I don't care what luxury cars cost, because I don't have to buy them. It is infuriating when something you believe your children may need is priced as a luxury good and heavily subsidized by your taxes.

How to Raise a University’s Profile: Pricing and Packaging
by Kevin Carey
New York Times
February 6, 2015

The cult of the professional manager. To be honest though until recently I thought american college was just the last years of high school plus maybe the first year of university (a bit like a 6th form college). But that is because it looks like high school in movies and you can't study the things we associate with university - medicine, law etc.

In the U.S., if you finish 1st grade at 7, and college at 7+11+4 = 22, you finish medical school at 22+4 = 26 and law school at 22+3 = 25 if you go straight through. At what age can you finish medical and law school in other countries if you start school at the usual age and go straight through?

It's very confusing since people use the term college/university somewhat interchangeably in the U.S. The term college in the US can mean a few different things. And when I first saw the UK term for college I was a bit confused in return. BTW as I'm sure you know most movies don't really show what life on a U.S. university campus is like very realistically.

There are a few different definitions of college here in the U.S.

1) An institution is refereed to as a university if it gives out graduate degree's of any sort Masters, PhD's, Law degree. This can be in addition to getting BA's or without. A College typically only gives out Associates (AA - 2 yr) or Bachelors (BA, BS, BFA) degree's.

2) A college might be a "part" of a university often designated by the type of degree but not always. For example a university having a college of Art, college of science, college of liberal arts.

3) And then the even more generic term where 'college' is just used as where a student goes after H.S. to study. The term I want my kids to go to 'college' usually just refers sending a student to any form of higher education.

There are different types of colleges that aren't part of universities. Community colleges that mostly give AA & technical degree's. Although that is changing and some give out BA's. These typically don't have dorms. And the professors don't typically need PhD's in their field. Many have programs so one can transfer to a '4 year' institution after completing a course of study. In contrast are small liberal arts colleges that are small private institutions that usually only give BA degrees. These colleges are small usually less than 2K students, usually expect 4 years living in a dorm.

Thank you for sharing this article. While other threads have discussed college as a Veblen good, this article may have a specific goal.

Some may say this sounds like a push for standardized testing, and for narrowing the scope of studies.

The linked page for the OEC study shows "In partnership with PEARSON Foundation". Other threads discuss the relationship between Pearson, standardized testing, and common core. Do we want common core type of standards, uniformity, and testing to take over the colleges and universities?

In the above quote from the article, the author's positioning of these sentences seems to imply a water park at GWU? (There is not.) The above statements are offset by the following facts also shared, but not prominently, within the article. (These facts provide appropriate context to understand that the building spree was not capricious, but in support of offering additional educational programs):


In related current events, accreditation of post-secondary institutions is being discussed until Feb 28, 2015, as is the NACIQI's desire to control that process. (PDF documents here (2015) and here (2012).) This could have far-ranging effects on U.S. colleges and universities going forward. If NACIQI, currently an advisory committee, gains singular power over the process of accreditation and access to Title IV funding, checks-and-balances could be removed (bringing to mind the adage Power corrupts; Absolute power corrupts absolutely.)

In partial response to Bostoninan's question about studying Medicine and law in other countries......it's complicated in Australia.

Here you can start school at 5 and finish year 1 age 6. It is not uncommon to start University at 17 particularly in certain states like Queensland. Red shirting has made starting University at 18 more common.

Law is available as an undergraduate degree. It is a combined degree, with a choice of Arts, Science, engineering, criminology, computer science etc. It takes 5 years minimum, and can take 6 or 7. That means finishing a law degree potentially at 22 although there is usually a six month post grad requirement at what is called the College of Law also. Make it 23.

Medicine is more complex. It can be done as an undergraduate degree with one university offering a five year course or there is a more traditional six year course. It can also be done as a post graduate. Most undergraduate Arts and Science degrees are three years with an option for a fourth Honours year for some. university courses are more immediately specialized here.

So as an undergraduate it is possible to finish age 22 (17+5) but more common to be 23 or 24. As a graduate the straight path takes a minimum of 7 years so 24 or 25. Then there is a year of internship which is compulsary General training in a paid position. After that one to three years as a resident which is a non training role while trying to get onto a specialist training program which is generally five years but can be much longer. A specialist who goes straight through a graduate program having left school at 18 will be 32 at a minimum at the end of the process.

I read the article, and was struck that GWU is now considered a national research university. I too remember it as a commuter school as the article stated it once was.

It's well known that all private schools that aspire to national stature have roughly the same sticker price. And given that GWU is making efforts to rise in the rankings (for whatever that is worth), it certainly seems a better value than say Bennington, a middling liberal arts school that I remember only because it had the highest sticker price in the country when I was applying to college many years ago. Even today, Bennington and GWU have about the same tuition, but Bennington's acceptance rate is 65% to GWU's 34%.

GWU can try to charge whatever it wants, but the only people that will pay that much are students from wealthy families that don't have any better choices.

They mention BU as the model for GWU in that story. As a Boston area resident, I think that a talented student can learn just as much at BU as they could at MIT for example, but that MIT's main value is a richer intellectual environment and better career opportunities. There are several kids from our high school each year that turn down full scholarships from BU each year and instead go to an Ivy, MIT, or a Carnegie-Mellon. So truly talented students won't pay anything near the sticker price, and may end up paying nothing for a fine education if they so choose.

If you were comparing BU to Harvard I might agree with you. But BU does not compare to MIT. MIT is a technical school and it's teaching style is different from most universities out there. You can not get out of BU what you can at MIT. The money to attend MIT goes to excellent and open ended research labs. Not so much to fancy rec centers. Have you ever taken a tour of MIT? My kids & I got an inside view of MIT when we were tour colleges with my daughter a few years back. It was a fun tour, my DD wasn't even remotely considering MIT, but I personally know people who work there and I wanted my DS to see it. The labs and facilities at MIT are just so inspiring and would make any of our STEM kids.

P.S. My DD goes to a private university that is about 1/2 the cost of the top schools. It's only a bit more expensive than many of my state schools. And what my DD gets for it is small class sizes and personal attention. She doesn't get some of the extra's this article talks about like fancy rec centers or a cohesive campus or the reputation. But its a good fit for her.

bluemagic,

I attended MIT for graduate school and received an excellent education. I agree with you that the research labs are exceptional and should have mentioned it.

But my point was different. I attended a midwest state school for undergrad that has roughly the same reputation as BU. I was part of the honors program and received an excellent education there as well. While the average school IQ was lower, my honors classmates were just as sharp as those at MIT (they all ended up at Stanford, Columbia, MIT, etc. for graduate school). I also found a great undergraduate research opportunity (only a few to choose from as opposed to hundreds). Career opportunities were notably different which is what I really noticed after attending MIT.

However, here is another key difference: My state school cost was less than zero. After considering all the scholarships I received, I even had beer money for the weekends. If I had gone to an expensive private school for undergrad, it would have completely drained my parents finances.

A clarification: I just saw that BU's Trustee scholarships cover full tuition, but not board. So it could be effectively free for a Boston area resident that lives at home, but those staying on campus would have to pay boarding fees. That is still an incredible educational value.

MIT subsidises all undergrads. It costs them about $70,000 to educate them, the full sticker price is $45,000. They can do this because they have an enormous endowment. I don't know about funding of grad students.

They also get around the poor high school prep while maintaining their own high standards by not grading subjects in the first semester, and not recording failed subjects in the second.



It sort of is. Things studied in first year are high school level elsewhere, but then they have a huge number of non-relevant general education subjects which fill at least a year's schedule, if not more. Which leaves two years to fit in what takes three years in other countries. A master's degree can potentially be only one year in the US. As far as I can tell the reluctance to teach professional degrees at undergrad level is just cultural. They could compact the general ed stuff (I know of at least one excellent liberal arts school which does not teach composition separately, but as part of every subject). PhDs take forever because students are expected to work in the supervisor's lab instead of hiring people for that purpose. They also have quite a lot of coursework at the PhD level, which supports the assumption that undergrad work is not as advanced as elsewhere. There is also a massive range in quality of the education at US universities, which AFAIK doesn't occur elsewhere.

Bluemagic, your college/university distinction isn't true in my experience. Colleges are also PhD granting institutions.

Just for fun, here's a list of "The 25 Most Amazing Campus Student Recreation Centers". They include luxuries such as water parks, waterslides, lazy rivers, rock climbing walls.

This is how the US New & World Reports classifies schools. And i know there is some governing body that approves college names. I know that the school my DD attends was "granted" university status about 15 years ago when they starting giving Masters degrees. I assume it's the accreditation board that grants this status.

OK looking up the usnew rankings, their definition is a little less strict than I said. But the idea is the same. They list colleges/universities in 4 categories.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings

The point is it's confusing. You can get a BA (4 yrs) degree from both a college and university. And those of us in the U.S. use the term in a confusing manner.

There are a few school experimenting with traditional 4 year BA, then graduated school system. UPenn has a 6/7 year Medical School program and from what I know it's highly competitive to get in. One admitted into the program students start right away after H.S. and go straight to an intensive 2/3 year 'undergraduate' pre-med classes without all of the 'general ed coursework'. As long as you keep above a certain GPA you are then automatically transferred to their medical school when these pre-reqs are finished. Don't know why more schools don't do this the requirements for pre-med don't take 4 years particularly for kids who take a large number of AP's during H.S.

I'm skeptical of this claim. I started college in the 80s. The cost of a year at my private seven-sisters college went from 10K the year before I started to 20K the year I graduated. So it doubled in five years.

Every year, they told us that "tuition doesn't begin to cover the cost of your education." They've been repeating that line ever since. With the exception of the last couple of years or so, tuition increases have risen at more or way more than the cost of inflation, so I have a lot of trouble accepting that tuition hasn't caught up with actual costs yet.

What I suspect is really going on is that the "whole cost of your education" claim is referring to the costs of the new dorms, the new rec center (with lazy river!), the new horsey barn, and all those shiny new research buildings. As for those buildings, undergraduates may or may not even enter them during their four years, much less make use of them beyond a possible summer gig or a fourth-year project.

That and the colleges are gouging parents, and in many cases, students through non-dischargeable-even-in-death student loans. In other words, they raise tuition because they can.

So tuition at MIT is $43,720. If a student takes 8 classes in a year (4 per semester), this means that each class costs roughly $5,500 per student, or $110,000 for 20 students. I have trouble believing that even a course in cell culture or molecular biology could cost that much, let alone general chemistry or...a math class.

I agree with you that you can probably get as good an education at many state schools as BU for a lot less price. But then I have a bias against BU as I had a sibling who attended BU 30 years ago who doesn't look at it fondly. But I do know schools like BU, NYU, USC have been trying to become more selective and give the Ivy's a run for their money. I do know this reputation hinges on the fact that they attract students with higher stats.

On the other hand many of the top state school including ones here in CA are becoming ALMOST as expensive as some private schools. They have state of the art recreation centers that have been funding by additional student "fees" making the schools more expensive. And from what I know it isn't possible to at most UC's to get a FULL MERIT scholarship. Instead the state gives top students some scholarships plus perks like early class registration, admission to 'honors' programs and classes, and special dorms. So if your really in the middle income area where you can't afford the state tuition but make too much to qualify for most financial aide AND you are a top student financially you are better off going to a private school that will give you a full ride.

You would finish highschool at 17 to q8 but generally be 18 when you started training. Law and Engineering are four years, vet is 5 years, medicine is about 7 but the last two so are paid on the job training. Admission to such courses bases on your first year results and I think now a days an interview.

Eta. This is in NZ. And yes I know the movies aren't accurate but I get the impression that there is a lot more hand holding in a US college. A NZ first year lecture could have more than 300 students. Lecturers come in, talk for 50 minutes and walk out. There are exceptions but most first year classes have little interaction and if you don't take responsibility you fail (and a lot of bright kids, away from home for the first time and just legally able to drink di fail).

I think those numbers come from taking the entire school budget (maybe subtracting the research grants), and dividing it among the students. There is certainly a case to be made that having lab research on campus is valuable to the students, but I don't know that it really makes sense to attribute all the costs to them.

That said, MIT is indeed its own unique and singular place, and it's not really "just as good" to just go there for grad school. But I think it is a luxury good. A Yugo will get you to work just as well, but you'll enjoy the ride more in the Lexus. You might get the same job after college if you go to BU, but you'll enjoy college more at MIT (if you're a person who ought to go to MIT). I think you'll also learn better habits of thought at MIT that will serve you better in the years afterward, but that's not a statement I can prove.

No hand-holding in the state flagship I went. I hardly showed up to any of my lecture-hall classes during the first 2 years (or 3) and no one ever noticed

This will vary completely depending on which college or university you attend. Large state universities are like this (like UC Berkeley, UT and other schools with enormous undergrad populations). Those schools, it is not uncommon for undergrads to be taught by TAs rather than professors.

Many smaller liberal arts colleges have smaller classes - the one I attended had probably 30-40 students for the large intro classes but for the more advanced courses like some of the STEM classes and the more obscure classes, the class could range from 12 to even as few as 5-6 students. However, even in these smaller schools, there is not as much "hand-holding" as people may think - it was a shock for some of my classmates who were so used to have parents and guidance counselors monitor their progress all semester to suddenly have to realize that for some classes, their *whole* grade depends on midterm paper/final and final paper and/or exam (and some classes had both final paper and exam). But the smaller liberal arts schools such as the one I attended was focused more on teaching than research (at least when I attended) so if you wanted to really get into a subject, the professors were eager to support your curiousity. I remember many times when my favorite CS teacher would randomly call a quick "class" after hours, when he saw a few of us confused over some materials he had presented. But I would not call that hand holding but rather being in an environment that engages with the students.

It really depends on which school you pick.

To piggyback upon notnafnaf's post, also-- it is more than possible at a larger college/uni to have all of those things happen in different courses/departments.

DD is at a large state flagship. She is in the much-smaller Honors College there, where the enrollment is about 4-6% that of the larger institution. She has lecture courses with 400+ students in them, in which a student has to WORK to make themselves known even to the TA's in the class, never mind the instructor.

The thing is, she knows that such personal interaction is key to being given the benefit of the doubt-- ever-- and also to getting insider information regarding upcoming assignments, tips about what the instructor is thinking re: certain assignments, etc. The unwritten stuff that matters.

On the other end of that extreme, she also has some small (<12 student) seminar/discussion classes where class participation is a HUGE portion of the student grade, since it's the engine of learning for everyone taking the course. I don't consider that hand-holding, really-- almost more like nowhere-to-hide. LOL.

She wasn't that shocked by having so much riding on just a few assessments-- but it is clear that some of her classmates have been. Some of them have been downright stunned by the level of difficulty and lack of gentle coaching from instructors, never mind the lack of "second chances" at things.

One of the only things that she has found maddening is a lack of accountability from faculty-- far from there being no hand-holding (except on demand, and as noted, DD goes to pretty great lengths to have her professors KNOW her), good luck even knowing what your grade is in a class prior to the final exam. DD has had courses where she didn't have any information on her course performance between the second week and the posting of final grades. Not kidding. Faculty also give assignments with MADDENINGLY short turn-around times-- and students are expected to basically be plugged in and nervously checking-checking-checking like rabid squirrels with ADD, I guess-- because if they don't, they will fail to notice that there is now a 5 page essay due in 24 hours. (I'm not actually exaggerating that by much-- 4 pages with citations, and 40 hours' notice).

College is now VERY much more hostile toward non-traditional, disabled, and older students, from what I've seen. The notion that students are "always on" and the assumption that they live ON CAMPUS-- is a huge disadvantage to those who are commuters, who must work, or have family caregiving in the picture. I truly don't know how those students have enough hours in the day now, because the ground is constantly shifting under them like quicksand.

There is also a patchwork of different electronic notification systems in play-- so some faculty use one, some use another, some prefer nothing at all and others use e-mail exclusively, etc. For DD's six classes this term, she has a variety of very different styles to contend with there, and no fewer than FIVE separate websites to check a minimum of five to six time daily to keep on top of it all.

I mention that because I thought that I was pretty well in tune with what the executive demands of the environment were like-- I had no idea how much more complex it was than when I was in the classroom. Be warned, those who have kids headed toward early matriculation-- executive function needs to be VERY good indeed. I still have to scaffold this, and the other home-town kids that we know? Yeah, their parents help with scheduling weekly, too-- it's just too much, too scattered for most of them otherwise. It's very fragmented now.

I think that faculty all (sort of) have to produce something akin to a syllabus-- though she has had a few that don't really do that, either. But there are no restrictions on how often they have to update student grades, how long they have before returning work to students, etc. This is quite alien to me-- never, never would I have been allowed to do to my students what DD's professors seem to expect her to put up with. It's outrageous, IMO.

At her state flagship, I am very pleased to say that there is little hand-holding, and even less grade inflation. Not working hard is a route to poor grades. Period. The retention rate is about 80% from beginning of freshman year to sophomore fall, which is probably as it should be.

Other than that-- what Val said. Oh-- one more thing. DD's "full tuition" scholarship still leaves us shelling out about 3-4K annually in additional "fees" and such, and she doesn't even live on campus. If she did, we'd also be writing checks for 12-16K every year. What this means is that her tuition is effectively about 14K annually.

Now, sure-- that is a fraction of the cost of an institution like BU, MIT, or HMC. Sure. But it is definitely not what most middle class families will find "affordable."

It angers me that so much of that cost is going toward things that seem to me to be quite unrelated to the academic mission. No, a fancy climbing wall and a 24 hour sushi bar are not "essential" campus amenities, and I'm tired of being forced to support that stuff. Supporting the library? Fine. Good, even. A new "recreation center" on campus? Uhhh- no.

Chalk is super expensive! And those nice slate chalkboards!

The shiny new labs at MIT are govt/industry funded. Classes at MIT are all taught by faculty, with a low teaching load (that's how to attract great faculty), so for a class with 60 students there are three professors, and it's a quarter of their nine month salary/cost of hiring (at a guess, maybe $5000 in staff costs per 10 students per subject per year?). Then there's heating costs, and plant maintenance and cleaning and IT and who the hell knows what else goes into these institutions. And because it's a private university none of that is public. I'd be fascinated to know how the calculation is done for a public school. But not fascinated enough to dig through business or accounting reports. Booring.

Howler, your post was tl;dr, but the last bit - the fancy amenities are what drives recruitment, high apps means lower acceptance percentage, which makes you seem selective, driving more recruitment, and probably more better students too. And better students earn more afterwards, and donate more.

There is also the coupon effect. They raise the sticker price and offer more scholarships to attract students, because $40,000 with a $15,000 scholarship is obviously a better deal than $25,000 with no scholrship.

So basically the lecturers are making the students pay for their (the lecturers)lack of executive function skills? I hadn't thought of some of this. When I was at university computers were a useful tool but most students used pen and paper 90% of the time. There was a stated marking turn around of less than a week for lab stuff or some fixed length for other stuff. Personallh I think it is unethical to have a second assignment due before the first is back as it prevents learning from mistakes until they have been repeated. If I were paying for my child to attend I would expect better. Basic accommodations and amenities are fine, substandard teaching practice is not.

I would have loved to have attended MIT as an undergrad.

That said, the students who went to MIT undergrad seem to be happy only looking back in remembrance. There is a reason they MIT has the slogan "IHTFP" that always shows up on the school ring. For everyone else, IHTFP stands for "I Hate This F* Place".

Yeah-- I'm regularly appalled by it in some of her classes. I'd NEVER have done that kind of thing. I always considered a syllabus my contract with students, and they knew when every quiz, exam, and assignment was due on the first day of class, and I tried for about a 48 hour turn-around. DD would LOVE to have a professor meet that kind of standard now.

The other thing that she's had happen is that document-sharing (for scheduling appointments and such) requires that students have access to do data entry-- but the problem is that they can then OVER-WRITE others' entries. Oh-- and so can the TA's, which is what I strongly suspect is happening at least some of the time.

DD basically only got about 4 hours' worth of unrestricted time on campus each week to do required appointments for a computer science class. She has also fairly routinely had an appointment over-written/deleted/moved without warning or notification. So she shows up, and voila-- she no longer has an appointment, in spite of having documented it with a screen shot on her phone (yeah-- it's been that regular a thing, that she wised up and started documenting it).

She doesn't like to be "a butthead" about this kind of thing-- but I finally INSISTED that she needed to let the class professor know about it, as she is a commuter with an overload that includes lab times-- there is simply no WAY for her to compensate for this kind of nonsense on a regular basis. The professor agreed (with alacrity and ire) and came down pretty hard on the TA corps.

She also quite regularly has to REMIND two other faculty to please post the week's assignment-- but only because she and I sit down each Sunday to see what her schedule for the week holds. She has practices three evenings a week, is doing a research hour and working in an arts activity as well-- which isn't a problem but for the executive demands of that 19 hours at the hands of 6 different faculty, all of whom have their own idiosyncratic method of doing things.

She has a schedule grid in an excel document. The uni doesn't provide them with anything to help them manage their time. WE do, and before anyone suggests that this is helicoptering-- I got the idea from her 19yo friend's parents, who do the same exact thing. It's just too scattered for kids who are age-appropriate in terms of executive function-- and I mean that even for those are are more typical in age.

This is what we have to take into consideration each Sunday:



I still sit down with DD once a week and prompt her to go through:

a) all of the paper that she's been handed that week,
b) twitter notices from one activity and one professor/TA
c) e-mail accounts (two-- one on campus and one regular account for an extracurricular)
d) Canvas online system
e) Blackboard online system
f) Pearson's MyMathLab for math homework
g) Pearson website for a gen ed class
h) other independent class website
i) each course syllabus to check for reading assignments, exam dates, etc-- there are few reminders, and sometimes she has to PROD a faculty member to post an assignment if it is due in the coming week and not up by Sunday evening...



We have an excel spreadsheet with a running schedule grid and additional notes, including upcoming events, homework slots, entry spaces for extracurriculars by the day, and a timed grid that runs from 8AM until 10PM 7 days per week.


It's nutty. Truly. I'm an insanely organized HG++ adult, and it's a LOT even for me to keep on top of. DH can't-- and, um-- he's got her schedule grid each week, and is HG/EG and enormously successful professionally. He still has to ask me re: when her practices are, what she is doing at any point in time, who is picking her up from campus, etc.

It isn't that technology has made it "better" so much as (from what I've seen) it makes it an order of magnitude more complex; students are expected to just deal with that and cater to each idiosyncratic set of preferences. That has always been somewhat true-- but the range of conduct is now so broad that it's kind of crazy. IMO.

While some of the fancy stuff may be over the top, college in the US has always been more than just academics. My eldest works out at the nice rec center. It would be really nice if the school had a softball field (no DI team, but a club team using a city converted soccer field - artificial turf outfield so no metal cleats).

Middle kid is still considering playing ball if she goes to a DIII school, and all of the DIIIs she likes are in cold climates. She would appreciate nice indoor athletic facilities for winter workouts. She also likes the water park facilities at warmer climate schools. When she heard one kid at her school had decided on Alabama, she asked if that was the school with the good water slide. Yes it is (lazy river too!), and if that piques her interest in a school that would give her full tuition+ - then that is fine with Mom and Dad.

As for sushi - even our public schools serve sushi in the middle school and high school. It isn't a 24 hour sushi bar - not yet.

That said, my eldest chose her school for academics, and middle kid will too. However, if the academics are equal, the fancy stuff could tip things in favor of one school for middle kid.

Watching this thread with interest. We will soon embark on negotiatiating the University system in the US for DD due to a posting Stateside in the next 18 months.

HK you are scaring me! Life at Uni was not that complex when I was a student here. There was a couple of sheets handed out detailing assignments and their due dates and when the tests were for each class. That was about it. Fortunately DD is pretty organised and seems adept at negotiating Internet accounts and school systems for obtaining and posting assignments etc. But still...ugh.

At some point I will start a thread asking questions about negotiating the American university system. It's a very different admissions process to what we have. It's also hard to get a real handle on what would be a good school. We will be limited to where we will live as I want DD to live at home. She will only be 15 or 16 and in a new country so that's a given.

Well, I am looking back in remembrance, but I think I really was happy as an undergrad there. Of course, I had an unusual experience because I was a transfer student (I did one year at UC Berkeley before I transferred). I think I was happier because I understood better what it was like to go to a school that wasn't a good "fit."

MIT freshman grading (pass or no record) is described at http://web.mit.edu/registrar/reg/grades/freshmangrading.html . I think not showing failing grades on a transcript is a little dishonest. It's a transcript, not a highlight reel. The essay from the MIT admissions blog Skipping Class and Failing Bio shows that the freshman grading policy encourages some students to be irresponsible.

Universities can be evaluated by many criteria, and I understand that MIT is a great school for many people. Most of the student blogs leave a much better impression, and MIT is to be credited for its openness in sponsoring the blogs.

I recently visited my alma mater, a small, selective (top 20) liberal arts college, and found the facilities looking much as I had left them 20-ish years ago. I think the gym had been spruced and there was a new science center. The dorms--the same. Spartan. Very. (A few are nicer by virtue of being old and pretty.) I compare this to my experience in several large state university towns, where new dorms, eateries, and buildings pop up like mushrooms and are swank as hell. Very interesting.

ndw, just wanted to understand when your DD would be entering college. Probably best for a new thread, but is she Class of 2016 (entering college Fall 2016)?

If so, and if she is going to college in the US, she should be taking (or have taken) the SAT, ACT and/or Subject Tests.

Do you have any say in where you live in the US? If so, how much flexibility in location? Will you move to the US after she has applied and been accepted (so you would know where to purchase/rent)?

Thanks for the questions NSG (hope abbreviation ok!). We will be in DC.

I have looked at the SATs which she can sit here and am contemplating having her sit before they change to see how she goes. American University doesn't require SATs but most others I have looked at will.

She finishes school here in Nov/Dec 2016. I am not sure she will have her results in time to apply for the Spring 2017 intake so likely looking at Fall 2017. The way our school years are offset makes it difficult. Gives us a little more time.

We will be renting and we have some choice but have to be inside the Beltway.

I will start a new thread shortly.

I probably should wait till you start a new thread. But a few comments on your situation. My DS should be graduating H.S. June 2017, so would be also applying to schools about the same time. As to applying for a "spring" Jan 2017 admit. Check with the schools to see if they accept spring applications not all do. It might be more comfortable for her to wait for 6 months but you might not be able to wait till you move to start the application process.

Keep in mind for a fall 2017 admission she many have to apply before you move. Application deadlines vary but are often due the fall the previous year, so be sure to check at each individual school. This is well before you even finish first semester of senior year. And in those situations she might not hear until they get in until March. In addition many private schools applications want teacher recommendation letters and detailed letters from the school that probably are easiest to get before you move.

Good info bluemagic. Yep, need a new thread, but just a side note - if you are looking for merit scholarships, it is best to submit SAT and/or ACT scores. My eldest goes to AU. While her GPA was good, it wasn't great. Her test scores were very good though, and that translated to about half tuition (for all four years).

Also, you might want to look at College Confidential. It is a forum where all sorts of college questions are asked and answered. It is likely that others have had similar situations to yours, and maybe they can provide some insight.

Thanks everyone. All good info.

The AU site specifically says not to send SAT scores for International students so that was actually one reason we were considering it.

Now as soon as I figure out how to start a new thread I will start one as I do appreciate the helpful hints.