because of my brief exposure to accounting) Posts: 117 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not just the teachers, it's not just the other students, but it's a synergy between good teachers and good students that makes a good school.
My sister went to Harvard and took on that crushing debt load but made so much money that she easily paid it off within 10 years and then for the next 20 years reaped the benefits. Financially speaking it's a good choice.
Also as far as the college experience itself goes, going to better schools meant a huge difference to her. I did fine at my state school (Auburn) once I realized it was important to gravitate to the best program there (Electrical Engineering) rather than follow my own strongest interest (Computer Engineering). But my sister's college experience was far better. She had better teachers, more interesting projects and papers assigned, and smarter students to work with and around. I do think all those things make a huge difference. For instance, at Harvard she took a class in constitutional law (I believe) from Alan Dershowitz, and sat in the Supreme Court chambers to watch them hear a case about women in the draft, which they were studying and writing briefs on for class. Nothing beats, if you ask me, that sort of real world "this is where it's all happening" experience. I certainly think my sister got her (and my parents') money's worth out of going to Harvard Law School.
My conclusion is that it's very important to go to the very best school you can manage to get into, by whatever means you can. That loans are a bad idea for everything in the world except for 2 things, education and houses. For those two things loans make good financial sense.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Liz- Tulane DOES offer good merit scholarships--I think that school was on my short list. Case Western Reserve is another good school merit aid. Some schools will offer full ride or full tuition for National Merit Scholars--so the PSAT is something high school juniors should take very seriously.
I'll agree that most second/third tier privates do offer SOME sort of merit aid, but I don't think it's enough to warrent the cost of attending these schools. From what I remember of my research, there were a lot of schools offering scholarships in the range of 5K-10K a year, some offering half tuition, and only a few offering full tuition or full rides.
Now, I'm not saying that 5K or 10K is something to sneeze at, or that it may not be really helpful to some students who can only afford to pay some X amount. But as tution at most privates costs at least 25K a year, and the total package for R & B, fees, books, etc is at least 30K (if you're very lucky), 10K isn't all that much-you're still left with 20K a year that you're going to have to pay somehow. For someone in my situation, with no chance of FinAid, and very little parental support, 20K a year simply would not have been manageable.
Compared to that, community colleges are a great bargin: live at home, pay around $20 a unit... Maybe $300, $400 a semester, after books, fees, and parking sticker. If I hadn't gotten any good scholarships, that's the course I would have taken. Go to a community college, and then transfer to a good public. The CC near my home, DeAnza College, regularly sent around 10% of it's graduating class to Berkeley, and they had a higher GPA (comparing the senior and junior years) upon 4-year graduation than the students who'd been at Cal all four years. It doesn't surprise me: DeAnza capped lecture classes at 40 or 50 students, labs at 20, and English and math classes at 25. Berkeley, on the other hand, regularly has classes of over 500 people.
Of course, the California community college system is one of the best (if not THE best) in the nation. I've heard that one out of every four college students is a California community college student; I'm not sure how correct that statistic is, but considering the size of the CCs, and the sheer number of them in California, I wouldn't be too surprised...
(If you hadn't guessed, I think CCs can be excellent schools, if you're willing to be proactive about your education)
posted
Tatiana - Did your sister go to Harvard for law school only, or for undergrad as well? From your post, it sounds like she went there for law school only.
When it comes to business and law schools, I agree that you should go to the "best" school you can possibly afford-get as many loans you need to go to that school. And by "best" I mean the one that's considered the best by CEOs and law firms for the specific industry you're interested in. (There's a better correlation between the prestige of a business school and your wage upon graduation than there is between the academic quality of a B-school and your wage upon graduation.)
For instance, if you really, really, really want to be an investment banker (aren't interested in having a life, I guess ), then you should do whatever it takes to get into Columbia's B-school. Why? Because Coumbia is in NYC, and all the big investment banking firms are based in NYC. You'll have the best chance at getting a good summer internship that will lead to a 100K job upon graduation, which will allow you to pay off those loans.
The same thing applys to law schools: the really big law firms (i.e. the really well-paying ones) all recruit from the top ten law schools. The pay rise you'll see after attending one of those schools will let you quickly pay off your loans, and you'll have many more years until retirement with that same very high wage.
Graduate school is a little different- it really depends upon your field and your future career goals. Most graduate schools give the majority (if not all) of their students a tuition wavier, health care, and either a fellowship, or a TA/RA position for a stipend from 15K to 25K. So you're really being PAID to attend graduate school (cheaper for the schools than hiring a real professor, so don't feel bad for them).
If you don't get the tuition wavier and stipend, then you're going to be looking at a lot of debt (100K-200K)--and academic jobs don't pay that well. If you're in the humanities, then I wouldn't attend a school unless it was A) one of the top 20 schools and B) giving you that tuition wavier and stipend. Unless you attend one of the top 20 schools, your chances of finding an academic job (which is basically your only choice in the humanities) is very low, due to simple demand and supply. And the increase in pay you'll see, even should you get into a tenture-track job, isn't enough to warrent paying 200K. Even the best education in the world isn't worth being in debt for the rest of your life, IMHO.
If you're in the sciences, engineering, or some of the social sciences (like economics), and are willing to go corporate after graduation, then you can afford to go to lesser-known schools, or take out loans for some of costs (although I'd still be hesitant about taking out loans for ALL of the cost). Again, it's all about supply and demand: scientists are in demand in the corporate world, whereas English Ph.ds aren't.
(Sorry about the long lecture on education options after college, but I've researched it quite a bit...)
However, for a lot of jobs where a BACHELOR'S degree is required, it matters less about where you went to school, and more about what you know and the fact that you have a degree (doesn't even matter what kind). A degree from an Ivy league will probably help you land the first job, but after that what matters more is how good you are at whatever you do. And a good internship during the summer while at some second-tier college can help you overcome the prestige problem. If you want to go on to some type of education after you earn your Bachelor's, then, again, it matters less about the prestige of your college, and more about your grades, reccomendations, and GRE/LSAT/MCAT. And after you earn an MBA/Ph.D/J.d., nobody cares about your undergraduate school.
This is why I think it matters more to go to a school you can afford for undergraduate, and DO WELL there, than attend an Ivy League and graduate with a lot of debt. 100K loans, unless they're for business or law school, aren't worth the pain later.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think we're on the same page, Jhai -- we're both pointing out that there are a variety of options.
In giving parents and students advice, one of the things I've said most often is that college is what you make of it. (Which many others have said above.) You can get a lousy education anywhere, and a great education anywhere. I do know that there are several community college systems in the US that have good reputations, and those can be a wonderful place to get started. And as you've pointed out, Jhai, the price is right.
All the same, I echo the idea that the quality of student makes a difference, too. My anecdotal experience has certainly supported that. Snobby? Perhaps. It was certainly fun to be the standout big fish in the graduate classes I took at a state-system university, but my graduate-level classes at the nearby private university were much more stimulating -- due, I think, to being surrounded by a relatively small group of carefully selected grad students.
posted
Jhai, my sister went to University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for undergraduate school. Not Ivy League but still a substantially better school than our state schools here in Alabama. Again it was more expensive and harder for her to get in but it was worth it. The teachers were better, the courses offered were more varied and interesting, and the facilities and students were of a higher quality than at Auburn or Alabama. Also, I really don't know if she would have been accepted to Harvard out of any of our state schools here. I rather doubt she would have been.
I had really good scores when I was looking at schools, but didn't realize what was at stake at the time. If I had it to do over again, I would have done my very best to go somewhere like Stanford, Cal Tech, MIT, or Princeton. Somewhere that had world class professors, excellent funding, and was widely recognized for its excellence.
No doubt, your own choices can make a huge difference in how good of an education you get at whatever school you attend. It's true, too, that I had several outstanding classes and professors at Auburn, but the opportunities for engaging study and fascinating coursework will be much greater at a first tier school, and if you are going into a profession that pays well it can be more than worth the effort and money to go to the best school you possibly can.
I really wish someone had emphasized that to me when I was in high school. Instead I think they maybe even tried to downplay the differences so that I would be content with my lot. I wish I'd been smart enough not to accept that and to go all out for the best school possible.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Liz- I agree on the being on the same page thing. I want to point out, however, that grad school and undergraduate school are two very different things. In grad school, the students surrounding you DO make a huge difference, as does the prestige of your program, both for your education and for your future career prospects. In undergrad--not so much. Just getting the degree is much more important.
Tatiana --I can understand going to Chapel Hill, even as an out-of-state student: it only costs $29,000 a year. If you have parental support, and perhaps some financial aid, that's not too much to handle. It's a good option if your state schools aren't that hot.
However, Stanford costs $44,000 a year. That's 160 dollars a day, or $1,120 a week. Do you really think the education you're getting there is worth the cost? You're paying to be taught by a TA for 8 or 10 classes as well, not world-class professors. They might teach one class a semester to undergrads, and then spend the rest of their time doing research with their grad students. I have friends who go to Stanford, and I've been on the campus quite regularly (I grew up in the area), and really, it's not all it's cracked up to be. Certainly not worth $1000 a week. In the Bay Area there's a bit of a stereotyped belief that all of the hard-working, brillant students tend to go to Berkeley, and the rich ones go to Stanford. Of course, this is only for undergrad--Stanford's Business school is in the top three in the nation, and it's graduate programs tend to be in the top ten. I'd LOVE to go to Stanford for graduate school.
Also, I'm not saying that Stanford isn't for everyone-but only if you can afford it. Personally, I pay for all of my school bills myself. Even if my parents supported me, I wouldn't want to go to Stanford (unless they had loads of spare cash), mainly because I can't justify $1,100 a week.
Finally, while what school you attended does count for law, business, or grad school, there are far more important factors. For law school, the LSAT is a big deal, your personal statement is important, and GPA and reccomendations. Those all come before school attended in importance. For buisness school, your personal statement and your experience are the two key factors--most people don't go for an MBA until they've been in the workforce for awhile, and have experience. That way, from the school's POV, they're bringing knowledge from their industry to the incoming class, and they'll have outside-the-classroom knowledge upon which they can apply what they're learning inside the classroom. Where you went for undergrad matters very little, unless you did something either really good or really bad while there. For graduate school, the biggest factors are grades, classes taken, reccomendations, (sometimes) the GRE, and, most importantly, research in your field. Research is key, since that's the best way a department can tell if you'll finish a ph.d and write up a good dissertation, since they'll have most likely invested a fair amount of time and money into you.
If your sister was good enough to get into Harvard Law from Chapel Hill, then she was probably good enough to get into Harvard, period, no matter what school she attended.
I think there are very few undergraduate schools that will get you such a good job that it is worth graduating with 100K in debt, when you could have gone to a less prestigious school and graduated with 15K or 20K in debt, and the same book education.
But maybe we disagree. And that's ok. Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For what it's worth, I completely agree, Jhai. I'll bet a good rule of thumb is, when you know what you're looking for in a university or a specific program, do whatever it takes to find it.
But I'll bet whether they know it or not most high school students are deciding on colleges and programs based on criteria that may not apply to them at all in the long run. If I could give my 18-year old self advice, I would say pay as little as possible for those credits until you know exactly what you want to do with them.
Posts: 377 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll just skip to the end on this thread and throw in my 2 cents. I was told by a girl who attended Harvard that no one is kept out based on an inability to pay. They're Harvard, after all, they know how to work the system. Though it may be that her parents make too much for her to get aid, but won't emancipate her. That is something my sister's husband did to get financial aid.
What else? If you do reasonably well at a second tier university- I'm thinking of BYU and U of UT here- you can go on to an Ivy League grad school. I've known tons of people who did so.
Anway, I'm sorry that for whatever reason your friend has sold herself short. I felt I did that by going to U of U. It was the path of least resistance. Some people can be really bright and lack ambition. And I'm testament to the fact that lack of ambition does not guarantee one will be a virtuous person. Just on the general topic of ambition. Some people, especially girls, think ambition makes you bad.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a sort of extreme example that illustrates what I'm saying, I would suggest that it's perfectly possible to get a fantastic education on your own, paying no tuition whatsoever, and living at home. A good library, the internet, and a liberal account at Amazon, along with discipline and personal commitment can give you an outstanding education for a tiny fraction of what even local community colleges charge. Yet why is that not a popular choice? Probably because of the same factors that make a first class school so much more conducive to getting a great education than mid- and lower-level schools are.
Sure you can do it on your own, but will you?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A good education can be bought for bargain-basement prices.
A wise man once said to me (paraphrasing), "you can learn anything you need to know and become an expert on it in 6 months. All that's required is to buy the the relevant books and spend some time reading."
Posts: 551 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Also, it is extremely rare that method of education will lead to a thorough understanding, because a lot of what is important to know about a field comes out in the interactions with active members of the field.
And I'd expand it to include access to the appropriate academic journals, though I hope one doesn't have much else to do, some fields produce more content than one could hope to digest in the same period of time (hence increasing sub-specialization).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think everything should be taught the way I'm being taught in my online animation school. 18 months of lectures, seminars, and assignments, all with lots of critiques and advice from your personal industry professional. And it's location-independent and cheap. I'd have seriously considered skipping the whole university thing if something like this had been available, and just read some liberal arts-type books instead. Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with getting an education from a library (and I totally believe it's possible for those who are dedicated enough. I'm not. ) is that your degree - the actual piece of paper - is very important in today's world. A lot of jobs won't even consider you if you don't have that piece of paper, whatever you may actually know. Of course there are exceptions to this rule - when aren't there? - but that's the general case for the "general" business world. (IT is a tad different, for instance - often all you need to do is pass certification tests.)
Why else would it cost a pittance to audit a class, but so much to take it for credit? Being able to signal your knowledge and work ethic to potential employers by a high grade is pretty important. And a full degree shows commitment over the long haul.
Tatiana - I just want to point out that some of the best teachers in the world can be at those second and third tier colleges. Heck, my favorite professor - the one that taught me what my field was really about - was a community college professor. Often you'll actually get *better* professors at the lower prestige colleges than at big, famous universities, because publishing isn't the focus of these professors: being good teachers is what they strive for. (Not implying that researchers can't be good teachers, but when it's "publish or perish," it's understandable if they put undergraduates second and research first.)
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Anway, I'm sorry that for whatever reason your friend has sold herself short.
You know, that statement bothers me.
I think looking at your options, and deciding on one based on financial reasons is not "selling yourself short." It may well be that the friend has made a good, solid decision after weighing all options and decided on what is best for her. Personally, I think a reluctance to go deeply in debt is a sign of maturity.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: In grad school, the students surrounding you DO make a huge difference, as does the prestige of your program, both for your education and for your future career prospects. In undergrad--not so much. Just getting the degree is much more important.
Important for what?
I agree that the degree is necessary for a job, but what about for the quality of your education? Again, anecdotal (and in a different state), but I had the same experience as a high school student/ undergrad. I took undergrad classes at both a state-system university and a much more selective private university. There was no comparison in the quality of the classes -- due to the level of interesting and intelligent participation from my fellow students, not the professors. (The professors were for the most part comparable.) If the purpose of your undergrad education is to get a job (or to get into grad school), then it doesn't matter as much. If the purpose is to take stimulating classes, then it becomes somewhat more important. Not the end-all and be-all -- but something to consider.
I do want to clarify that I'm not drawing a distinction between private and public institutions, but between more and less selective institutions.
On the other hand, if an honors college is available in a less selective institution, it might make a difference in classroom discussion. I did take an honors level class at the less-selective state school and it was certainly better than the others I took. (Or maybe it was just that really cute guy in my research group. Hard to tell. )
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
