<p>You’re right. I’m just living vicariously through my D. I wanted the big “public Ivy” experience, with all its pomp and circumstance. But my Dad was a truck driver and my mom a home maker - 30 years ago, that meant; “you want college, go ‘giterdone’ on your own” which I did, at a nondescript state school, with no debt, and subsequently did quite well. Which is why we qualify for squat for FA aid from the Public Ivy. And now I just question it as a “prudent” investment. If it can be even called that. My head says "no way is an undergrad degree worth 200k! My heart says - “football Fridays followed by game Saturdays, all the spirit and camaraderie and lifetime connections…” I want that for my D. And then the head kicks in; the next 4 years will go by faster than the last 4. The fact that we CAN pay for college, and are willing to, doesn’t obligate us to be stupid with our money. What kind of example does that set? and so on and so on.</p>
<p>This is kid #1 going through this. So “precedent” is important. But if the goal of going to college is a good education to prepare for a career in your chosen field? why do we have all this competition among schools??? any one of them can accomplish that objective, and do, for many students, every day! You can’t tell me it costs 30k/year more to educate a kid at Duke, than it does at NC Charlotte. Duke charges what they do, because people are willing to pay for it. (period). Not for what it returns in the marketplace.</p>
<p>Sorry to bore everyone while I wrestle with this, outwardly. I can’t be the only one.</p>
<p>I never thought of my kid’s college education as a financial investment. As it happens, I live in a state whose flagship would cost me more than every single LACs my D is considering. In fact, it would cost me more than one of the three neighboring state flagships she applied to and not much less than the two others. So I never needed to struggle as you are struggling to find a rationale for paying a premium for a higher ranking and other even harder-to-quantify factors. </p>
<p>IMO, I think you are being a little hard on yourself. It would not be “stupid” to pay the full price for the big public Ivy. It would also not be “stupid” to choose a school with a lower price tag and less cachet. If you looked at various schools’ balance sheets, maybe the differences in cost would seem rational to you, and maybe they wouldn’t. Maybe the “pomp and circumstance” of the public Ivy are worth the difference in cost to you. There’s nothing wrong with that. </p>
<p>I don’t happen to think that the most important goal of a college education is to “prepare for a career in your chosen field.” I see it as a transition from childhood to adulthood and consider the non-career-focused stuff (learning for learning’s sake, social life, camaraderie, football games, coffee shops) just as important. I may be in the minority; I often am!</p>
<p>giterdone -
The beauty about living here is we have free choice and there are so many schools at so many price levels that it really is up to you to decide. It’s not an easy decision. It’s not like I’m all yay! I’m about to spend a small fortune! However, I am thrilled we are able to afford the opportunity. We’ve already foot the bill for private school so I’ve had years of judgment about why we didn’t send our kids to public school. I’ve long since come to terms with our decision process. </p>
<p>Just because I think it’s worth it doesn’t mean you will or should. And your wanting your child to go to Duke instead of UNC for the experience of the school, the sports, the camaraderie, connections is not wrong either. </p>
<p>Every person here has a different circumstance and a different philosophy. I don’t doubt that every parent here wants the best for their child, and best is relative to each person and it may not mean best school but best financial decision, best opportunity for a decent education and a job.</p>
<p>Someone (Christopher Hitchens?) said that there is no such thing as a life without regrets, and you have to choose the regrets that you’re going to have. In this college choice, it comes down to what you think you will regret more as a parent and responsible adult: spending the money, or not spending the money? The answer to this question would depend on how the more expensive option will affect your long-term financial security, the ability to pay for other childrens’ college, your age, your health, your job stability, and the caliber of your D’s educational experience. It is really hard to judge sometimes.</p>
<p>We’ve got the “setting a precedent” situation in our house. </p>
<p>Son entered his college on a full ride. At the end of freshman year, he gave up the scholarship and we became full-pay at his very expensive school. But, the cost of the remaining 3 years was within the budget we set way back in HS. So, he gets to stay there for the remaining 3 years, even without a scholarship. </p>
<p>Daughter has the same budget. But, since she’s not interested in the scholarship her brother got, she must find a way to stretch her money across 4 years. She’s the stronger student in the family, but she finds herself “aiming lower” in search of merit aid. As parents, we feel badly about this. </p>
<p>But, really, should we? I don’t think so. There’s fair and there’s equal. Sometimes they’re not the same thing. Plus, there’s more than one way to get an excellent education. </p>
<p>So we’ll not pity poor little D because we eliminated Brown and Dartmouth due to budget. Nor will we shead a tear if she has to suffer through the bargains of Dickinson/Gettysburg/Elon/H&WS if/when her favorites (Bucknell/W&M/F&M) are stingy with the merit aid. </p>
<p>If choosing one school from a list 5 or 6 that are affordable is the most difficult decision she ever has to make, then we’ll be counting our blessings. And, we thank God every day that D understands this.</p>
<p>Today, I’m wearing a pair of pants that I don’t like very much. I don’t like the feel of the material, and I don’t think they look great. They are perfectly functional as pants, though. They cover my body, are appropriate for the environment, have pockets, etc. But I don’t like them. Why did I buy them, and why do I wear them? They were really cheap. Should I toss them and buy more expensive pants that I like better?</p>
<p>It seems to me that a lot of people are thinking about college educations the way I am thinking about my pants. These pants are good enough–wouldn’t it be wasteful to chuck them and buy pants that cost five times as much? Well, maybe or maybe not. But if I can easily afford better pants, do I continue to wear these because I’m prudent, or just cheap?</p>
<p>So, these are the average salaries for those graduates who had a bachelor’s degree. Perhaps the results are skewed because a larger number of students from some of these schools chose to continue their education, and get post-graduate degrees. This data excludes all of those graduates with grad degrees and (likely) higher earnings.</p>
<p>^ I would hope (HOPE) that a sophisticated salary survey site would keep the comparison “apples to apples” At least not overlooking the obvious you just mentioned. The methodology is in the link, I just didn’t take the time to look at it.</p>
<p>Good analogy @Hunt. Except - if I were buying your pants? you’d be happy with the ones you got on… :D</p>
<p>familyof3–in the second link posted it also showed mid career level earnings.</p>
<p>Hunt–?? If you think your extra $200,000 is going to get you farther along in life, hey, more power to you. Keep in mind that the ROE for that is 20 years. Can you show me stats that 20 years out Harvard grads make that much more than University of Iowa grads in the same field?</p>
I don’t think the nicer pants will cover my legs any better than the cheap ones, so if all I care about is that particularly utility, there’s no reason for me to buy more expensive pants. But some people might care about other factors–they may be luxuries, of course–and they might think it’s worth paying for them, if they can afford it. To me, that’s the simple answer to all these discussions.</p>
<p>I read the methodology. That is why I pointed this out. Obviously, they are comparing apples to apples. The salaries are for graduates with a bachelor’s degree only. The mid-career salary is still for those with a bachelor’s. </p>
<p>What I am saying is that more and more students are going on get their graduate degrees these days. Those students are not included in the data (rightly so), but can be expected to have higher mid-level career salaries, I would think. Perhaps a larger % of graduates who go on to grad school would cause that school’s data to be skewed.</p>
<p>Oh I agree. And that’s the point. What is the value (impact) at the outset, of attending a particular school. Like the Ivy study suggests; if a kid is motivated, smart, ambitious… it matters less where they get their undergrad degree. Paying 50k a year or 15k a year for tuition doesn’t seem to translate into (significantly) better actual career earnings, or career satisfaction. So, the point I’m starting to circle around is; what kind of “experience” do we want for our kids, because this choice isn’t about educational quality; what kind of financial (frugal or otherwise) decision example do we want to set - if this choice even sets one? And where do each of us, or me in particular, draw the line?</p>
<p>To expand on @Hunt’s analogy: I bought a car for my D to use through H.S. it wasn’t a Cadillac or BMW. It was a practical (safe) Hyundai. And she loved it! Who wouldn’t love a new car? no matter what it is… so, in the same vein - do I fulfill a “want” or a “need” when it comes to college?</p>
<p>I don’t think that grad school would influence the data any since they are only comparing jobs that do not require an advanced degree. They have specifically excluded schools where a large portion of the students go on to grad school. They are comparing apples to apples.</p>
<p>Schools with few bachelor’s degree graduates, schools that have recently begun offering bachelor’s degrees, or schools with a large percentage of graduates earning advanced degrees, may not be included due to insufficient data. In addition, a few schools were excluded due to issues in identifying the school accurately, usually because of ambiguous names or recent name changes.</p>
<p>I went on the Payscale site to try to figure out why DS top choice school was not ranked (not enough data) and so it was an excellent reminder that not everyone is willing or interested in putting their salaries on the web for the world to see. Payscale.com data is not much more reliable than the other methodology used in Forbes rankings that causes such concern for all. </p>
<p>That said, I noticed that a few of the schools on the outside of the top ten are schools that have very high grad school/professional school enrollment.</p>
<p>^ some information is better than no information, especially if the methodology is sound, transparent, and relevant. You can dismiss it, but in exchange for what alternative?</p>
<p>We are from New England and my son is looking at schools that are primarily in the midwest. I think that some people believe that if you go to school near Boston, your education must be superior. :)</p>
<p>The Midwestern schools we have visited (small LACs) appear to be exactly what my son is looking for: small classes, motivated professors, hands-on learning, etc. </p>
<p>Another thought about the salaries for those who attend Midwestern schools: Are most of these graduates living in area with a lower cost of living? $60,000 goes much further in Ohio than it does in Massachusetts.</p>
<p>Edited to add:
There are certainly schools on this list with a higher % of students who do go on to grad school.</p>
<p>I am not dismissing it (just as I don’t dismiss the Forbes data), but I can question the source. After all, this data is largely sef-reported, and therfore open to flaws of human character. What caught me first was that a school was missing, which made me dig a bit deeper. That several schools in the Midwest are missing gave me pause, that is all.</p>
Duke spends waaaaay more than $30K/kid more than UNC-Charlotte. Whether it is spending it effectively on education (and education of undergraduates) or not, that’s a whole other question, and hard to evaluate. </p>
<p>It’s a little hard to compare Duke and UNC-Charlotte, because their financial statements are meaningfully different, and Duke has a whole health system consolidated in its statements. In terms of students, the two universities are different sizes – UNC-Charlotte has 25,000 students, of whom 19,000 are undergrads; Duke has 15,000 with 6,500 undergrads. Duke pays $1.2 billion annually in employee compensation, compared to UNCC’s $263 million. It’s not easy to find the numbers, but the size and compensation of Duke’s faculty is likely significantly greater than UNC-Charlotte, and their qualifications should be meaningfully higher, too. As a rough estimate, Duke’s non-health-system annual compensation expense is probably $350-400 million. Duke’s physical facilities are better as well: It has $5.6 billion in land, buildings and equipment pre-depreciation, vs. UNCC’s $754 million. And UNC-Charlotte gets meaningful state funding that Duke does not – $190 million last year, or $10,000 per undergraduate. Of course, Duke’s endowment dwarfs that of UNC-Charlotte ($6 billion vs. $100 million), which is why Duke can “get by” only charging $30,000 more. Duke’s net tuition represents about 15% of its non-health system operating expenses, UNC Charlotte’s net tuition is 25% of its operating expenses.</p>
in particular, draw the line?</p>