Great Schools At Great Prices

College Search & Lists
1

<p>USNEWS rankings:</p>

<p>What am I missing? Can someone explain to me how one comes up with a list if some schools have a starting sticker price of over 50,000, while others have a starting sticker of perhaps 33,000? Please read the methodology used. I do not “get it”. </p>

<p>BTW, as a side issue, I thought it was interesting that I did not see any (could have missed several though) CTCL schools on that list. Some of those CTCL schools have a pretty high endowment for the size of their schools too.</p>

2

<p>Hey Northeastmom,
I totally agree with you… they should shower more attention to the schools that are cheap and good, but it seems like their definition of ‘great schools’ is the list that they make themselves. The list is quite misleading, all it is is simply a scholarship/aid info table.</p>

3

<p>Many schools, “discount” (aka give merit scholarships) to the vast majority.</p>

4

<p>Hi Goodwood,</p>

<p>I thought that I was not understanding something about their methodology in making this list. One can inflate prices to the moon and then discount heavily through merit and financial aid to show a great discount. That does not mean much to me. Perhaps it can help one make this list, or make a prospie and his/her parents feel flattered, but the bottom line is still the bottom line.</p>

5

<p>I don’t know what you’re driving at. The methodology looks at:

Cost is not considered. Discounting is not considered.</p>

6

<p>Unfortunately I don’t have time for this right now, but mazewanderer was kind enough to dissect this for me. Here is mazewanderer’s reply from a thread on the parent forum:</p>

<p>Here is the methodology:</p>

<ol>
<li>Ratio of quality to price: A school’s overall score in the Best Colleges 2011 rankings was divided by the 2009-2010 academic year net cost to a student receiving the average need-based scholarship or grant. The higher the ratio of a school’s Best Colleges 2011 edition rank to the discounted total cost less the average 2009-2010 academic year need-based scholarship or grant, the better the value. Total cost equals the sum of these cost factors for each school from the 2009-2010 academic year tuition, room and board, fees, books, and other expenses, including transportation.</li>
</ol>

<p>Harvard has a score of 100 in the USNWR rankings and let us assume a COA of $50,000 and a Rank of 1. In this measure, 100/50,000 = .002. In their opinion this is value received per dollar spent.</p>

<p>Case Western Reserve has a rank of 41, a score of 60 in USNWR and let us assume a COA of $50,000 also.</p>

<p>So the measure for Case Western is 60/50,000= 0.0012, which is less than Harvards</p>

<p>So what the editors are saying is that For Harvard, I pay a certain amount and for that amount I get the top ranked institution. Case Western is not a top ranked institution, and if I pay the same amount to Case Western, I am not getting the same value.</p>

<p>So by their logic, a student who is willing to pay $50,000 for Harvard, should pay only $30000 as COA for Case Western to get the same value per dollar spent. In marketing terms it is called Value to price ration, and here value is measured by the UNSNWR rankings. </p>

<p>Extending their logic, an institution with a score of 50 should charge only $25,000 and with a score of 25, should charge only $12500 as COA. That is why you have all these institutions with different costs mixed up.</p>

<p>Obviously this is naive, but UNSWR gets to define the criteria. So this measure helps top ranked institutions. You cannot measure value by USNWR rankings.</p>

<ol>
<li>Percentage of all undergraduates receiving need-based scholarships or grants during the 2009-2010 academic year.</li>
</ol>

<p>This favors institutions that a give a lot of people little aid as opposed to schools that give few people lot of aid. So a school that gives 500 people 1000 dollars each will be favored over one that gives 200 people $2500 each, even though the total amount of aid is the same.</p>

<ol>
<li>Average discount: percentage of a school’s 2009-2010 total costs (tuition, room and board, fees, books, and other expenses) covered by the 2009-2010 academic year average need-based scholarship or grant to undergraduates.</li>
</ol>

<p>This measures the ratio of what people actually pay to the rack rate.</p>

<p>It does not make much sense to me, but that is their methodology. Overall, this measure favors top ranked institutions, state schools that have lower tuition and schools that give aid to more people though it may not be as large in dollar terms when compared to a lower ranked college.</p>

7

<p>If you don’t like USNWR because it does not consider cost, then check out the Kiplinger rankings.</p>

8

<p>Hmmmm! based on the summary you provided I think USNWR’s logic is clear ‘if’ you accept their rankings. Please note, for students from middle & lower class families it will cost less to attend HYPS, Cornell, Brown, Williams, Amherst than to attend most state schools. Higher ranked cost less. I wonder if this is the reason we have seen the dramatic increase in applications at the top-wealthy-need based schools. For middle and low income families the key to a lower tuition bill is admission to a top=wealthy-need based school. They have one big advantage FA is not linked to academic performance.</p>

9

<p>Agreed, appdad. The Great Prices list really doesn’t apply to low - low middle class students since their aid eligibility will dramatically alter their actual prices. It could be relevant for middle - upper middle class students since aid will not be as much help, but for most of those students paying $55K a year isn’t possible so weighing quality won’t make a “Great” school financially accessible. It’s certainly relevant to upper class students, but if they can afford $55K without breaking a sweat then why would they care? All in all, it’s not a very useful list.</p>

10

<p>Now I understand. That is how US News designates their Best Value schools. Not that I necessarily agree with it. It is all based on the discounting. Because all the academies are no cost they get no love, even though they cost $0. And it only accounts for need based scholarships. They should retitle it “best values for high achieving kids with need who don’t want to attend no cost schools”.</p>

11

<p>What schools are no-cost?</p>

12

<p>The service academies cover annual expenses (though of course they do have a service commitment, so they aren’t exactly no cost).</p>

<p>Cooper Union is tuition free (though students have to cover their own R & B).</p>

<p>Olin awards a half-tuition scholarship to all admitted students.</p>

13

<p>I actually support the FA policies of the so-called ‘best value’ schools. Historically, these campuses were reserved for the children of the rich and famous. The current FA policies are designed to create economic diversity. Based on what I have seen on many of these campuses it appears to be working. There has been a dramatic increase in the number students from middle and upper middle class ($70K to 120K) who can afford to attend HYP and the other 25 to 30 schools that have the funds to support these generous FA programs. To be honest it is a very useful list. Many of the college bound students and parents I have meet are not aware of the generous FA programs offered by the elites. On the other hand they are aware of the fact that tuition at the privates is in the range of 35K to 40K versus in-state tuition being >20K. I circulated the list of no-loan schools to relatives and it completely changed the list of schools their kids generated. Unfortunately, this</p>