Something really odd that I've noticed

[ClassicRockerDad]

<p>

So I was looking through many college confidential threads that compared full tuition scholarships at School X (assuming X is not prestigious in its own right) vs Ivys/stanford/mit/duke/chicago/jhu/NU and found that in almost every instance, posters advised the student to go to the full tuition no name school. Now, in the aforementioned schools, almost every if not every kid could get a full tuition scholarship at School X so why wouldn’t they just attend there? Using that logic, these schools should have trouble attracting students since every kid could just go to School X for free? Now, some of you might mention that it depends on whether these top schools place a financial burden on the families involved but I would argue than in these schools there is a wide variety of kids; kids where attending a prestigious school has placed extreme financial burden on their families to none at all. My question is this: if everyone seems to indicate “take the money and run” why are there still such a wide range of students at these prestigious schools? (wide range in terms of financial burden)

</p>

<p>You should in no way view the advice you get on CC as either good or representative of common wisdom.
It’s just a small number of people making a lot of posts. Often they made this choice and think that everybody else should too. </p>

<p>By the same token, I’m paying full price for two kids to go to private colleges. I think that’s the better way to go for us and I think that sometimes you get what you pay for. Of course, you shouldn’t take my opinion as either good or representative either. </p>