Kiplinger has published its annual report on the colleges that it rates as the best value colleges. Many of the same colleges are at the top of this list. For example, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hills is the number one value among public colleges for the 10th year in a row. However, that may not be the case next year, since the board is raising in-state tuition by 15.6% for next year, and similar percentages for the next several years. Part of the justification for raising tuition to that extent is the fact that UNC-Chapel Hill has been recognized by Kiplinger and other as such a great deal, compared to other public colleges.
Among private schools, Princeton University appears to continue to offer the best financial aid program. According to Kiplinges, the average Princeton grad leaves owing only a little over $5,000 for his/her undergraduate education. Of course, these kinds of average statistics can be misleading; if you go to school with nine millionaires who can afford the tuition outright, while you need to borrow $50,000, that averages out to a mean debt of $5,000. Nonetheless, Princeton is generally regarded as the school among the Ivy League colleges that does the best job in providing sufficient aid to allow anyone who does get in to be able to attend.
There are two things that are interesting to look at between the two lists. One is the average debt upon graduation. Graduates of even the #1 bargain public school, UNC-Chapel Hill, owe an average of over $15,000, while quite a few few of the top schools have a significantly lower average debt upon graduation. Secondly, while Chapel Hill as a four-year graduation rate of nearly 75%, and my alma mater, the College of William and Mary, as well as the University of Virginia, have four-year completion rates of over 80%, most of the other top "bargain" public schools have four-year completion rates in the 50 percentiles, or even the 40's. Obviously, this is related to the debt burden, because having to extend your education beyond four years increased the years paying tuition and probably the overall debt. This is one of the reasons that public university may not be quite as much of a bargain as they seem.
Anyway, to see the list of the best values in public education, see this chart.
To see a similar list for the private universities, see this chart.
Showing posts with label college tuition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label college tuition. Show all posts
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
The Rising Costs of College
For your Halloween-eve enjoyment/terror, I've got something scarier than any ghost, zombie, monster, or masked killer...OK, maybe not the masked killer, but still pretty scary...
Here is a chart by the Freakonomics guys about the rising cost of college tuition between 1978 and 2008:
The chart only shows private colleges, but I believe the figures are pretty much the same for public ones as well. And to take away your last hopes, although this chart only goes to 2008, it hasn't gotten any better in the last few years, particularly with all the cuts to state budgets. According to Freakonomics, here are the figures for college tuitions in 2011-2012:
One silver lining to note, however, is that these figures are the PUBLISHED tuition and fees. In recent years, many, if not the majority, of students are actually paying substantially less than the published rate, at least for state and nonprofit four-year colleges, due to grants and scholarships and such. The Obama administration is now requiring colleges to post a calculator on their websites so families can input their income information and such, and get a better idea of the real costs they will be expected to pay. This at least allows students to better compare colleges on what their real, ultimate costs will be, not just to dismiss certain colleges on their published fees when they would probably be required to pay less.
But I don't think anyone has any good ideas about how to reign in these soaring increases in college costs.
Here is a chart by the Freakonomics guys about the rising cost of college tuition between 1978 and 2008:
 |
| © 2011 Freakonomics, LLC |
The chart only shows private colleges, but I believe the figures are pretty much the same for public ones as well. And to take away your last hopes, although this chart only goes to 2008, it hasn't gotten any better in the last few years, particularly with all the cuts to state budgets. According to Freakonomics, here are the figures for college tuitions in 2011-2012:
The question nobody seems to be able to answer definitely is WHY college tuition is rising at three times the cost of living, higher even than our sky rocketing health care costs.
- The average published in-state tuition and fees at public four-year institutions was $8,244 in 2011-12, which is 8.3%, or $631, higher than in 2010-11. Average total for tuition, fees, room and board, were $17,131, up 6.0 percent.
- For out-of-state tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and universities, the published average was $20,770, which is 5.7%, or $1,122, higher than in 2010-11. Average total charges were up 5.2% to $29,657.
- The percentage increase was smaller, but the totals are still higher at private nonprofit four-year colleges and universities. The published tuition and fees averaged $28,500 in 2011-12, which was 4.5%, or $1,235, higher than in 2010-11. The total average charges were up 4.4% to $38,589.
- The average increase in published in-state tuition and fees at public two-year colleges was even higher. They totaled $2,963, which is 8.7%, or $236, higher than in 2010-11.The average increase in published in-state tuition and fees at public two-year colleges was even higher. They totaled $2,963, which is 8.7%, or $236, higher than in 2010-11.
- Holding the line at a mere 3.2% increase were the average published tuition and fees, which were estimated at $14,487 in 2011-12.
One silver lining to note, however, is that these figures are the PUBLISHED tuition and fees. In recent years, many, if not the majority, of students are actually paying substantially less than the published rate, at least for state and nonprofit four-year colleges, due to grants and scholarships and such. The Obama administration is now requiring colleges to post a calculator on their websites so families can input their income information and such, and get a better idea of the real costs they will be expected to pay. This at least allows students to better compare colleges on what their real, ultimate costs will be, not just to dismiss certain colleges on their published fees when they would probably be required to pay less.
But I don't think anyone has any good ideas about how to reign in these soaring increases in college costs.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Linchpin's Seth Godin: "School is a complete failure...and College is an even bigger scam"
For a much shorter critique of the current American K-12 and college educational system, you may want to watch this short video of an interview with Seth Godin. Godin is the author of Linchpin, a book that discusses those key individuals that drive organizations that make a difference, along with how you can become one of those particularly-influential people. However, in the video below, "playing by the rules" that you are taught in school appears not to be one of his techniques to the top. Like the PRO side of the "Do Too Many People Go to College?" question, or the studies that suggest attendance at highly competitive schools produces no educational gains over comparable peers at traditional schools, Godin also questions the investment of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars for a college degree.
If you are homeschooling, he has some kind words for you. However, he also suggests how parents can make things better in their children's schools.
But you can hear the man himself explain his views on education in 4:36 in the video below:
If you are homeschooling, he has some kind words for you. However, he also suggests how parents can make things better in their children's schools.
But you can hear the man himself explain his views on education in 4:36 in the video below:
Monday, October 17, 2011
Do Too Many Kids Go to College?
That was the question being examined last Wednesday in Chicago, in a formal, Oxford-style debate sponsored by Intelligence Squared US, a recent American import of an English organization that sponsors academic debates among the top thinkers on various public policy issues. Each side debates, an audience votes, and a winner is determined by who has won the most votes. But the larger point, of course, is to raise the level of discussion of these issues and to expose the public to some arguments that they haven't heard before on these contentious subjects.
Appearing on the PRO side of the Do Too Many Kids Go to College? question was Peter Thiel. Peter Thiel, besides being the co-founder of PayPal and early investor in Facebook, has established the Thiel Fellowships to pay up to $100,000 to up to 20 young people or teams NOT to go to college, but to invest in their entrepreneurial ideas instead (for more information, read my earlier post). Thiel argues that college costs have gotten way out of hand, landing students with excessive loan burdens that restrict their future options. In the debate, he pointed out that, adjusting for inflation, college costs have gone up 300% since 1980--more than any other cost, including health care, housing costs, taxes, etc. He also believes many are better served if they get some life experience first, then go to college with those lessons in the real world under their belts.
Also on the PRO side was Charles Murray, co-author of the controversial book, The Bell Curve, about the role of IQ in the class structure of the US. He maintained his controversial tone, such as this quote of his from the debate:
On the CON side was Vivek Wadhwa, who writes for the Washington Post and Bloomberg Business Week while serving as the Director of Research at the Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at Duke University and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School. He discussed this in an international perspective, and argued that the outflow of jobs to other countries, such as India, with a high percentage of college graduates would only intensify if we don't continue to graduate our students from college.
Joining him for the CON arguments was Henry Bienen, the former President of Northwestern University. He pointed that while unemployment for college graduates may be at an all-time high, it is still only one third of the rate of unemployment for those lacking a college degree.
If you would like to watch the entire debate, or to read a transcript, you can see it on the Intelligence Squared US website.
Appearing on the PRO side of the Do Too Many Kids Go to College? question was Peter Thiel. Peter Thiel, besides being the co-founder of PayPal and early investor in Facebook, has established the Thiel Fellowships to pay up to $100,000 to up to 20 young people or teams NOT to go to college, but to invest in their entrepreneurial ideas instead (for more information, read my earlier post). Thiel argues that college costs have gotten way out of hand, landing students with excessive loan burdens that restrict their future options. In the debate, he pointed out that, adjusting for inflation, college costs have gone up 300% since 1980--more than any other cost, including health care, housing costs, taxes, etc. He also believes many are better served if they get some life experience first, then go to college with those lessons in the real world under their belts.
Also on the PRO side was Charles Murray, co-author of the controversial book, The Bell Curve, about the role of IQ in the class structure of the US. He maintained his controversial tone, such as this quote of his from the debate:
Almost everybody needs more education after high school. What they don't need is this fraudulent, destructive, antediluvian thing called a PA. The thesis of my argument is really that the BA is the work of the devil.OK, then....
On the CON side was Vivek Wadhwa, who writes for the Washington Post and Bloomberg Business Week while serving as the Director of Research at the Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at Duke University and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School. He discussed this in an international perspective, and argued that the outflow of jobs to other countries, such as India, with a high percentage of college graduates would only intensify if we don't continue to graduate our students from college.
Joining him for the CON arguments was Henry Bienen, the former President of Northwestern University. He pointed that while unemployment for college graduates may be at an all-time high, it is still only one third of the rate of unemployment for those lacking a college degree.
If you would like to watch the entire debate, or to read a transcript, you can see it on the Intelligence Squared US website.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Yet Another Study Shows Public Colleges Provide Better Value for Post-Graduation Salaries
So the final in my trinity of recent studies that suggest that top students don't necessarily have to pay top dollar for good educational opportunities, I turn to the "payback" study done by SmartMoney magazine. Like yesterday's study, this one is based on the salaries earned by the graduates of top colleges, which I personally think is a dubious evaluation of the quality of education. Nonetheless, it is a major consideration of most families looking at college decisions, so it is worth at least noting what these studies are saying.
So the payback scale devised by this study looks at the average salary of graduates divided by the total fees (tuition and other charges by the college itself) over four years of earning a degree. So, for example, if the average student paid $25,000 a year for four years at College X, but earned an average salary at graduation of $150,000 a year, that school would have a payback scale of 150% ($150,000/$100,000 total costs). But if the average student paid $50,000 a year for four years, but earned an average salary of $175,000, that college would have a payback scale of only 87.5% ($175,000/200,000).
Let's acknowledge upfront that the payback scale favors some universities over others. For one thing, the schools that offer programs in business or science and technology are going to look better than those that are typical "liberal arts" colleges, whose graduates may be going into such field as social work, the arts, non-profit research, or--gasp!--education, whose salaries are typically lower. The scores also don't take into account average financial aid--which would benefit the Ivy League schools, whose endowments are rich enough to offer healthy aid packages to many students--or typical years to graduate--which would make many public universities look worse, because more of their students take longer to graduate than the presumed four years. So looking at these figures with somewhat of a grain of salt, what did SmartMoney magazine find?
Based on the payback scale, the highest performing colleges and universities were the top-tier public universities. According to SmartMoney magazine, the luckiest students are those living in Georgia: Georgia Institute of Technology was their #1 "payback" school (with a payback ration of 221), and University of Georgia was #4 (payback of 186). In general, the South and Midwest ruled the top of the payback scale, with the University of California at Berkeley being the only college on either coast breaking into the top 10 (it was #10 with a payback ratio of 146).
Alas for North Carolinians, no college in the state made the top 50 of the SmartCollege listing. Our neighboring states did better; South Carolina has Clemson University, which was #6 with a 160% ratio, and Virginia had both the University of Virginia at #16 (117%) and my alma mater, The College of Williams and Mary, at #18 (111%).
It is not until you get to #19 that you find a private school: the Ivy League university of Princeton, which as a payback scale of 102. The last 30 universities on the list are dominated by private schools, with the Ivy Leagues generally scoring higher than most of the other top-tier private colleges.
You can read the article to find out the specific details about the average salaries of the three types of schools--public, private, or Ivies--and the comparative relative costs. But the bottom line is still the same: going to a very expensive and exclusive university does not guarantee you a higher salaries, particularly when you compare the relative costs of earning your degree.
Now, my point in the three posts is not to bash the Ivy League schools, or private schools in general. But there can be so much pressure about getting into "the right school" or "the best school," and I hope looking at some of this data can help middle schoolers and high schooler feel less anxious about their postsecondary education.
And I do have to admit to a personal bias. When I was in high school, I applied (and got accepted, at least to some) to Ivy League and elite/expensive private schools, but I ended up choosing The College of William and Mary, which was one of my state schools, and thus a fraction of the cost of the others. I ended up getting an excellent education at a bargain price. But since I didn't have thousands of dollars of student loans hanging over my head, I was able to choose jobs that I really enjoyed and that I thought were really valuable--jobs in the non-profit world, and then in education (leading finally to homeschooling, where I get to PAY for the privilege of spending untold hours every day teaching children!). I've never had a high salary job, but I think I've had plenty of high impact jobs. Plus, I've always enjoyed and believed in what I did--which is something that is hard to put a price tag on.
So all I'm saying is--there is a lot to consider when choosing what college to attend. Don't feel that a fancy name alone is the yellow road that will bring you to your dreams.
So the payback scale devised by this study looks at the average salary of graduates divided by the total fees (tuition and other charges by the college itself) over four years of earning a degree. So, for example, if the average student paid $25,000 a year for four years at College X, but earned an average salary at graduation of $150,000 a year, that school would have a payback scale of 150% ($150,000/$100,000 total costs). But if the average student paid $50,000 a year for four years, but earned an average salary of $175,000, that college would have a payback scale of only 87.5% ($175,000/200,000).
Let's acknowledge upfront that the payback scale favors some universities over others. For one thing, the schools that offer programs in business or science and technology are going to look better than those that are typical "liberal arts" colleges, whose graduates may be going into such field as social work, the arts, non-profit research, or--gasp!--education, whose salaries are typically lower. The scores also don't take into account average financial aid--which would benefit the Ivy League schools, whose endowments are rich enough to offer healthy aid packages to many students--or typical years to graduate--which would make many public universities look worse, because more of their students take longer to graduate than the presumed four years. So looking at these figures with somewhat of a grain of salt, what did SmartMoney magazine find?
Based on the payback scale, the highest performing colleges and universities were the top-tier public universities. According to SmartMoney magazine, the luckiest students are those living in Georgia: Georgia Institute of Technology was their #1 "payback" school (with a payback ration of 221), and University of Georgia was #4 (payback of 186). In general, the South and Midwest ruled the top of the payback scale, with the University of California at Berkeley being the only college on either coast breaking into the top 10 (it was #10 with a payback ratio of 146).
Alas for North Carolinians, no college in the state made the top 50 of the SmartCollege listing. Our neighboring states did better; South Carolina has Clemson University, which was #6 with a 160% ratio, and Virginia had both the University of Virginia at #16 (117%) and my alma mater, The College of Williams and Mary, at #18 (111%).
It is not until you get to #19 that you find a private school: the Ivy League university of Princeton, which as a payback scale of 102. The last 30 universities on the list are dominated by private schools, with the Ivy Leagues generally scoring higher than most of the other top-tier private colleges.
You can read the article to find out the specific details about the average salaries of the three types of schools--public, private, or Ivies--and the comparative relative costs. But the bottom line is still the same: going to a very expensive and exclusive university does not guarantee you a higher salaries, particularly when you compare the relative costs of earning your degree.
Now, my point in the three posts is not to bash the Ivy League schools, or private schools in general. But there can be so much pressure about getting into "the right school" or "the best school," and I hope looking at some of this data can help middle schoolers and high schooler feel less anxious about their postsecondary education.
And I do have to admit to a personal bias. When I was in high school, I applied (and got accepted, at least to some) to Ivy League and elite/expensive private schools, but I ended up choosing The College of William and Mary, which was one of my state schools, and thus a fraction of the cost of the others. I ended up getting an excellent education at a bargain price. But since I didn't have thousands of dollars of student loans hanging over my head, I was able to choose jobs that I really enjoyed and that I thought were really valuable--jobs in the non-profit world, and then in education (leading finally to homeschooling, where I get to PAY for the privilege of spending untold hours every day teaching children!). I've never had a high salary job, but I think I've had plenty of high impact jobs. Plus, I've always enjoyed and believed in what I did--which is something that is hard to put a price tag on.
So all I'm saying is--there is a lot to consider when choosing what college to attend. Don't feel that a fancy name alone is the yellow road that will bring you to your dreams.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Study Casts Doubt on the Ability of Highly Competitive Universities to Raise Salaries
On the heels of my post yesterday about a study that showed that high achieving students end up with similar test scores whether they get into the most competitive high schools or not, a study this year by researchers at Princeton University discovered a similar phenomenon in regards to the most exclusive universities. In this 2011 study, they found that most high achieving high school students who applied to the most elite colleges, but ended up going to a less competitive school (whether because they weren't accepted or chose a different school), earned the same average salaries as their peers that graduated from the exclusive colleges (Ivy League-level schools).
This study is particularly interesting because it was a repeat of a study that the same economists published about 10 years ago. That study revealed the same thing--applicants to top tier universities who attended less elite colleges generally obtained comparable salaries to the graduates of the most exclusive schools. In the first study, however, the salaries were self-reported, which left room for some, padding, shall we say. But in this follow-up research, not only were many more people included, with the time span now reaching to careers of people in their 40s and 50s, but the data on salaries was taken from more objective sources, such as Social Security information. Still, the results were the same; there was no boost in income for graduates of top colleges compared to other students with comparable test scores and such who didn't attend those types of schools.
So, the bottom line is: Big name colleges are not required to earn the big bucks. If you have the grades and test scores, along with personal qualities like self-confidence and persistence that are related to applying to these types of schools, of a viable candidate for admission, ON THE AVERAGE, you will earn as much even if you attend a less prestigious college. Depending on how much you have to pay for the big name schools, in fact, you may be better off turning them down (if accepted) and pursuing an education at a less costly alternative.
There are some BIG caveats to this conclusion, however. Graduating from a highly competitive/Ivy League type university DID significantly increase the incomes of minority students (black and Latino), students from low income families, and those whose parents did not attend college. It appears that the elite colleges do provide those types of students with skills, habits, or networks that do advance their professional chances at gaining a larger salary.
But for white middle or upper income students, the debt they might occur to attend the most exclusive schools is not likely to translate to significantly higher salaries.
Of course, we hope that earning a lot of money is not the sole criteria by which we judge our universities. Income upon graduation is an even worse stand-in for educational quality than standardized tests are. However, there can be questions about the educational value of the highly elite schools. In many of them, the focus is really on graduate education, so that a majority of undergraduate classes are taught by graduate students, who may have only a shallow command of either teaching techniques or the subject area (and sometimes, even of the English language itself!).
This is all to say that students don't need to feel that their lives will be ruined if they don't get into their desired Ivy League schools. There are a lot more factors involved in finding the right school than simply the prestige of its name.
This study is particularly interesting because it was a repeat of a study that the same economists published about 10 years ago. That study revealed the same thing--applicants to top tier universities who attended less elite colleges generally obtained comparable salaries to the graduates of the most exclusive schools. In the first study, however, the salaries were self-reported, which left room for some, padding, shall we say. But in this follow-up research, not only were many more people included, with the time span now reaching to careers of people in their 40s and 50s, but the data on salaries was taken from more objective sources, such as Social Security information. Still, the results were the same; there was no boost in income for graduates of top colleges compared to other students with comparable test scores and such who didn't attend those types of schools.
So, the bottom line is: Big name colleges are not required to earn the big bucks. If you have the grades and test scores, along with personal qualities like self-confidence and persistence that are related to applying to these types of schools, of a viable candidate for admission, ON THE AVERAGE, you will earn as much even if you attend a less prestigious college. Depending on how much you have to pay for the big name schools, in fact, you may be better off turning them down (if accepted) and pursuing an education at a less costly alternative.
There are some BIG caveats to this conclusion, however. Graduating from a highly competitive/Ivy League type university DID significantly increase the incomes of minority students (black and Latino), students from low income families, and those whose parents did not attend college. It appears that the elite colleges do provide those types of students with skills, habits, or networks that do advance their professional chances at gaining a larger salary.
But for white middle or upper income students, the debt they might occur to attend the most exclusive schools is not likely to translate to significantly higher salaries.
Of course, we hope that earning a lot of money is not the sole criteria by which we judge our universities. Income upon graduation is an even worse stand-in for educational quality than standardized tests are. However, there can be questions about the educational value of the highly elite schools. In many of them, the focus is really on graduate education, so that a majority of undergraduate classes are taught by graduate students, who may have only a shallow command of either teaching techniques or the subject area (and sometimes, even of the English language itself!).
This is all to say that students don't need to feel that their lives will be ruined if they don't get into their desired Ivy League schools. There are a lot more factors involved in finding the right school than simply the prestige of its name.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Triangle NC the Center for Bargain Colleges
The College Board released statistics this week that claimed that while the average cost per year for a four-year private school undergraduate education is now $36,000 (compared to $21,000 ten years ago), the increase in financial aid actually reduces the average per year cost to $22,000. Kiplingers followed up that data with their annual listing of the best bargains in private education, based on the average amount of needs-based, and in some cases, non needs-based grants available to reduce the actual costs of attending the school.
The top school on the list for 2010-2011 is Princeton University. However, the fifth university of their best-value listing was Duke University, located in the Durham point of Research Triangle, NC. This adds Duke to last year's rating of University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as the best value among public universities, as well as North Carolina State University's inclusion as number 10.
So even though the college costs around here sound astronomical, it appears that the true costs can be significantly lower. And we seemed to be blessed with a variety of choices for "bargain" undergraduate education; I didn't any other community that had options under both the public and private lists.
I've included some of the data from the report, including graduation rates and average debt upon graduation, below. I've also included the statistics from my alma mater, The College of William and Mary, which was #4 on the list....just because it is my old school, several of my friends have children applying there, and it provides some useful comparisons to the local schools. But if you want to see the data itself, or want to look for other colleges you are considering, you can access the Kiplinger statistics at: http://www.kiplinger.com/reports/best-college-values/
Duke University
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/5yrs: 83%, 92%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 8
Yearly cost: $53,157
Average debt at graduation: $23,059
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 75%, 88%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 14
Yearly cost, in-state: $15,294
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $33,184
Average debt at graduation: $14,936
North Carolina State University
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 37%, 70%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 16
Yearly cost, in-state: $14,390
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $26,875
Average debt at graduation: $14,996
The College of William and Mary
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 84%, 92%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 11
Yearly cost, in-state: $20,566
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $40,358
Average debt at graduation: $12,859
The top school on the list for 2010-2011 is Princeton University. However, the fifth university of their best-value listing was Duke University, located in the Durham point of Research Triangle, NC. This adds Duke to last year's rating of University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as the best value among public universities, as well as North Carolina State University's inclusion as number 10.
So even though the college costs around here sound astronomical, it appears that the true costs can be significantly lower. And we seemed to be blessed with a variety of choices for "bargain" undergraduate education; I didn't any other community that had options under both the public and private lists.
I've included some of the data from the report, including graduation rates and average debt upon graduation, below. I've also included the statistics from my alma mater, The College of William and Mary, which was #4 on the list....just because it is my old school, several of my friends have children applying there, and it provides some useful comparisons to the local schools. But if you want to see the data itself, or want to look for other colleges you are considering, you can access the Kiplinger statistics at: http://www.kiplinger.com/reports/best-college-values/
Duke University
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/5yrs: 83%, 92%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 8
Yearly cost: $53,157
Average debt at graduation: $23,059
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 75%, 88%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 14
Yearly cost, in-state: $15,294
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $33,184
Average debt at graduation: $14,936
North Carolina State University
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 37%, 70%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 16
Yearly cost, in-state: $14,390
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $26,875
Average debt at graduation: $14,996
The College of William and Mary
Graduation Rate, 4yrs/6yrs: 84%, 92%
Student/Faculty Ratio: 11
Yearly cost, in-state: $20,566
Yearly cost, out-of-state: $40,358
Average debt at graduation: $12,859
Monday, October 25, 2010
How Much of Your College Tuition and Fees Are Going Towards Athletics?
Earlier this month, USA Today did a fascinating study of the amount of student money that goes to support intercollegiate athletics. It seems that many colleges are supporting this programs as part of the mandatory fees that students are charged in addition to tuition. In some cases, however, the athletic fee could amount to over 20% of the tuition. And in many cases, the athletic fee is hidden under some generic title, such as "Student Activity Fee," so that students and parents have no idea that the money is going to the sports program.
According to the USA Today study, the amount that colleges have been charging for sports has been increasing dramatically; fees had jumped by 18% between 2005 and 2009 alone (adjusting for inflation). So this is a definite factor in the rapidly-escalating cost of attending college.
The relatively good news for North Carolina students is that this state isn't too bad when compared to many others, according to the USA Today data. Any guesses as to which branch of the University of North Carolina charged students the most for their athletic program? Actually, among the UNC branches listed, the highest rate was required at UNC-Asheville: $620, or 13% of the tuition total. Next came UNC-Wilmington, with a $541.25 fee (10% of tuition), closely followed by UNC-Greensboro, which bills its students $489 (9.8% of tuition). Our local universities were much lower. UNC-Chapel Hill charges only $271, or 4.1% of tuition, but the best bargain could be found at NC State, whose $159 fee represents only 2.4% of tuition (Duke University was not included in the listings).
One focus of the article is how students are not aware that so much of their money is going towards athletics because the fee is not specified. So I did a quick look at the websites of the UNC colleges listed to see if that was the case. While not an exhausted search, I could not find any student athletics fee listed by UNC-Chapel Hill or UNC-Asheville (nor at Duke). However, NC State, UNC-Greensboro, and UNC-Wilmington all had a complete breakdown of all mandatory student fees that had a clear designation of the athletics fee.
Personally, since our family has never been great sports fans, I think that fees over approximately 5% of tuition are out of line with what I think college priorities should be. However, I realize others may place a higher value on intercollegiate athletics. Nonetheless, I believe colleges should upfront information about such fees so that students and families can know where their college dollars are going. So I commend NC State, UNC-Greensboro, and UNC-Wilmington for their honesty on this subject, and I hope the other state schools will follow their lead.
If you want to see the list of the fees and percentages charged by other colleges in the nation, see the USA Today data at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2010-09-21-athletic-fees-chart_N.htm .
According to the USA Today study, the amount that colleges have been charging for sports has been increasing dramatically; fees had jumped by 18% between 2005 and 2009 alone (adjusting for inflation). So this is a definite factor in the rapidly-escalating cost of attending college.
The relatively good news for North Carolina students is that this state isn't too bad when compared to many others, according to the USA Today data. Any guesses as to which branch of the University of North Carolina charged students the most for their athletic program? Actually, among the UNC branches listed, the highest rate was required at UNC-Asheville: $620, or 13% of the tuition total. Next came UNC-Wilmington, with a $541.25 fee (10% of tuition), closely followed by UNC-Greensboro, which bills its students $489 (9.8% of tuition). Our local universities were much lower. UNC-Chapel Hill charges only $271, or 4.1% of tuition, but the best bargain could be found at NC State, whose $159 fee represents only 2.4% of tuition (Duke University was not included in the listings).
One focus of the article is how students are not aware that so much of their money is going towards athletics because the fee is not specified. So I did a quick look at the websites of the UNC colleges listed to see if that was the case. While not an exhausted search, I could not find any student athletics fee listed by UNC-Chapel Hill or UNC-Asheville (nor at Duke). However, NC State, UNC-Greensboro, and UNC-Wilmington all had a complete breakdown of all mandatory student fees that had a clear designation of the athletics fee.
Personally, since our family has never been great sports fans, I think that fees over approximately 5% of tuition are out of line with what I think college priorities should be. However, I realize others may place a higher value on intercollegiate athletics. Nonetheless, I believe colleges should upfront information about such fees so that students and families can know where their college dollars are going. So I commend NC State, UNC-Greensboro, and UNC-Wilmington for their honesty on this subject, and I hope the other state schools will follow their lead.
If you want to see the list of the fees and percentages charged by other colleges in the nation, see the USA Today data at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2010-09-21-athletic-fees-chart_N.htm .
Monday, October 11, 2010
Is the movie "The Social Network" GOOD for Reducing College Application Anxiety?
OK, so now I've REALLY got to see this movie!
I'm speaking of "The Social Network," the movie about which I wrote in a previous post as potentially misrepresenting both the study of innovation and of history (even though, admittedly, I haven't seen it.). Then today, my favorite newspaper writer on the education beat, Jay Mathews of The Washington Post, had a fabulous article about how well the movie represents undergraduate life in Ivy League schools (Mathews attended Harvard, as did Facebook founder Mark Zuckerman, although I think Mathews graduated, unlike Zuckerman).
Mathew advises college-anxious parents to pay attention to what the students are talking about in the film. According to Mathews, they talk about, ummmm, let's call it "dating," clubs, parties, technology, making contacts, making money, and so on. What they do not talk about is their classes, their teachers, their homework, their "Dead Poet Society"-like inspiration that evokes new levels of passion for their chosen fields.
And that, according to Mathews, is the reality of undergraduate education at Ivy League-level colleges like Harvard (at least, in his personal and professional experience). It is not a community of inspired learners who devote themselves to the pursuit of knowledge and forging new understanding of their chosen fields. It is a community of people who excelled in high school (otherwise they wouldn't be there), but who otherwise act like undergraduates at almost all schools--caught up in new experiences, testing out living on their own, devoted to their favorite clubs, activities, or relationships....much or most of which may have little or nothing to do with their classes.
For years, Mathews has been trying to convince people that acceptance to an Ivy League or similarly competitive schools is not like obtaining a Willy Wonka Golden Ticket, of which only FIVE exist and only that will allow you in the running to run the Chocolate Factory. The author of Harvard Schmarvard: Getting Beyong the Ivy League to the College That Is Best for You, Mathews argues that dedicated students can find at least as good educational opportunities, and in some cases, even better ones at the lesser-known, less competitive, but more undergraduate-focused universities than at iconic institutions like Harvard. He recommends that high school students (and their families) also read a new book, Debt-Free U: How I Paid for an Outstanding College Education Without Loans, Scholarships, or Mooching off My Parents by Zac Bissonette. This book, Mathew claims, demonstrates how someone who is truly passionate about their academics can create a superior intellectual program at a state university to what the typical student experiences at schools that will cost a quarter of a million dollars to complete (see my earlier post for more details on that subject).
Who knew that move would foment so much discussion on educational issues? I really do feel like I have to see it now, when before the major attraction in the movie for me was seeing Justin Timberlake, whom I like, not in a cougar way, but as someone who seems like a nice guy with considerable talents (I particularly liked his duet with Al Green on "Let's Stay Together" when the 2009 Grammy show had to find a last-minute replacement for the just-incarcerated Chris Brown).
I'll let you know what I think once I've seen it myself.
I'm speaking of "The Social Network," the movie about which I wrote in a previous post as potentially misrepresenting both the study of innovation and of history (even though, admittedly, I haven't seen it.). Then today, my favorite newspaper writer on the education beat, Jay Mathews of The Washington Post, had a fabulous article about how well the movie represents undergraduate life in Ivy League schools (Mathews attended Harvard, as did Facebook founder Mark Zuckerman, although I think Mathews graduated, unlike Zuckerman).
Mathew advises college-anxious parents to pay attention to what the students are talking about in the film. According to Mathews, they talk about, ummmm, let's call it "dating," clubs, parties, technology, making contacts, making money, and so on. What they do not talk about is their classes, their teachers, their homework, their "Dead Poet Society"-like inspiration that evokes new levels of passion for their chosen fields.
And that, according to Mathews, is the reality of undergraduate education at Ivy League-level colleges like Harvard (at least, in his personal and professional experience). It is not a community of inspired learners who devote themselves to the pursuit of knowledge and forging new understanding of their chosen fields. It is a community of people who excelled in high school (otherwise they wouldn't be there), but who otherwise act like undergraduates at almost all schools--caught up in new experiences, testing out living on their own, devoted to their favorite clubs, activities, or relationships....much or most of which may have little or nothing to do with their classes.
For years, Mathews has been trying to convince people that acceptance to an Ivy League or similarly competitive schools is not like obtaining a Willy Wonka Golden Ticket, of which only FIVE exist and only that will allow you in the running to run the Chocolate Factory. The author of Harvard Schmarvard: Getting Beyong the Ivy League to the College That Is Best for You, Mathews argues that dedicated students can find at least as good educational opportunities, and in some cases, even better ones at the lesser-known, less competitive, but more undergraduate-focused universities than at iconic institutions like Harvard. He recommends that high school students (and their families) also read a new book, Debt-Free U: How I Paid for an Outstanding College Education Without Loans, Scholarships, or Mooching off My Parents by Zac Bissonette. This book, Mathew claims, demonstrates how someone who is truly passionate about their academics can create a superior intellectual program at a state university to what the typical student experiences at schools that will cost a quarter of a million dollars to complete (see my earlier post for more details on that subject).
Who knew that move would foment so much discussion on educational issues? I really do feel like I have to see it now, when before the major attraction in the movie for me was seeing Justin Timberlake, whom I like, not in a cougar way, but as someone who seems like a nice guy with considerable talents (I particularly liked his duet with Al Green on "Let's Stay Together" when the 2009 Grammy show had to find a last-minute replacement for the just-incarcerated Chris Brown).
I'll let you know what I think once I've seen it myself.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
A Different Approach to Undergraduate Education
Tonight I listened to a webinar entitled "Harvard or Heaven with Voddie Baucham," a Christian minister who is a leader in the contemporary Family Integrated Church movement. During this talk, Baucham attacked the current higher education system as being worthless, rediculously expensive, unnecessarily long, and antagonistic towards Christianity and Christian values. Rather than send his children to a traditional college, Baucham's children are enrolled in a program called College Plus (http:www.collegeplus.org), which the website describes as "a revolutionary Christian based distance learning program helping students earn their fully accredited bachelor’s degree in a fraction of the time and cost of the traditional university system."
What College Plus does is assign each student a coach, who works with them in acquiring the skills and content knowledge to pass the CLEP or other subject-matter exam that will assure them college credit in that area. Because the program is so individualized, it varies from student to student, but the website suggests that the typical student graduates with a baccalaurete degree in two-three years for a total cost of $10,000-$15,000.
Now, my worldview and belief system is very different from Reverend Baucham preaches. I also value some of the things he rejects as "worthless," just as I don't care about some aspects of education that are most important to him. However, I found this to be an interesting illustration of an alternative approach to college that doesn't end up bankrupting the student and/or the parents.
And that is, I think, one of the most precious things about the American higher education system--the wide number of alternate paths and approaches that are available to our students. If nothing else, I'm grateful to College Plus for reminding me of that gift of our system.
What College Plus does is assign each student a coach, who works with them in acquiring the skills and content knowledge to pass the CLEP or other subject-matter exam that will assure them college credit in that area. Because the program is so individualized, it varies from student to student, but the website suggests that the typical student graduates with a baccalaurete degree in two-three years for a total cost of $10,000-$15,000.
Now, my worldview and belief system is very different from Reverend Baucham preaches. I also value some of the things he rejects as "worthless," just as I don't care about some aspects of education that are most important to him. However, I found this to be an interesting illustration of an alternative approach to college that doesn't end up bankrupting the student and/or the parents.
And that is, I think, one of the most precious things about the American higher education system--the wide number of alternate paths and approaches that are available to our students. If nothing else, I'm grateful to College Plus for reminding me of that gift of our system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)