engelhardtlm1

As a 2005 GCC grad who is currently on the academic job market (and considering takign advantage of GCC's preference for grads), my thoughts:

(1) Grove City does operate debt-free (or at least with VERY low debt), this eliminates interest costs which can be substantial.
(2) Grove City's faculty is hired to teach, and teaching loads tend to be relatively heavy. (4 classes a semester for full time faculty is not unusual). If you have faculty that teach 4 classes a semester rather than 3, you can have 33% lower faculty costs and still pay the same salaries since you don't have to hire as many faculty members.
(3) How they make it worthwhile for faculty: research expectations for GCC faculty tend to be low. Many still do research, but it isn't considered to be particularly important compared to teaching quality. Also, faculty have advisees (how that is handled is determined by each department for their own majors), but have no regular administrative duties. (The way one faculty member described it - most colleges evaluate professors by "community service" - by which they mean serving on committees. At GCC, faculty are evaluated on community service - by which they mean actual service to the community - in the form of volunteering for your church and such.)
(4) Re: tenure. GCC still does not offer tenure, and has won court cases against terminated faculty suggesting that there is "de facto tenure". That said, GCC tends to view people involved with it as a "family" and terminates faculty very rarely.
(5) Student-faculty ratios are terribly misleading. It is possible for a department to have a student-faculty ratio that is comparatively low, but still have larger class sizes. Why? Because half the faculty have endowed research chairs and don't teach. At Grove City, the faculty is hired to teach, and spends its time teaching. If you look at the class size distribution, you'll find what I found to be true in my experience. The grand majority of classes have 20-40 students. Almost no classes have fewer than 20 (I had a couple that did - but that's because I was in a small major so major-specific classes were very small), and a few classes are larger by design. (For example, the mandatory fitness and wellness class is enormous - but then gets broken into smaller groups.) My guess is that independent studies don't get counted in the statistics, as they are pretty easy to come by at GCC and, effectively, have a class size of 1. (I think I had at least 2 semesters where I did independent studies.)
(6) GCC's students are generally QUITE conservative culturally, religiously, and politically. So much so that when the college pastor used "crap" in a sermon in a Sunday night Vespers service, his office got numerous complaints about the language being inappropriate. This conservatism from the students means that, despite the broad trends in the PCUSA, GCC has managed to stay one of the most conservative campuses in the country.
(7) GCC is not particularly diverse - but this doesn't seem to be by design. In 2004 (I think), Dr. Thompson was hired as VP of Student Life and Learning. He's African-American, and was specifically given the mission of making the student body more diverse while maintaining the high academic standard at GCC. What this translates to: get the high-quality minority students to apply to GCC. How successful he's been, I don't know.
(8) GCC claims that, on average, federal strings cost more than the money that comes with them. So, "no federal strings and no federal money" is actually a net financial gain. Whether this is true, I'm not sure. But, the fact that GCC's tuition is so low - and has been low for a long time - suggests that they're probably right.
(9) Student services may be "skimped on" to some degree. The cafeteria food is edible, but not great (or at least it was when I was there). Dorms are far from luxurious (though the new apartments are quite nice - and students pay a premium to live there if I recall correctly). Most organizations are funded mostly by member dues.
(10) Financial Aid from GCC is very slim. This comes from the fact that they refuse to redistribute funds - at least on a large scale. So, they don't overcharge the less intelligent to subsidize the more intelligent. Since starting tuition is the "preFA price", it makes sense that GCC would have lower tuition. Also, they avoid the cost of having to figure out who gets aid and who doesn't. This saves a bit on administrative costs.
(11) As far as Grove City the town, I liked it. It's a very safe, quiet place to live. Any complaints students have are generally about there being too little to do rather than about rising drug trafficking. I went on late night walks on a regular basis, and never felt unsafe - usually because there was literally no one else on the streets.

As a last point, I'm going to try to answer Whistle Pig's question: why doesn't GCC share its secret?

The answer is simple. It doesn't share its secret, because there is no secret to share. Rather, you just have to do simple things that make sense. Avoid debt. Minimize faculty expenses by paying faculty to teach rather than research or serve on committees. Don't give tenure so you can ditch the lousy teachers if you have to. Avoid some administrative costs by not redistributing tuition money in the form of "financial aid". Locate your college in a town where the costs of living and property aren't particularly high. (This lets you get property to build on for cheap, and also lets you pay your faculty less since their living expenses are relatively low.) Don't accept federal money because the strings attached are too expensive. Focus on getting the big donors to give a lot rather than trying to get everyone to get a little (fundraising is expensive after all) - though that last point is changing, since many rankings now include the percentage of alumni that give and GCC cares about its rank.

Of course, it's obvious why colleges don't do these things (as you note). Some are impossible (it's not like Wheaton can just pick up and move to the middle of nowhere), and others have significant institutional barriers. But, it's not fair to act as if GCC is somehow being secretive about how they keep costs down. Sure, they're not publicizing it (publicity is expensive, after all!), but it's not like they're trying to hide it. Their policies are pretty much an open book for anyone who cares to ask - it just so happens that no one wants to.

Whistle Pig

It would be nice ...and simple...if the scenario was as obvious as you think it to be.

Undoubtedly you are touching on some of the keys in your analysis. Drastically reduced faculty costs in that the college cannot compete for top scholars or teachers. And with little or no financial aid available, 2 major EXPENSE side items are drastically reduced.

The no-debt thing is common among LACs. Most of the quality have the same strategy re: debt. This dog doesn't hunt.

The service item is nice to know, and of no consequence.

GCC is light years behind in its fund-raising, only recently engaging in a college-wide campaign. For many years, GCC had literally no development staff. They are playing catch-up here, but as has been noted, beyond building costs, they are required NOT to engage in endowment building. Thus another strike against their revenue generating capacity.

The Fed Aid idea that it requires greater expenditure to administer than it generates in revenue is nothing short of laughable, I'm afraid. Were that so, most would be following suit. None are.

So, one can only conclude, no matter the allegations that GCC's very high student-fac ratio does not play out ...because faculty have a rather high teaching load (it's not outrageously high)...cannot be true.

In the end, GCC has literally no choice but to hire faculty who are willing to teach more students in more classes absent the benefit and security of tenure, and obviously for substantially lower pay and benefits than their colleagues. Furthermore, and this is a key issue, these same faculty must then personally advise 2 or 3 times as many students as their peers (and most will tell you quality advising, one of the things allegedly key to places like GCC SHOULD consume 20-30% of a faculty member's time.)

So it's not hard to figure that while anecdotes of pleasant personal experiences are comforting and reassuring, and speculation of how GCC gets away with it while still maintaining a quality experience for the masses makes for interesting reading ...in the end of this, that's all we know. Anecdotes and speculation.

So the question remains. How? And why not come open and clean about that how, as knowing that would affirm 1 of 3 things, either of which will serve God's world ...

1. Share with the world the magic model that other institutions might emulate and serve their students (and parents footing the enormous bills) more efficiently

2. Expose those institutions who proclaim that they must charge 2 or 3 times the GCC tuition to provide a quality educaton

3. Come clean with GCC families and prospects that the GCC model and experience is indeed different (and potentially "less") and worth precisely what it costs.

In all 3, wouldn't it be the Christian thing to do?

You see, in the end this boils down to a couple of simple, critically important things:

* Knowing and getting what a family pays for (value) at GC and elsewhere,and

* Potentially grossly overpaying for that which they are purchasing, or consuming an educational experience from the collegiate bargain basement.

But hold not your breath that anyone duly informed will offer up the answers. So much for brotherly love.

btw, failed to note your very important point relative to this discussion ...hiring its own for faculty slots. While there are arguments for doing so, most are not positive or powerful, imo. Some will argue that process enhances keeping on the "straight and narrow" enlisting those who've been indoctrinated in the GCC "way." Imo, the negatives of this far outweigh the positives, nurturing at least part of the idea, narrowness. I believe Believing can and will stand on its own.

lukesfan

Whistle Pig has been dominating this discussion for months, with a clearly defined agenda to bash GCC. Too bad, and a poor witness to the world about brotherly love among Christians of different denominations. Bitter with the Presbyterian Church USA, he seems to not realize that conservative Presbyterians devoted to following Christ and exist to do His work in the world, just as do the Baptists at his favorite school.

Wheaton and GCC are both excellent schools, but they do come at the faith from different angles and it shows up in how they operate, who they hire, what they expect of students and staff, and how they measure success.

My eldest daughter graduated from George Fox University (a Quaker school here in Oregon), my son is half way through a mechanical engineering degree at Grove City College (and plays football... Wolverines!), children of friends of ours have attended Franciscan University at Stubenville OH, at Hillsdale, and at Calvin College. My youngest daughter is likely to attend Thomas Aquinas College.

Each of these schools looks at the faith in a different way. Catholics, Baptists, Presbyterians, and the vaguely "Protestants" can look to Pope or Preacher or Judeo-Christian values as the sure guide. Whistle Pig's devotion to Graham is admirable and reflective of Wheaton. It doesn't make Wheaton particularly diverse, though. Because Baptists have a minimalist form of the faith, there is a tendency to call anyone from more sacramental traditions "narrow" if they hold true to what they believe. Consider his (voluminous) writings in that light.

The fact that people of so many branches of the Christian faith, from Catholic to vaguely protestant, go to GCC creates a very strong and very real intellectual diversity on campus. It is equivalent to what I saw at George Fox University (where I serve on an industry advisory council for the engineering department, btw), and has more heft than what I've seen from Wheaton in various writings from that school. But it does have a different, more militant, more... Reformed/Calvinist point to it than the peaceful/laid back Quakers of the left coast or the evangelistic crusaders of Wheaton. That there is more biological diversity at Wheaton is undoubted; that there is more intellectual diversity is questionable. The presence of a substantial body of Catholics on campus alone is a strong point in GCC's favor in this regard.

The education my son is receiving as a mechanical engineer is far better than what I got at the University of Washington lo these many years ago; this is a good school, and the professors in engineering at least know their business. The effort he has to put out to keep up with his fellow students is remarkable (how many of us outlined in writing upcoming chapters in our physics book so that we could keep up?), and reminds me of similar challenges during my master's program in mechanical engineering at Stanford University. Combining that with the opportunity to play NCAA DivIII football (for a really committed Christian coach) and other campus activities (like their winning human powered vehicle effort) means an education in time management, fitness, focus, and purpose along with the expected professional prep.

Socially my wife and I (a traditional Catholic and Presbyterian, respectively) have been delighted with the friends he's made at GCC, and the various social events he has participated in. He wears a suit far more often in PA than in OR, but that is probably good for him to experience... for a while. In comparison to the wetlands of Oregon the winter is very cold and snowy.

Compared to most colleges (and I suspect, only from reading about it, compared to Wheaton) GCC can be something of a boot camp. Students who graduate from GCC are going to burst onto the world prepared to work very hard and having been challenged by a very sharp set of peers and faculty. It can be overwhelming, and the sheer discipline and effort will dissuade many, and cause cynics (like Whistle Pig) to doubt. But for the right student, it is an excellent school.

Whistle Pig

lukesfan, a few thoughts.

You may not like some of the messages, but no need to mudsling. There's nothing personal here. But your tactic seems all to common these days. Hate the message, can't respond, shoot the messenger. Attempt to somehow disparage the person. Do what you will. You already have. I have to tell you, our pastor would chuckle at how you think you understand me. He'd probably also chuckle at your notion of "conservative Presbyterian" , at least in the shriveling Louisville-bound USA branch. Now, Associate, PCA, EPC ...those are dramatically different than the mainstream that GCC claims as its heritage. As do many. But to then suggest, perhaps beyond [bold]The Laymen[/bold] subscribers, that PC USA is "conservative". That's pretty sad. There is a very distinctive reason why the USA is on the fast track to fossilization, millions departing the church ...many for those other Presbyterian groups. Most of which by the way, might choose to debate if your G.Fox Quakerism is even Christianity. but that's for another day. You may want to bone up on your theology anyway. No doubt many/most GCC theologians would agree. Lost souls in Oregon.

But back to the point. I'm a realist and have found, short of the biblical manna or JC's feeding the 5K, here in our world, we get what we pay for. And not you, nor anyone else has been able to definitively tell readers how GCC keeps its tuition low absent of sorely diminishing quality.

Here's what we know for sure:

1. GCC has excellent, nearly exclusively white students, most from in and around W.PA. They are drawn from a sizeable pool of students who inversely reflect those admitted.

2. GCC has a very high student faculty ratio AND average class size.

3. Similarly, GCC faculty have a very high teaching load and student advising load. They must. Simply do the math.

4. While many proclaim them to be fair teachers, minimal researchers, and definitely believers, they are without any doubt marginal scholars in general. They are paid better than a decade ago, now have a modest, poor retirement plan but that is a vast improvement on history, in wich GCC profs and admin had NO retirement plan as recently as the early '80s. They still have no benefit of tenure, no matter whether WE think that is good or otherwise. Faculty think it's very good, especially if they find the truth to be something that might be controversial to status quo.

5. Charter of the founders proclaims little or no endowment fund-raising and investment. It's not allowed and GCC history reveals the college has been true to that. Not raising funds professionally until recent years.

But what most claim, and rightly so, is that GCC puts out very fine, good grads. What else would be expected??? They start out with the very same.

So, my call is NOT to demean the GCC model, but rather to ask what it is. And I'd LOVE to get an answer from someone, anyone who can answer it honestly, candidly, openly.

But none do. So that lack of transparency suggests there are things that GCC leaders do not what the public to know, to understand, to realize. So be it. That is their privilege.

In which case, I'll stick with the message that that really seems to fly in the face of Christian love, brotherhood, sharing.

And I'll stick with the message that no thinking person ought to simply buy the pablum that many on this thread offer up for how it is GCC does it all on the cheap ...without really being cheap.

You see, there is no magic here. Only an opaque desire to keep the consumer in the dark and buying the company line. Sadly, luke sees asking hard questions that chronically remain unanswered by GCC as cynicism. Think about it. Christ loved transparency, he MULTIMPLIED goodness rather than hoarding it, he told us to drink from the fountain where we'd never go thirsty. It does not appear that GCC practices any of these, upon close analysis.

btw, often the real reason the lukes of the world don't ask any really hard questions? They cannot afford to know the truth. As Paul Newman's character was admonished, "you gotta get your mind right, Lukesfan." But you may not really want to know that GCC appears to be the "computer model" ...good info in, good results out. Neither of which says much about what goes on in process, or why it costs ...so little. If it smells cheap, it just might be.

Creekland

GCC and Wheaton are both colleges we are considering for our younguns (oldest starts college in '10) so I am pleased to see this thread and read the different responses even if a bit of it is a couple years old.

Just to be clear, Whistle Pig, are you claiming that the education at GCC must be inferior simply due to the financial and class size stats or is it because of what the graduates are unable to do (get into grad school, perform adequately on the job, GET jobs, etc)?

I'll be honest and say this is the first negative 'stuff' I've ever seen about GCC (and I've been looking). I've talked with parents, current students, and comments on other web sites and all have highly praised the school. We have not yet visited it, but plan to in the fall (along with Wheaton and possibly Geneva). I would like to hear anything good or bad - just to have the ideas to ponder as we visit and eventually choose the best fit.

However, if your concern is just the finances, etc, might I add my two cents worth to mention the private high school I attended for a year in Florida was populated with some of the best teachers I ever had - in spite of their low pay. Their reason for accepting the lower pay was BECAUSE they wanted better students - and all that came with them. This was not a religious school, but I could see teaching at a school where the religious values matched mine being an even better incentive to be willing to work for less than one could get elsewhere. You can indeed get superb teachers with the right conditions.

I also will be honest and say I've been getting quite the education about Christian colleges in general as both hubby and my backgrounds are with a major public university. Up till this year we knew next to nothing about any Christian college. However, due to the major my oldest wants... he needs a Christian school. We'd like for him to get the best education possible... at a conservative (but not legalistic) school. We are not Calvinists, but have yet to see where that would be a problem at GCC... or other Presbyterian schools we are considering.

Whistle Pig

No I'm not. To the contrary, I noted specifically that GCC has one undisputable, stellar asset. Students. Bright white kids. And they are that "way" when then enroll, and it's a very reasonable proposition to think they'd be equally so upon graduation. Yes?

What I'm seeking, hoping for is answer to a very simple question of how GCC manages to allegedly do more (or even equal) with less (50-70% less than other privates. And specifically, how does GCC allegedly offer a comparable "good, quality" Christian education than WC? GCC tuition = $12K+ WC tuition = $25K+ Plus, Wheaton has a much greater endowment ...and always will have if GCC remains true to its chartered mandates of minimal endowments ...

So, to take the GCC off the defense and allow them some offense:

What in the world is WC doing with all its surplus cash, year after year after year.

Who's getting the real value?

They are vastly different models. What are the +'s and -'s of each?

But comparing them as 2 peas in a pod? All that illustrates is the lack of understanding of he/she who attempts to put these 2 institutions in the same boat. The ONLY similarities are 2 ...

1. Bright students @ both altho they'd look nothing like each other. WC's, despite its doubled price tag is significantly more selective. Why would that be if they are otherwise the same? Why would students and parents choose to pay double in this comparison, or triple in others?

2. They both proclaim the Gospel of Christ as central to their mission.

Claim what you must, but these are as different as night and day. And not a soul has been able to say why, beyond personal anecdotes affirming, "I loved [take your pick]" or "I had great Christian pals @ ..." or "My teachers were terrific @ ..." or "Tuition is low because they have no debt @ ..."

But none has been able to explain definitively how one college can perform the service at half or less the cost of the other. Even @ GCC, economics profs would say, absent of something very different, "ain't no free lunch." Or @ WC the economists might in a flash of candor, confess "your parents are paying double what they should be, suckers!"

In the end, this becomes the classic illustration of the complexity of valuing one's purchase and experiences. Like saying a Chevy Cobalt and a BMW are equal purchases. They aren't. And neither are GCC and WC, are they. Can't be.

Creekland

Interesting that you should make this comparison. The one negative that we have heard about Wheaton to date is that it is getting very 'elite' in attitude - to the point of being snobbish, upper class, and similar to how some view Ivy league schools (one only need to read other comments on this forum - outside the Christian branch - to see similar feelings from the secular world).

Quite honestly, as a Christian, we've spent years teaching our boys that all are created equal in Christ whether rich or poor, academically talented or not, etc., etc., etc. While I want my sons to have a decent post high school education, I most certainly do not want to turn them into 'elite snobs.' I'd much rather send mine to a State University than an Ivy League if they went secular. The "I'm better than you because _____" sounds way too Pharisaical to me and a hard (wrong) attitude to later combat in ones personal life.

We're Ford people - and I highly like Tony Campolo's spiel, "Should a Christian own a BMW?" My Ford can get me to any place I want to go and uses the same roads a BMW has to use - yet costs considerably less both to buy and to repair/upkeep. It may indeed have less bells and whistles. I've yet to need any of those bells and whistles. The same amount of money I could have spent on the bells and whistles can better be used elsewhere - especially in this economy.

I will agree that the diversity in students sounds much better at Wheaton, but so far, that sounds like the only 'plus' in your posts - with the rest concentrated on 'you get what you pay for' even though you, yourself, admit that the graduates appear to do well at GCC. The 'good in, good out' reasoning you use could just as easily apply to Wheaton.

You also might consider that there are other options for a lower cost. Lower pay and benefits is most likely one (as you insist). Might I propose that it also costs less all around to have a college in small town Western PA compared to Chicago outskirts? Again from our experience... hubby is a Civil Engineer - PE - with his own business. We used to live/work in a major city (5 years post college - got his PE there), but then opted to move to semi-rural PA. We made considerably more $$ in the city, but the cost of living and the country perks we enjoy here make us absolutely love our home area (been here 13 years). Does this 'lesser' income make hubby a 'lesser' engineer? Hardly. Can we live in this area with less income at standards we like? Absolutely. Are we even remotely tempted to move back to a city with its bells and whistles? Never. Not even when headhunters call with seemingly higher salaries...

As I stated in other posts, we have not yet visited either GCC nor Wheaton. We probably will still visit both this fall as I hate to cross one school off a list simply due to one forum even if it substantiates that which I've heard elsewhere. We'll just keep it in mind during our visit.

I do appreciate your candor with regards to both schools.

Our son will be the one making the final decision on where he wants to spend his 4 years getting a Community/Economic/Global Development type of major (name changes based on the school it's offered at). With this major he plans to go to third world countries and help them develop sustainable incomes so they no longer need payouts and/or welfare. He wants to do this with a Christian slant - hence needing a Christian college of some sort. The one we've been to that we like the best so far is Covenant College in GA. It has even less bells and whistles than I'm expecting at GCC since it's a VERY small school (though with a good head of this particular department). It's so small no one here has even responded with thoughts about it and it's not listed on the list of colleges with CC when one wants to search - even though it ranks 4th in the South for Baccalaureate Colleges with US News and 2nd highest of the Christian colleges with Forbes... Obviously Wheaton ranks higher on both lists, but I seriously doubt my son will need a BMW for his intended future...

kelis

I've been reading this thread with mixed feelings for months now, and it's finally time for me to chime in.

As a current Wheaton student, I can say that the campus is not, in any way, infused with an "elitist" attitude. Of course, I can't speak for every individual or family represented at the college, and I have met one or two who consider themselves "elite". This has more to do with individual personalities than the fact that they happen to attend Wheaton.

I applied to and was accepted at Grove City as well, and though I chose to attend Wheaton, I don't consider Grove City an inferior school in any way. The two are distinctly different. However both, as has been established, educate in a Christ-centered environment and have many successful, satisfied graduates. Anyone who is considering these schools absolutely needs to visit them both (preferably in the same season...ie, both in the spring, or both in the winter), because each school has a unique appeal to different students.

An aside to Creekland--if your son is interested in Global Development, you may already be aware of this, but Wheaton has a program called Human Needs and Global Resources (HNGR), which he might be interested in checking out. It's a certificate program which can be added on to any major, consisting of various classes and, most siginificantly, a six-month internship with an organization in a third-world country. I know several students interested in development work who have gone through the HNGR program, combining it with an economics major. For more info: Wheaton College (Wheaton, IL) - Department Name

Lastly, I confess I know little of the intricate workings of the finances at either Wheaton or Grove City--as is, I'm sure, the case with the vast majority of those reading this thread. Whistle Pig, if your desire is to get a "definitive" answer about Grove City's financial methods, I'm fairly certain no one here can give you that, regardless of how many times you repeat the question. Call the college, talk to someone who may know. This thread is not the most appropriate place. I recognize that some prospective students and parents may want to keep these questions in mind while conducting the college search. If your desire was to raise awareness, your work is done. Your point has been made.

Creekland

Thank you for chiming in. I was hoping someone with direct/current experience would... Your thoughts are also in mind as we visit (this fall).

Searching for this type of major/college is 100% new to me as our (parent) background with colleges has been totally in the sciences. I'm learning about many colleges I didn't know existed before. The major this son wants fits him well, so we mainly need to find a good place for him to go.

At first, I merely looked at places with 'Development' as a major (secular and Christian, but secular got eliminated by him with our first visit). Needless to say, places are few and far between (Covenant and Eastern are two I know of). Eastern got eliminated - mainly due to SAT stats. Our son is a good bit more talented than their Freshman class - and while I don't mean that in an 'elite' way - I do feel it is best for all students if they learn with their peers (in ability). Covenant appears to be a better match - but it is small... Yet, we were very pleased with the head of the Dept and the students we talked with. It does help (us - mentally) that it is well-regarded by US News and Forbes, but I'm stymied by the lack of info about it elsewhere... That said, I've yet to see anything negative - and there have been positives from parents and students we've found. Our son liked it there, but has yet to compare other Christian options. He is still on the high side with SAT scores, but not nearly as much, so I'm comfortable with it.

To widen my search, we're now looking at higher ranked/rated Christian schools (eastern half of the US due to our location). This is where Wheaton and GCC come in. Both have 'ways' of doing it - and graduates who are out doing similar things, but neither has it as a major. We will visit both in latter Sept. I'm definitely open to other suggestions if anyone reading has any. We do not particularly want colleges that are super strict with 'life' rules... but do want a good (Protestant) Christian spirit within. We were very comfortable with Covenant - and their President is a Wheaton grad...

I do know finances are going to be an issue. We have three boys heading to college within 5 years from now. My middle son wants medical research - so that will be pricey. This oldest son is picking a career that is not well-known for high pay, so oodles of student loans will not be in his best interest. The recent economic downturn has not helped with our ability to assist - nor are we spending all of what we have on just our oldest... We trust that God will show us where is best - partially perhaps by providing funding that fits. In the meantime, I'm discovering new sites (like this one) in my search for options and opinions - and definitely appreciate all who chime in.

jorbie

Creekland-
I'm not sure if its exactly the same as the other schools you mentioned and their development programs, but GCC offers a major called Entrepreneurship (http://www.gcc.edu/Entrepreneurship.php) that might interest you. I am currently mentoring a recent of graduate of GCC who spent four years in this program and who plans to move and work in rural China developing a business model and website that will offer English education programs to the vast numbers of Chinese who have little or no access to Western English teachers.

Not sure - but this sounds like the type of work your son might someday like to do. If you have questions about the program, please give me an email. Its adamheld@gmail.com.

Creekland

Thanks Jorbie. We'll know a little more once we visit in Sept (I wants classes to be in sessions, so a summer visit is out of the question). Right now he's considering majoring in Economics if he attends one of these 'non-major' schools. He's planning to double major with Economics if he goes to a school with Development as a major.

A couple of the profs at Covenant just had a book published, 'When Helping Hurts: Alleviating Poverty Without Hurting the Poor. . .and Ourselves' :

Community Development Professors Co-Author Book on Helping the Poor | Covenant College

I ordered it to see what they have to say, etc. We're trying to consider all aspects.

wildwoodscott

Wheaton is a great school. So is GCC. A lot depends on what one is seeking in a college. A very good friend of mine has a daughter at Wheaton who absolutely loves it. Here's why GCC was better for my son:

1) the financial aid package was better for us at GCC (not in total dollars but it was in percentage of total cost)

2) the swim team/facilities were much better at GCC (that assertion is bound to get a reaction on this board if there are any Wheaton swim fans out there )

3) the diversity of majors at GCC was greater. E.g., my son graduated in mechanical engineering, not something you can do at Wheaton

4) the political and economic philosophy of GCC is much more coherent than at Wheaton. Some may regard this as a disadvantage, but I found the consistent libertarian perspective at GCC very helpful to my son's personal discipline.

5) living in another part of the country proved to be a greater expression of "diversity" than he would have experienced at Wheaton.

Contrary to some reports on this thread, I have always found the facilities at GCC to be very well cared for, even those that are older. In fact, this has always made a deep impression on me. The same guy that designed Central Park in NYC designed the GCC campus (Frederick Olmsted). It is, in my opinion, a much more beautiful campus than Wheaton's (but beauty is in the eye of the beholder).

My son got what he wanted out of his college experience--a great education at a great price in a Christian environment. (Now I'm sounding like the admissions brochure!) He was accepted into Ph.D. programs at MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Michigan, Georgia Tech, Purdue, Johns Hopkins, Illinois, Notre Dame, and Stanford.

All that to say--give Grove City a look. It's not for everyone, but it might be for you (or your daughter or son).

lukesfan

Both colleges showed up this year on the Princeton Review's top ten lists for Religious Students (Wheaton #3, Grove City College #6), Most Conservative Students (Wh #8, GCC #3), and others. Wheaton students seem happy with the food (#13), and both are on the Best 371 colleges list as well as the best 50 value list.

In 2007, GCC and Wheaton were both on the "Stone Cold Sober" top 10 list, Wheaton at #2 and Grove City College at #5. This year GCC fell to #11 (off the list) while Wheaton remained at #2. Perhaps the fact that Grove City is no longer a dry town is having a negative effect. But the binge drinking culture that seems to be prevalent at most universities around the country is absent at both of these schools.

Whistle Pig

Perhaps what this best illustrates? Well, several things:

1. The silliness of taking those ratings so seriously and assuming their precision. They are anecdotal.

2. And the potential fallacy of deducing a valid answer from them. (In this case, how "similar" Wheaton and GCC must be ...beyond fundamental creed, they are anything but. Especially as you get beyond the Princeton Review descriptors.) These are not the proverbial Gumpian "peas and carrots."

3. And lastly and most laughably ...That there is no drinking and especially "binge" style @ either. Who's interested in some ocean-front property in Arizona? A friend was the bus driver for regular weekend social sojourns to the firehall in Harrisville, just beyond then-dry GC. Tickets are round trip with unlimited access to the keg. So, if one wants to deduce or figure an inferred, implied truth? Have at it.

That last one though, is really, dare I say, sobering. These aren't angels, people ... @ either place! They are adolescent young people, and they can and will sip suds and more! No matter what the campus WCTU Chapter recommends.

Now, get caught sloppy drunk either place? "We've got trouble, my friends! Right there in River City!"

mom2d&k

Whistle Pig--

The railing nature of your replies is making me wonder what your background is. Well-meaning and reasonable responders offer up a logical answers as to why GCC costs less than similar LACs, and you swat them down with sweeping, condescending statements full of dogma but no facts. How do you know most LACs operate with no debt? Do you have statistics on that? How do you know it doesn't cost significant funds to comply with federal regulations? Have you researched that issue? Have you done a cost-benefit analysis? You are very willing to criticize the "anecdotal" nature of the replies of others and yet your own responses are replete with unsubstantiated opinions, which universally cast GCC as some mastermind of a nefarious higher education conspiracy. You argue they should answer the question of how they keep things so reasonable in cost, even if no one has asked the question. (So now the college is to read minds?) The truth is they have answered it. No debt, no governmental compliance expenses, no unionized or tenured professors, a commitment to sound and frugal money management.

One thought you did not comment on despite its being mentioned frequently: That the GCC sticker price is actually the sticker price. Wealthy and less bright students are not subsidizing the education of poorer and and more intelligent students. As you rightly noted, the aid (particularly merit aid) at GCC is not substantial. It does not offer the full tuition or half tuition academic scholarships for the very accomplished matriculants that other LACs, with higher "sticker price" tuitions, offer. But that means the sticker price is the REAL cost, minus the minimal endowment from PEW and SUN Oil. You worry that cost-conscious parents might be being duped into buying an inferior educational product, but is it possible that, at more costly LACs, parents are being duped into subsidizing the education of others less affluent or more academically promising? Wouldn't it be more fair if we all just paid what it really cost?

I would also like to argue against your assumption that lower cost necessarily means lower quality. Have you read Charles Murray's "Losing Ground?" More money does not necessarily mean better quality. Just like gifted prep school or private school teachers are willing to work for less pay for a trade-off in other nonquantifiable attributes, is it possible GCC profs are willing to work for less because they believe in the school's mission, or like its stance against the government, or appreciate it is among few schools actually trying to keep costs in line with the rate of inflation? Rather than assume they are substandard scholars, could you not as reasonably assume they are PRINCIPLED scholars willing to trade a few extra $$$$ for being part of a mission they believe in? And please don't discount the valid points of previous posters arguing that the cost of living in rural Grove City is SUBSTANTIALLY less than in the toney suburbs outside of Chicago. Grove City can pay its professors less because they in turn do not have to spend as much to live. Such an obvious point is evident in the private sector all the time. National law firms pay their first year attorneys substantially more in NYC than they do first-year attorneys with the same qualifications hired for their offices in more affordable cities. It's just common sense.


And here's another thought: are you willing to concede that the best educations could result without incessant hand-holding from always available (because they are not working!) faculty? That such educations come from high expectations and a framework for success but then independence and self-discovery of knowledge for the budding scholar? That guided self-study, in a community of similar student scholars, creates an intellectual environment conducive to great academic and intellectual growth without a 9 to 1 student/faculty ratio?

So now I return to my original thought as I've read your responses to others in this thread...what is your personal background with GCC? Former student, former employee, employee or student at a rival school, unaccepted GCC applicant? And because I won't ask you to do what I will not do myself, I will concede I am a mid-80s GCC grad, but, at the time of my graduation, I would have been voted least likely to defend the school on a forum such as this. I was the editor of the paper who personally wrote scathing editorials about the place on a regular basis! I led a protest march of 1000 students to the very steps of the administration building. My point is I am not some blind Kool-Aid drinking GCC cheerleader. But in the last 20 years, the school has changed, drastically for the better, as have I.

I'm sure the food is still not stellar and the springs are still dreary, but there are solid graduates being encouraged on their intellectual and spiritual walk at GCC at a price that is probably more honest than other than a handful of other schools. Maybe you should not be asking GCC why it is so cheap; maybe you should instead be asking Wheaton and other similar schools why their costs are so high? (And I mean absolutely no offense to Wheaton here...just making a rhetorical point.)