Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Ivies cheaper than some state schools

The "Wasted Time" thread has become a discussion about paying for college, which I suggest be continued here. As I wrote there, parents should not assume that state schools will be the cheapest. The article below confirms that.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_20101265
Believe it: Harvard cheaper than Cal State
By Matt Krupnick
03/04/2012
San Jose Mercury News

The impossible has happened: Harvard College is now thousands of dollars cheaper than Cal State East Bay for middle-income California students.
So is Princeton. And Williams College. And Yale.
Top private schools, with their generous aid, have been among the most affordable options for poor students for a few years, but rising tuition has only recently sent California State University and University of California prices shooting past the Harvards and Yales for middle-class students.
The revelation comes as thousands of college and university students on Monday march to protest budget cuts in Sacramento that have forced up tuition and shaken campuses.
It's almost unthinkable in a state that once practically gave away college educations.
"We are coming close to pricing out many of our middle-class students," said Rhonda Johnson, Cal State East Bay's financial-aid director. "Now we're seeing a disadvantaged middle class."
College-cost calculators illuminate the dramatic shifts.
Consider a family of four -- married parents, a high-school senior and a 14-year-old child -- making $130,000 a year.
With typical aid,¿ the family should expect to pay nearly $24,000 for a Cal State freshman's tuition, on-campus room and board, supplies and other expenses. At Harvard? Just $17,000, even though its stated annual tuition is $36,305.
The same family would pay about $33,000 for a freshman year at UC Santa Cruz.

UC Berkeley, which recently followed the lead of private colleges by boosting aid for middle-class families, would cost $19,500.

...

Thanks Bostonian. I was not raised to aim for Ivies, but as my mother has pointed out on numerous occasions for my DD, “why not, if she could get a great scholarship?”

The mentality I was raised with is that, if you had to pay out for Ivies it would be value for money if you were guaranteed to hook into whatever path/professional entity it might be that values a degree from that particular school. Sometimes that takes the social connections as well, but that probably depends upon what you’re studying and aiming for. There are others with deeper knowledge about and more experience with this matter than me.

Anyway, information is power and thanks for posting these links.

I still think it's realistic to expect a full college scholarship for state schools. My sister-in-law got one a few years ago (dental school now).

There are two tracks to choose from, in my mind.

You can choose the "free" state school track or you can aim for the Ivy.

It depends on whether you are looking for a good brand (Ivy Diploma) or a free school (taking on the debt in grad school).

I think that Bostonian is right if you don't have savings. If you have savings, you will drain them to pay for the Ivy.

For either track, one needs good grades in honors/AP courses and good test scores. In 12th grade one can apply both to state schools and to Ivies. So the idea of separate tracks does not make sense to me. How should the efforts of students on these supposedly different tracks differ?

Actually, you don't. Lottery scholarships in our state require a C average and a high school diploma. They are only available to students who have been a resident of the state for at least the past year, and they do require that you begin college at a participating state institution immediately after high school along with then maintaining full time status and a C average in your college classes. But that is really not stringent requirements to get a college degree for about $6000 out of pocket after using just the state lottery scholarship.

The tracks don't have a difference in high school effort. I'm talking about post-high school tracks.

I chose the "state school" track (free) vs. the Ivy ($100,000). So did my college roommate. So there is that economic difference that you debating doesn't exist, but does exist if you have savings.

The academic difference is that you can more easily academically outperform your peers at the state school, which applies if you want to go to grad school. So my point is that it's possibly cheaper and possibly easier to get into a better grad school if you choose the non-Ivy state school.

I am consumed with curiosity ABQMom. To which state are you referring with the 'C' average lottery system? And this is a lottery in the traditional sense, as in names are randomly drawn? What percentage of entrants get a scholarship? Is this a common system or limited to your state?

I confess, I am skeptical about the wisdom of investing tax dollars in 'C' students. As was discussed in the "Wasted Time" thread, not everyone belongs in college. A 'C' student would seem marginally prepared for college. I wonder if your state tracks graduation rates for their lottery winners? It would be interesting to know if graduation correlates to high school GPA.

Wrong thread.

Maybe New Mexico, based on http://prognewmexico.typepad.com/nm...slative-lottery-scholarship-program.html and
http://www.nmlottery.com/legislative-lottery-scholarships.aspx .

Yes - NM is correct. We have high schools where the graduation rates are well below 50%, so there is a drive to raise the number of students continuing to college. Our particular high school has over 20% of graduates with GPA's above 4.0 and over 97% continuing on to college, so the students who choose to stay in-state usually have an easier time rising to the top of their classes.