<p>
</p>
<p>Bad example. We used to have a beat up old Dodge Dart. Paid very little for it, but it was very reliable. It was totaled (that is, transformed into an accordion) when an idiot tried to pass a line of cars on a 2-lane highway, in a rainstorm, and hit my husband head-on. He walked away. I’ll take an old slant-six Dodge Dart, with all its steel, over a Lexus any day.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see this too. And I believe for many, it’s purely an economic reality. For families who earn a very good living, but are not the REALLY wealthy (e.g. those making around $250,000 - and please, no flames telling me that IS wealthy…I’m trying to differentiate them from the millionaires), financially the Ivy league (and other highly selective private schools) are more and more unavailable from a financial standpoint. They would likely not qualify for any need-based aid. </p>
<p>Looking at the last 10 years: our household income, which is somewhat fluid and not a set salary, has actually slightly decreased since 2000; but let’s assume it stayed even in this down economy. Harvard’s tuition (not inc. R&B) in 2000 was $22,765; in 2010 it was $34,976! So maybe 10 years ago for some, that tuition was do-able, but not today and then those state flagships look more attractive.</p>
<p>And as for state flagships being “better”: as I previously said, it really depends on the student and the fit, not to mention what state you live in. I went to a state flagship school (an Ivy wasn’t even on my radar screen) and my child goes to an Ivy. When looking at schools and seeing his experiences there, there is a different “feel”. The only way I can describe it is to paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart’s famous quotation about “hard to define, but I know it when I see it”.</p>
<p>“I dont know what yo mean be “easily afford” I would suggest kids are going with the state schools when their parents could afford, but not so easily swankier privates.” </p>
<p>No, I mean there are kids whose parents are downright wealthy who choose non-elite publics because they simply don’t care about social climbing or having a Nobel laureate teaching them an into-level course. One poster here mentioned some kids in Kentucky bleeding blue and having the U of K as their #1 choice, regardless of the other options open to them. This is not an isolated phenomenon, nor is it limited to schools with great sports. Somewhere out there right now there are rich valedictorians who are dying to go to Texas Tech or Montana. Call it the Megan Fox syndrome or the Courtney Cox phenomenon…not EVERYBODY is looking to catch the biggest fish in the sea.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Totally agree from what I see here. No one would blink twice at a valedictorian or other “really smart kid” choosing U of Illinois, esp for business or engineering. These schools that dominate CC simply aren’t on their radar screens, at all. They aren’t terribly jealous of parents who do have kids going to the more elite schools, either – so it’s not a “gosh, I’d love to, but I don’t know if I can afford it” - it’s simply “that’s nice, but I’ve got a great flagship and know plenty of successful people who went there, so why wouldn’t I?”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. (my bolding added above) And here’s the dirty little secret. If the parents are already wealthy, they don’t NEED to care about social climbing. They send their kids to whatever schools they want to go to – could be the state flagship, could be a directional, could be an Arizona State type of school that is stereotypically known more for parties than academics – and they simply don’t care that some other people, elsewhere, think that the sun rises and sets on Ivy League schools. It’s irrelevant to them. Who do they need to impress? No one.</p>
<p>I think even my elitist son would have seriously considered some state schools if he was good enough at his sport to be recruited by them. The first year at Penn he really thought it was not worth the money and wanted to leave. He wound up staying, and I’ve asked him a number of times if he thought it was worth it. He does. He said he learned so much (as much from peers as professors) and made contacts that will be important to him for years. It was an educational experience and not just a road to a degree. He had prep school classmates that went off to some of the “flavor of the day” OOS state schools (including my alma mater) and left after a year because the experience wasn’t what they expected. There are SO many ways to get an education and there are kids who would hate a highly selective school and others who would be lost at a big state school. My other child found the perfect fit at Rice but would picked IU over Penn in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>When we moved to TN after my son had already started college, many people could not imagine why we sent our son to “Penn State” and were paying out of state tuition. They understood a little better when I told them that we were not residents of TN when he was applying…</p>
<p>As Pizzagirl states, and MomofWildChild relates in her anecdote, above, the Ivy League does not have the same cachet in all regions of the US. Some top students who live in non-Ivy fever locales have a lot more freedom to consider all of their options than those who grow up in an environment in which it is assumed that all extremely high achievers will be aiming for the Ivy League. </p>
<p>However, my observation is that in our university-dominated town, there is more interest, not less, in the very highly selective schools over the last few years. Just since my son graduated (2007), I hear a lot more talk about shooting for the Ivy League schools. On the other hand, I also encounter a lot more interest about large merit scholarships to good private (non-Ivy) schools.</p>
<p>My children attended Catholic school until high school, when they switched to a private prep. Most of their grade school friends went on to Catholic high schools. Ivies are not on the radar among that group - for them it’s Fordham, Villanova, Holy Cross, PC, Boston College, etc. Most of them would probably chose Notre Dame over Harvard in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>"No, I mean there are kids whose parents are downright wealthy who choose non-elite publics because they simply don’t care about social climbing or having a Nobel laureate teaching them an into-level course. One poster here mentioned some kids in Kentucky bleeding blue and having the U of K as their #1 choice, regardless of the other options open to them. This is not an isolated phenomenon, nor is it limited to schools with great sports. Somewhere out there right now there are rich valedictorians who are dying to go to Texas Tech or Montana. Call it the Megan Fox syndrome or the Courtney Cox phenomenon…not EVERYBODY is looking to catch the biggest fish in the sea. "</p>
<p>In some places the ives are very far way, and for some people going very far away to school is a big deal. For some people going where lots of HS classmates go is a big deal. In some careers making local contacts is useful and if you are planning to stay in the local area, a state school has a lot more of those than the Ivies do. There are lots of reasons someone who is able to get into an Ivy and is downright wealthy might make another choice - I do not think though, that this is always a sign of moral superiority, or even that they are not concerned with social climbing. There are other strategies for social climbing than University.</p>
<p>“Some top students who live in non-Ivy fever locales have a lot more freedom to consider all of their options than those who grow up in an environment in which it is assumed that all extremely high achievers will be aiming for the Ivy League”</p>
<p>and where is this elusive locale? </p>
<p>I live in Northern Virginia, and my DD attended a very high ranked sci tech magnet HS. We have a great public flagship as is well known, but her HS had lots of families (especially some high achievement oriented recent immigrants but not only them) with intense Ivy fever - but I think almost everyone there was aware of the desirability of the top sci tech schools, and quite a few thought about the top LACs and of course U Chicago for the nerdiest kids. </p>
<p>Oh, and one kid took his NMS to Oklahoma for the free ride. </p>
<p>If families felt that much freedom to consider other options at TJ of all places, I really wonder where the freedom constrained high schools are.</p>
<p>midmo, re: more shooting for an Ivy or merit schools lately-part of that is possibly/probably a function of what menloparkmom(I think) mentioned a while back-the changes the Ivies have made more recently that would help more moderate families. My 2005 son thought of applying to one of the top 3 Ivies but applied ED then to UVa instead(still had ED then). The Ivy expressed some interest in him athletically but with no scholarship, merit aid it just would not have worked and he/we did not really pursue it when we had great instate options. We were fairly frugal even then so luckily did not spend the extra money since the economy certainly has changed since then-just could not see how the Ivy would be worth over twice as much (I know many here think it would be but for us it was not-personal choice). Then again, we ended up paying full price for UVa(with son taking out some unsubsidized Stafford loans which he has already paid off) and did not consider looking at other schools for merit aid money. That also seems to be something more and more families are looking at in the last couple of years-merit. I am glad we did feel that we could take on the cost of an instate public since he wanted to go to UVa, but in this day and age, that is increasingly difficult for alot of families.</p>
<p>
You’re right. All those Gothic buildings? Cardboard facades. And all that ivy? Plastic.</p>
<p>Many Californians with great stats stick with their top state schools. Same with those in VA, Michigan. The Hope Program has truly kept in state talent inside of Georgia. I just wish that more states had flagship schools that rival the ivies.</p>
<p>Re: Post #227:
I think it’s quite a stretch to say that graduate rankings reflect the quality of undergraduate education
I would agree with that comment. I only cited the grad rankings to indicate that many public universities could hold their own with elite private universities in terms of faculty strength across a range of disciplines. For the student who is going to go into debt to attend a private university because he thinks they attract the best faculty, its a relevant point. Of course, there are many other factors that might support his choice of a private university over a public university, but his assumption that a private university necessarily has a better faculty is an erroneous one. </p>
<p>I would also note that the rate of admission to graduate programs also isn’t exactly a measure of the quality of undergraduate education–but I suppose it makes sense to look at, especially if you are just looking for “return on investment” in terms of earning power.</p>
<p>I partially would agree with that comment. The capacity of a school to prepare a student well for graduate study in his chosen field of study is an important indicator of the quality of undergraduate education at that school. If a public university can accomplish this as well or better than a private university, then that public university is a viable option for a student who chooses that field of study. Of course, there is more to the quality of undergraduate education than just ones major, but thats a big part of it. And, a students education in his major not only includes knowledge of content, but also includes many aspects of those analytic, writing, research and other skills commonly considered to reflect quality. Is there more to quality of undergrad education? Sure, but I wouldnt make the claim that an elite private university necessarily does it better than a public university. I do think it will be harder to access many of those features associated with quality education at a public university, but that brings us back to the matter of finding ways to mitigate the potential adverse educational features often associated public universities, e.g., larger class sizes, etc. It might harder to mitigate those factors at a public university, but realistically, that will always be the necessary trade-off that many good students face. Having said that, however, I also dont think those adverse factors are entirely absent even at elite private universities. In fact, some of those factors are simply features of research universities, though the larger size of public universities tends to exacerbate them.</p>
<p>Regarding your comment on return on investment, I fail to see how thats anything specific to public universities. Lots of students (the majority?) who choose elite private universities are looking at their choice in terms of return on investment, whether thats future admission to a graduate or professional school, networking, prestige, or a job on Wall St. So, if those types of outcomes are not exactly a measure of the quality of undergrad education for students at a public university, it also is not any more or less a measure of quality for students at private universities.</p>
<p>While it may not be politic to put it this way, there are elements of college education that are not really related directly to future earning power–they might be described as lifestyle enhancement, or luxuries, or what have you. But it’s hard to measure the degree to which your education makes you a broadly interested and interesting person.
I would agree with that comment. I think, however, that broadly interested and interesting persons will be found at both public and private universities. Will I encounter more of them per square yard at Harvard or Stanford than I will at Tennessee? Yes, I think so. How about at Wisconsin, or Washington, or Indiana? Well, perhaps, not quite as many as at Harvard, but I dont think those schools are particularly lacking for such persons. How about at Emory, Vanderbilt, Rice, or Northwestern? Again, perhaps, not as many as at Harvard or Stanford, but I think Wisconsin, Indiana, and many others would more than hold their own in that regard. How about at an elite LAC? Id also find such persons in that environment, but I think Id find many more at a good university, whether public or private. </p>
<p>As you noted, its hard to measure the degree to which ones education makes one a broadly interested and interesting person. Certainly, encounters with faculty, students, and other persons in your environment contribute to that, but I dont think private universities necessarily have an edge in that regard. Certainly, the general education one receives outside ones major contributes to that. Again, I dont think that necessarily distinguishes private universities from public universities. To some extent, a student either is or is not a broadly interested and interesting person before entering a university. Do private universities hold an edge in that regard? Well, yes, I suppose they do to the extent that they select for those qualities. And, certainly, they admit many very accomplished students who have done some very interesting things. Beyond, some tippy-top private universities, I think the numbers of such students drops off quite a bit. Youll probably still find more such students at private universities than at many public universities, but youll still find plenty at the better public universities. I would venture to say, however, that there are a fair number of admitted students at top private universities, who were able to do some really cool and interesting things that they are passionate about simply to pad their admissions resume or because their socio-economic status provided opportunities to do so that were not ordinarily available to most other people. One wonders how many aspiring I-bankers disclosed their real aspirations on their Harvard applications and instead wrote of how “passionate” they were about helping the less fortunate on some parent-financed junket to Haiti? Oh, but maybe such a student is still very interesting—perhaps he can converse like a junior Tim Geithner about US banking policy and the journal article he read about it in his economics course (written by his professor, of course, who also knows Tim Geithner and Larry Summers personally). But then, theres the farm kid at Wisconsin, who only helped out at the local food pantry with her church youth group, but for whom it was a truly altruistic activity. She can tell you anything you want to know about how much Wisconsin dairy farmers get for their milk (cause her dairy farmer Dad deals with this every day). She thought she would major in Dairy Science, but when she took a required course on Crop Science, she was so intellectually turned on when her agronomy professor (who consults with the FAO) told the class about his efforts to develop new strains of certain food crops that will grow better in Africa, that she switched her major to Genetics with a minor in international agriculture. Its not required in the ag school, but she signed up for a language course in Swahili, so she can do a summer study abroad program in Kenya. She wants to get a PhD in Plant Genetics. Frankly, I think Id find the student at Wisconsin to be a more interesting person.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s the person and the extent to which said person cares about other people’s responses / reactions that makes all the difference. Most of my kids’ target schools were off the radar screen of many of their peers. I couldn’t have cared less - it was their problem that they didn’t know Brandeis, or Bryn Mawr, or Haverford, or Kenyon, or Macalester, not my family’s. </p>
<p>D gets very little local recognition for having made it into Wellesley. I doubt half her teachers even know what it is, beyond perhaps a vague Hillary Clinton association. Her brother gets a <em>lot</em> more recognition for having made it into Northwestern – but even though, a lot of that is because they perceive NU as the “local really good school” and haven’t a clue how truly highly ranked it is nationally. </p>
<p>But when I read threads, such as the old thread (I’m forgetting the screenname - newmassdad? whose D “settled” for Chicago?) about the “pressure” on kids to go to a certain set of schools because that’s what their peers all think is cool, I just have to roll my eyes mentally. I don’t care if the pressure is to go to an Ivy because the sun rises and sets on Ivies, or if the pressure is to go to the state flagship because why would anybody miss out on the football and fraternity fun and go more than 100 miles away … I’ve just raised my kids to know that other people may not be aware of certain things, but we know better, and that philosophy informed their college search. Snobby it may be – but I’ll gladly own it.</p>
<p>zapfino,That Wisconsin person would probably be pretty interesting to me too! Along with academic intelligence, certainly things like social and emotional intelligence are equally important. The Ivies and their peers certainly do not have a monopoly on positive traits. Not knocking elite schools at all , just feel it can get tiresome when the implication by some seems to be that the most accomplished,interesting,creative students and faculty are only/most frequently found at the “elites.”</p>
<p>I would like to see a gradual weaning of public funds from private universities to be diverted to the state flagships. If that happened our very best schools will likely be the state schools.</p>
<p>
Sure, but I get weary of the suggestion that all schools are essentially the same. Somebody once asked John Dillinger why he robbed banks. “Because that’s where the money is.” Some people want to go to elite schools because that’s where the highest concentration of highly able accomplished students are, and the lowest concentration of students who aren’t that interested in a high-level education.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The part that I bolded is the real kicker, to me. I cannot tell you how liberating I found it to be in an environment where everybody around me was interested in learning, valued academics, and it wasn’t nerdy to be excited about what you were learning in class and want to learn more, study, and talk about it outside the classroom. I would have had a harder time finding that at the state flagship in the state where I went to high school. That’s not to say such students didn’t exist, but it wasn’t the prevailing culture.</p>
<p>
Are you serious? Some magical method? I’m not an expert on English, but the UNL faculty in that department don’t appear underqualified in any way.</p>
<p>Is the level of research at UNL in English of the same caliber as Harvard? No, but as you point out research ability does not perfectly correspond to teaching ability. I don’t see any reason to believe that the UNL faculty are unqualified to teach undergrads, and neither of us can say which school actually has better teachers, if such a thing can even be objectively determined.
I don’t see how this addresses either of my points in post #228. I am not willing to concede that a student at UNL will have less valuable peer experiences than at Harvard.</p>
<p>IMO, “craft[ing] a class” is only relevant when looking at the student population as a whole, and I don’t think that applies to actual students who will not interact with the entire population on a daily basis.
Well, I think you can use an ROI approach with regards to more than money. The question I think every single parent and student needs to ask is: does the additional return - both monetary and intangible - from spending X additional dollars outweigh the best alternative uses for that money?
I will be CHOOSING a state flagship over 1-3 top 15 privates. There is money in the bank that could pay for the more expensive school, and I am CHOOSING to keep that money in the bank. You will find other anecdotal examples earlier in this thread.</p>
<p>I will grant that this scenario is not necessarily the norm. However, it is quite plausible that there are many students who could likely be admitted to elite privates who never even apply because they plan to attend their state school.
I would probably concede this to some extent. However, I question whether the actual impacts of this statistical disparity provide much of a return - holistically - on one’s education dollar.</p>
<p>
Im confused . What public funding do private Us receive?</p>