Just not the ones that students are desperate to get into.
@suzyQ7 & @Huskymaniac You may not be aware that US college education for international students has been a financial boom for public/private colleges and by extension saving money for US students who would otherwise pay even higher tuition and fees. Chinese students for example, numbered more than 330,000, pay an average $60k/yr, attending schools that very few American families would be willing to pay the full price for.
There are indeed a handful of most selective schools such as HYPSM that provide need blind scholarships to a few hundred of lucky international admits. But those kids either end up remaining in US and become major contributors to the economy or they return to their home country and become influential leaders friendly to the US. Not only the income from international students far exceeds small amount of scholarship given to them but the scholarship is likely to pay dividend far greater than itself in the future.
If someone should be complaining they should be countries like India and China who have had brain drain for decades. US’ competitiveness in many industries like high tech rests in no small part on free import of international talent, and lot of times these students even subsidize the native US students.
Many other colleges outside the IVYs provide merit and need based discounts to internationals. Im all for full pay international students attending our universities to subsidize US FA. But if a college is going to give away money to foreign students, then they should be taxed on that.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if this actually happened. The new federal tax package penalize colleges with very large endowments? The state of Connecticut is in major debt, and endowment taxes have been on the table.
Anyway, we are going off topic. I do think there will be many consolidations and closures as less popular schools deal with a bursted bubble of costs, reduced enrollment, and a lower value prop for incoming students. This is good.
One of our first looks at this in the Northeast was the closing of Mount Ida College in Newton, MA. The school was in debt and was struggling to fill spots and also lacked an endowment. In a controversial move, UMASS Amherst, close to 90 minutes away, bought the college to use as a career center for many of its Boston area graduates and Boston area employers of its students. There will be more Mount Idas down the road, but this won’t impact the stress on future applicants of most schools discussed on this website. More importantly, the state flagships will become increasingly competitive as a great cost effective option. Private universities, even elite ones, understand that they will need to limit increases in cost by cost of living increases. The current increases are not sustainable.
In response to thread title…No, it is not.
“Anyway, we are going off topic.”
If you prefer not to answer my question that is fine of course – but I will finish by saying I think having the rules different for colleges than other non-profits is both extremely unfair to colleges, and also works against American interests for the reasons @jzducol explains above.
Colleges are not charties (although they are non profits) since they are charging half the students a very high price in order to give others a discount. So, yes, is completely equitable to have different rules for colleges than for charties that don’t “charge” for services rendered. As a mentioned, that is happening right now with the tax on college’s endowments when they are larger than a certain amount.
^^^ I’ll stop being coy and respectfully disagree. Strongly. Extremely strongly. Need-based aid is 100% charitable IMHO. You can’t tax certain non-profits because you don’t like how they do things.
I won’t comment again on this to avoid threadjack.
Educating international students at US colleges & universities is a great way to influence potential business & poltical leaders in a non-adversarial environment while exposing US students to different perspectives.
Awarding financial aid to internationals may be among the most efficient & effective methods for furthering American values abroad.
@Publisher
Is there a limit to how many international students should be allowed to study in the US? Any at all? Should universities be allowed to completely fill up on these high paying students? Look, no one is advocating zero international students. I’m sure a reasonable limit can be agreed upon and it should be done before this becomes a problem. And it isn’t the only problem or looming problem with regards to admission to elite schools. The author made a generalization that just will not hold at the elite schools. The growth in international students is one reason. The growth in applicants raised by tiger parents (former internationals in most cases) is another reason. Social engineering by admissions offices is another reason. It is going to be harder and harder to get admitted for non-recruited athletes that are also non-unicorns. The percentage of incoming classes to elite universities for recruited athletes will remain fairly constant. The percentage of unicorns will increase. The percentage of internationals to help pay for the social engineering will increase. The number of kids of tiger parents applying for the shrinking remainder will increase. The acceptance rates will continue to plummet and the only kids that make it into that shrinking remainder will be the kids whose parents either play the game or hire a consultant to help them play the game.
Of course there should be a limit, in my opinion, as diversity enhances the educational experience.
The more interesting question may be a focus on state sponsored schools versus private school limits.
Certainly reasonable to argue that state sponsored universities should offer no to minimal financial aid to non-residents & international students, but provincialism has costs too.
My last comment on this too. I am not advocating banning undergraduate international students or prohibiting FA or merit for them (yes, many schools give merit/discounts to internationals), I am in favor of colleges being taxed on those subsidies/gifts to international students since I, as a tax payer, am subsiding their discounts. Either pay full (like many Americans have to) or the college should pay tax on those gifts.
This bubble WILL eventually burst. We thought it was at 60K, but no. What’s the magic sticker that even rich people won’t pay? And please, let’s not always focus on Harvard. NYU, Fordham, BU, BC, Trinity, Bowdoin, Hamilton etc are all now ~70K for 50% of enrolled students. Many of these schools give merit or FA to internationals.
Soaring college tuitions is, in significant part, a result of the change in bankruptcy law that makes student loan debt almost non-dischargeable. Lenders, therefore, face very minimal risk in making student loans. The ready supply of money makes it easy for selective colleges & universities to raise prices for tuition & room.
And they use those high tuition payments to subsidize their social engineering obessions.
“This bubble WILL eventually burst. We thought it was at 60K, but no. What’s the magic sticker that even rich people won’t pay? And please, let’s not always focus on Harvard. NYU, Fordham, BU, BC, Trinity, Bowdoin, Hamilton etc are all now ~70K for 50% of enrolled students. Many of these schools give merit or FA to internationals.”
@suzyQ7 - You got me. My ex and I are both Hamilton alum, and aside from a couple thousand in merit aid one year, we both were full pay. Because back in the 90s, his bank VP single mom and my primary breadwinner teacher mom could swing the tuition. It wasn’t as easy for my parents, but it was doable. When we had our son, my brother-in-law, who is a big time professor at one of the CC favorites that shall remain nameless, told us that by the time my son went to college, it would cost $50,000 a year. We couldn’t believe it back then. And that was only 16/17 years ago. Now to send him to Hamilton would be $20,000 above that. I love Hamilton. I think it’s a great school and I got a fantastic education there. I would love to be able to give that to my son, but I have tried over and over to justify $70,000 a year and I just can’t do it, even if we ask big time professor uncle to pitch in (haha!). Does it piss me off? Yes. I suppose Hamilton doesn’t owe me anything, but it’s really disappointing. We will apply, but we will also be doing some bargain shopping.
I don’t see admissions at elite colleges getting any less stressful. In fact, more so the opposite way. The good state schools are increasingly bringing in foreigners and oos students as they pay higher tuition rates as well, not so safety schools anymore there.
@Trixy34 I know a lot of people who feel the same way about BC. Then again I know people that are perfectly happy paying 70K for similar ranked LACs / universities, but the ROI is really dropping with the exception of the Tippity Top Single Letter Colleges.
Does Super Smart Uncle think it’s worth it to pay $280K for 4 years of college? I would be interested to know what insiders believe the value is of the product.
Apparently, 47% of Hamilton students and their parents think that it is worth list price, since they are attending without any grants or scholarships: https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=hamilton&s=all&id=191515#finaid
Of possible interest, Forbes included these schools in its article, “10 Expensive Colleges Worth Every Penny”:
- Amherst
- Dartmouth
- Williams
- UChicago
- Tufts
- Colgate
- UPenn
- Columbia
- Hamilton
- Vassar
Typically, return on investment type rankings can be, at best, anodyne and, at worst, undermining of the primary benefits of higher education. However, if students can look forward to an intellectually stimulating four year experience among engaging peers, as would be the case at most of the above colleges, along with the reinforcement of ROI prospects, this would seem to be a good thing.
Financial ROI has become more important mainly because higher education is (a) more difficult to afford financially, and (b) more of a “necessary” credential in many parts of the labor market (even if general or specific skills and knowledge signaled by higher education are not needed for the job – credential creep). For most college students, the upgrade in job and career prospects are probably the primary motivation, and they would not spend the money to attend college if it did not upgrade their job and career prospects compared to having just a high school diploma.
Granted, those with generous wealthy well-connected parents may not need to consider the financial ROI aspects of college much or at all. But that describes only a tiny slice of college students and potential college students.