Who says the Ivy League is too much
After reading an article in Fortune magazine, I couldn’t believe what I was reading. I was totally baffled. The main article was how college campuses, mostly the elite ones, were feeling the effect of the recession and the economic hard times our country has endured. This came as no surprise as I figured most colleges were feeling the heat and people start to weigh options differently when deciding about their future and not everyone can afford a college education at this time. Makes sense right? I thought so as well.
What I couldn’t wrap my head around was how second and third-tier schools were charging close to what Ivy League schools were asking for admissions. To pay for Yale next year for example, one would need to write a check for $36,000. Steep obviously, but this is Yale we are talking about here. But a school such as Bucknell or Kenyon were charging $30,000 for admissions according to the excerpt.
Can that really be? How are they able to charge only a few grand less than some of the finest schools on the entire planet? Especially in times like these, wouldn’t it be beneficial to schools to look at cutting admission costs just a tad? I mean lets get real here. I know you don’t have to go to Harvard or Princeton to be successful and not every CEO or President came from the Ivy League, but still.
The article cited the fact that now 2/3 of high school graduates are going to college, compared to the 1970′s when that number was only half. So more kids are now going and they are able to charge what they want because they know they can. This just doesn’t sit well with me. If so many are going away to college, shouldn’t they be able to make it MORE affordable?
My feeling is that everyone should have the opportunity to go to school. Maybe not everyone can get in to Harvard or Yale, I’m fine with that. But I don’t think just because you can’t afford it, that should deter someone from trying to get a college education and crushing their hopes and dreams of earning that degree.
Where do we draw the line though? I’m curious as to what others think. I don’t think that every college should institute the same admission costs across the board. You have to stay competitive and admission costs help fund great programs certain schools have. But I think there has to be something done about schools charging an arm and a leg when clearly the education you are getting is not what you are paying for.
Sort out the public schools from the private–and you’ll get some different figures. Kenyon and Bucknell are both private and don’t receive regular public infusions for capital expense.
Why would you go to second or third tier private school when you have in-state tuition at Michigan (Ann Arbor), Berkeley or UVA?
Then too, how are you going to evaluate the potential education you’ll get? What criteria will you use? What about the resources of the school, including libraries and faculty?
Most kids and parents miss the importance of a school’s network. For example, in the sciences, econ and sociology, the faculty and grad network at U Chicago is impeccable. Political Science and government at Michigan, UVA, Georgetown, Berkeley and Yale have impeccable networks.
This is more than an apples and oranges game. My point–analysis on the basis of tuition is a profound oversimplification of a number of highly complex issues.
You should check out the tuition at places like Bates and Middelbury, they put Ivies to shame. But you’re missing the point. These schools charge as much as they can get away with. If it’s too expensive for enough people they’ll be forced to reduce tuition to bring in students. This is the market at work. This, mind you, is coming from a guy that went to a public in state school so I don’t have a private bias.
I watched an interview recently that Bill Moyers (PBS) did with David Simon and they discussed a point about how our education system feeds into the greater workings of the country that I think seems relevant here.
I don’t think the system has been designed around this rule but it is definitely an operative observation that we educate who we need to. This expands on what The Weakonomist touched on in their comment regarding the fact that school tuition is a product of a market system. Schools charge what the market will bare – regardless of the fact that education system financing itself has changed drastically in the past few decades to accommodate the increase in school’s tuition and fees. For example the financing model for education used to be 80% grants and 20% loans and now fewer than 20% of college educations are financed by grants with the remainder coming primarily from loans.
What I mean by the statement that we educate who we need to is a more controversial statement than you may at first realize. What I am saying is that if you boil our country down into market factors there is a percentage of the population who we just don’t need. Our challenge becomes what to do with that smaller group to keep them from damaging the percentage of the population we do need.
As controversial as this idea may seem, I think anyone would be hard pressed to explain why in the larger scheme of things it matters if one kid doesn’t go to college – and for a market society, that’s all any kid is – one kid. Again, I’m not suggesting any design behind this observation, but just as people discuss how economic markets “correct”, I think these same behaviors apply to systems that operate under the same market-based models.
I see everyone’s point here and they all make valid arguments. I was just looking at it from a different standpoint I guess. I think we would all agree that the types of schools who like to keep costs on the higher end are not Yale or Harvard. Granted they are good schools and I don’t mean to lessen them any bit as I’m sure they have a great curriculum. Think of it in terms of buying a car. Would you pay for a Ferrari and get a Lexus? Both are good cars but one is obviously better than the other. I just don’t see how you can rationalize paying that much for admission knowing you are being taken. Maybe I’m too high on some schools and picking on the others. I don’t mean to be but that’s just how I see them
I recently read somewhere that mid level schools almost always match whatever the top institutions are charging. The reason this article contended was that by matching the tuition cost of a Harvard or Yale parents who are paying the bill feel like their son or daughter is receiving the equivalent quality of education because the prices match.
Another aspect that is never talked about are scholarships. Many (and quite possibly a majority) of students do not pay the full price of their educations. I think this is an incredible mistake. Instead of forcing a minority to pay for another person’s education, schools should only charge the true cost of their tuition. If a school wants to give out need based scholarships for disadvantaged students I am all for that, but the money should come from other funding sources like concerned alumni or the endowment.
My theory on the matter is that high school graduates from affluent families find their niche at schools where there is an abundance of other kids from rich families. This may be a tainted view but as someone who strongly considered both Bucknell($40,000) and Lehigh (~38,000 tuition) I found this to be true. When visiting the campuses on accepted student days, I found myself surrounded by a bunch of trust fund babies who loved the thought of 4 more years in a “bubble” (Also the reason I chose to go to a state school).
While the fit wasn’t right for me, I believe that there is some reason to send your kid to these types of universities. The main reason that I think it is not unreasonable to pay these exorbitant tuitions is because I believe that there is probably a strong correlation between your starting salary and how much you paid to attend your particular university. While some people might not agree with me on this one, I think that most college grads end up at their first job through a reference or connection. Many of the connections or networks that get us our first jobs are from college friends’ parents, teachers, etc. The bottom line is if you hang out with enough rich people, one of their parents will probably help you get into a job that you wouldn’t normally be eligible for. I realize that this is a very cynical view on the matter, but I believe that it is much harder for a kid from an affluent family to tumble to a lower rung job than for a student of the same caliber graduating from a state university.
1. When you speak about tuition, you really should include the room and board to make the figures more realistic. For example, Yale 09-10 will be 36,500 for tuition + 11,000 for room and board, which means studying at Yale will cost 47,500 without financial aid.
2. Your numbers are off. Do your research before posting. Bucknell tuition is 39,000 for tuition + 9,000 for room and board i.e. 48,000. I’m sure Kenyon is at that level, and I know Middlebury will pass 50 grand next year.
3. “If so many more people are going to college, shouldn’t they make it more affordable?” This statement goes against simple economics 101 logic: as demand rises, so does price.
4. The undergraduate educational difference between a Kenyon and a Yale are not very high. You can’t say, but come on it’s Yale. You’d do better analyzing what is in a college education. What does Yale have that Kenyon doesn’t and vice-versa. You’ll find that the quality of teaching is identical and that Kenyon might be better in this field (the most important one) because the classes are smaller. In reality, the quality of the students is almost identical at a Kenyon or Yale (just look how selective both schools are).
5. College education is expensive, but I would not say that a Harvard undergrad education is worth more money than a Kenyon undergrad. You might get some prestige points and a bigger alumni network, but educationally speaking, it’s the same stuff. Top tier schools are more than just the ivies, but if you just want to go to college, you can go for pretty cheap to a state school.
6. Post on what you know. Don’t try to act like an expert on what you don’t. And do your research.
7. Good luck.