Jump to content

Menu

Flabbergasted by friends' lack of awareness of college costs - UPDATE in post #440


Hoggirl
 Share

Recommended Posts

Every school has a net price calculator. They may not be 100% accurate but they can certainly provide a ballpark estimate of whether or not grant aid (not necessarily merit aid) is even close.

 

Low income students definitely can be well-served by 100% meet need schools. No one has stated otherwise. I even stated they can often bridge the gap with federal student loans in post 199: "Kids with low income parents who are Pell eligible might be able to bridge a gap with student loans at generous schools. But that definitely is not true for your typical middle middle class family. Their parents make too much for Pell. The universities expect parents to pay according to their FA formula. It does NOT work out via student application effort. It only works out via parents paying."

 

It is not hyperbolic. Students are far better served understanding their families' financial scenario. What applies to one family like yours with waived application fees and large amts of aid does not translate to other students. So if someone with waivers, Pell, and large amts of institutional aid is advising kids that in general it is worth applying and seeing, that advise is only good for kids with similiar financial profiles, not a universal truth. What is universally valid across all applicants is that knowing your financial aid options prior to applying leads to more financially realistic options.

*Some* students are better served with your advice, *some* with mine. I used that qualifier for a reason. I spent years working with low-income title 1 kids on highe ed admissions, and much of the advice here is not what was best for those families. Their most generous packages almost always came from the most selective schools they could manage to get the child into.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary, this advice works for some students.  If they go simply off a NPC or what they've heard through the grapevine, they'd have missed out on a fantastic option they loved.  It doesn't work for everyone - that's for sure - but I tell students and parents to go ahead and apply if they have a dream school or two.  Of course, it also comes with the caution to not fall in love and have some safeties that they are pretty sure will work because there are no guarantees.  One never knows which application and/or interview (or whatever) will catch admin's or a financial decision maker's eye and stand out. It might be theirs - or it might not be.  It won't be if they don't try.  It's not worthless if they try and don't get it.  It actually puts an ending to the "what if" question that will linger on if not tried.

 

I agree here. I certainly, absolutely would not advocate a "spray and pray" approach to out of reach schools. But if there is one, specific school that a student absolutely has fallen in love with, I would much rather spend the money in high school to see if it's at all possible, than to wonder about it for years later. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One never knows which application and/or interview (or whatever) will catch admin's or a financial decision maker's eye and stand out. .

That is not going to happen at schools where FA is purely based on financial formulas.

 

Merit aid, otoh, is absolutely variable. That I agree with 100% and students should definitely apply if merit aid is an option and the student believes they have a chance.

 

But, again, websites offer a lot of information and can help students know where to put their best efforts.

 

When students don't do research on what is competitive for a particular school (score ranges, GPAs, course loads, etc) and just apply bc they like the school, that is like applying via throwing a dart blindfolded. Some lucky guy might hit a target, but by far most won't. If that is their main application strategy, they are most likely going to be sorely disappointed unless they have matches in there by chance.

Edited by 8FillTheHeart
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree here. I certainly, absolutely would not advocate a "spray and pray" approach to out of reach schools. But if there is one, specific school that a student absolutely has fallen in love with, I would much rather spend the money in high school to see if it's at all possible, than to wonder about it for years later. 

 

A few years back one young lass almost didn't apply to NYU because "everyone knows they are stingy with aid," but she absolutely loved NYC and the school.  Guess which school came back the cheapest for her to attend?

 

Quite honestly, her experience is what changed my advice from "don't bother" to "go ahead and try, but have other plans too."  

 

My experience with schools is that if they really want a student, aid changes from what's listed.  My guy applied to Furman and got some merit aid, but it left us with a huge amount over our EFC to pay.  Furman didn't want to reject my super high stats lad, but they also didn't really want him.  U Rochester's final package beat both Pitt and U Alabama - our financial safeties.  They wanted him.  I'm pretty darn sure they don't regret it now either with his performance there and the awards he's won.  Furman lost out.  ;)

 

Same kid.  One school wanted him.  Another didn't.  Others were more or less what was expected.  One really doesn't know ahead of time.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 If that is their main application strategy, they are most likely going to be sorely disappointed unless they have matches in there by chance.

 

To be fair, no one is suggesting this be a main application strategy.  Quite the contrary.  What many of us are saying is we've seen enough lucky kids hit the target to think it's worth a chance for an application or two if desired, and if nothing else, that closes the "what if" question.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, no one is suggesting this be a main application strategy. Quite the contrary. What many of us are saying is we've seen enough lucky kids hit the target to think it's worth a chance for an application or two if desired, and if nothing else, that closes the "what if" question.

That is not what I am addressing at all. I'm addressing the idea that if a student wants to attend a certain school that if there is a will there is a way. Um....just no. Not for all kids. Considering the post's scenario was meant to rebut Cynthia's OP, the family income she was discussing definitely precludes that idea.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think it’s important not to assume one’s current financial picture will be the same years down the line. Three years before I went to college my parents were still married. Two years before, my primary parent was well-employed. It’s not that difficult to find people who tumble down the economic ladder quick, fast and in a hurry. Knowing that there are different approaches and options isn’t just important for people who are currently low-income.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is not what I am addressing at all. I'm addressing the idea that if a student wants to attend a certain school that if there is a will there is a way. Um....just no. Not for all kids. Considering the post's scenario was meant to rebut Cynthia's OP, the family income she was discussing definitely precludes that idea.

 

I agree with that totally.  The only ones who don't have to care what college costs are those who can and are willing to be full pay.  We get very few of those in our school district.  I'm trying hard to think of an example and can only name one family in my mind, though there may be a handful more.

 

I agree totally with the OP.  Folks should be doing their homework ahead of spending time and money traveling miles to see an unlikely school.  We tell kids to visit nearby schools (day trips) to see which type they like (or don't like) and then work on picking options.  It's only after all the "work" has gone into researching that if there's an unlikely school or two they think would be perfect, feel free to try it and see.  Just don't put all your eggs into that basket.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think it’s important not to assume one’s current financial picture will be the same years down the line. Three years before I went to college my parents were still married. Two years before, my primary parent was well-employed. It’s not that difficult to find people who tumble down the economic ladder quick, fast and in a hurry. Knowing that there are different approaches and options isn’t just important for people who are currently low-income.

I am definite not advocating not knowing there are different options. To the contrary. I think it is important for parents and students to know and understand the process and all of the ins and outs. I think knowing how FA works and how it varies according to the institution empowers students during the application process. Controlling your decisions based on being informed is a far better option than applying and "waiting and seeing if you might be lucky" when that financial information is readily available prior to applying.

 

There are definitely scenarios where students can't know until they hear....competitive merit for one. But students and parents can try to determine if it is a pure pipe dream or at least a semi-hopeful option if they really try to educate themselves on the process. (Last yr I attempted to help a mom whose Dd had a 30 ACT, a mid 3.x GPA, no major awards, a handful of AP courses, no real ECs. She was convinced her Dd was competitive for elite schools and highly competitive merit awards. She didnt want to hear otherwise and the outcome was lots of denies and too expensive bc no merit. Understanding matters.)

Edited by 8FillTheHeart
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The friends mentioned in my original post are definitely of the "donut hole" variety. Too much to get significant (if any)need-based aid but an unaffordable EFC. But, they were woefully lacking in basic financial knowledge related to college costs.

 

As I've said before, I don't understand the athletic aspect. I asked the mom if it wasn't possible to know the *maximum* amount a female volleyball player could get. She says that can't be knowable, which I find difficult to believe. My understanding (rather rightly or wrongly) is that sometimes more "merit" is "found" at Div III schools where an athlete is really wanted. But, I might be making that up. Lol. Her Dd is not a top recruit, but it seems like one could know the largest amounts that are available for female volleyball players. Seems like that would I be required for transparency purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The friends mentioned in my original post are definitely of the "donut hole" variety. Too much to get significant (if any)need-based aid but an unaffordable EFC. But, they were woefully lacking in basic financial knowledge related to college costs.

 

As I've said before, I don't understand the athletic aspect. I asked the mom if it wasn't possible to know the *maximum* amount a female volleyball player could get. She says that can't be knowable, which I find difficult to believe. My understanding (rather rightly or wrongly) is that sometimes more "merit" is "found" at Div III schools where an athlete is really wanted. But, I might be making that up. Lol. Her Dd is not a top recruit, but it seems like one could know the largest amounts that are available for female volleyball players. Seems like that would I be required for transparency purposes.

Division 1 women's volleyball is one of the few "head count" sports, meaning that if you get a scholarship on a Division 1 team, it's a full ride, but there cannot be more than 12 students on scholarship at any one time, so each coach will only have ~3 scholarships per year for incoming freshmen, which they reserve for the very top recruits. So at D1 schools you either get the full COA or you get no athletic money at all. At D2 schools, women's volleyball is an "equivalency" sport, and D2 teams get a maximum of 8 scholarships, which they can split up however they like. So they could have 16 players each with a half-ride, or they could give 6 of the best players full rides and then give 8 other players each a 1/4 ride, etc. But, again, coaches typically only have about 25% of their total scholarship money to award to incoming freshmen. And all of those scenarios assume the team is "fully funded" and can actually award the maximum allowable scholarships, which is often not the case. (For example, the maximum number of scholarships allowed in D1 men's fencing is 4.5, but Stanford only funds 2.)

 

If this kid is not a top recruit she's not going to get a full ride at a D1 school, and it doesn't sound like she's in the running for merit aid or much financial aid, either. She should probably focus on lower-ranked but fully funded D2 teams where the coach specifically needs someone in her position, and hope for at least a partial scholarship. If the coach is interested in her, he should be able to tell her upfront about how much he would have available.

 

D3 schools can get in serious trouble for awarding academic scholarships or financial aid to athletes who would not technically qualify for them, although that doesn't mean some of them wouldn't try to get away with it. I remember reading about a school where the baseball coach was brazenly telling recruits that he could increase their financial aid or add some academic scholarships to get them to attend, and NCAA came down hard on him.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this kid is not a top recruit she's not going to get a full ride at a D1 school, and it doesn't sound like she's in the running for merit aid or much financial aid, either. She should probably focus on lower-ranked but fully funded D2 teams where the coach specifically needs someone in her position, and hope for at least a partial scholarship. If the coach is interested in her, he should be able to tell her upfront about how much he would have available.

 

D3 schools can get in serious trouble for awarding academic scholarships or financial aid to athletes who would not technically qualify for them, although that doesn't mean some of them wouldn't try to get away with it. I remember reading about a school where the baseball coach was brazenly telling recruits that he could increase their financial aid or add some academic scholarships to get them to attend, and NCAA came down hard on him.

According to her mom, there is a lot of "it depends" answers coming from coaches about the money depending on whether or not other young women accept offers that have already been extended. Mom says there is no way to know because it depends on who else claims it at any particular school. It still seems to me that one could know the highest amount a top recruit would get (at a Div II school - yes, not DI at all) and know you probably weren't getting that much and work backwards.

If a top athletic scholarship wasn't going to make it affordable, and you know you aren't a top athlete, well then it won't be affordable for you.

 

I don't think they had any idea how much private schools would cost. They didn't balk at their daughter turning up her nose at any and all in-state schools. They had some fuzzy notion about "scholarships." They had no idea that their daughter could only borrow a limited amount. I don't really think they ever thought they'd have to contribute much of anything at all for her to be able to attend college. She knows the Dd is not a top recruit and she knows she's not an academic hot-shot. SMH.

 

ETA: I think I mentioned this before, but an in-state DII coach wanted to talk to her, and she didn't even bother because she doesn't want to stay in-state.

Edited by Hoggirl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each and every child I have to relearn what's what bc they change from yr to yr. Schools that offered scholarships last yr aren't this yr or they have dramatically changed amts/policies. Test score requirements change. Homeschool requirements change. Requirements for health insurance change (and this cannot simply be dismissed. Some U's require students to purchase their health care policies to the tune of $3000. That can alone can eat up 1/2 of their student loan without even discussing tuition, fees, rooom, board, books, and travel expenses.)

 

No situation is a simple translation across familial situations for a lot of schools. What a university will cost our family is not what it will cost yours for schools that use FAFSA and CSS. Advocating applying to see is the absolute worst advice anyone can give students.

This, absolutely. Even with kids two years apart, the search is different -- Not only do scholarships and financial aid policies change, but a lot of the admissions landscape changes. New version of the SAT. New alphabet soup of admissions plans or new application systems. There are a lot of rumors of changes coming from the Department of Education on the student loan program. Keep your eyes and ears open at all times.

 

Even if nothing changed in admissions and financial aid, your kids are different and may be hunting for a different location, academic, or social fit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to her mom, there is a lot of "it depends" answers coming from coaches about the money depending on whether or not other young women accept offers that have already been extended. Mom says there is no way to know because it depends on who else claims it at any particular school. It still seems to me that one could know the highest amount a top recruit would get (at a Div II school - yes, not DI at all) and know you probably weren't getting that much and work backwards.

If a top athletic scholarship wasn't going to make it affordable, and you know you aren't a top athlete, well then it won't be affordable for you.

 

I don't think they had any idea how much private schools would cost. They didn't balk at their daughter turning up her nose at any and all in-state schools. They had some fuzzy notion about "scholarships." They had no idea that their daughter could only borrow a limited amount. I don't really think they ever thought they'd have to contribute much of anything at all for her to be able to attend college. She knows the Dd is not a top recruit and she knows she's not an academic hot-shot. SMH.

 

ETA: I think I mentioned this before, but an in-state DII coach wanted to talk to her, and she didn't even bother because she doesn't want to stay in-state.

So now, in spring semester of senior year, she's basically just waiting to see if any crumbs will be left on the table at any of the schools she applied to, even though it's highly unlikely that she could afford them even with the crumbs, when she could potentially have had a firm scholarship offer at an affordable state school. :blink: 

 

When I posted above that coaches should be able to tell her upfront how much money they could offer, I was assuming she was a junior and was looking for offers to apply next fall. Now that I realize she's a second-semester senior, I think it's true that they have no way of knowing how much she might get, because at this point all the money's already been offered, and coaches are just waiting to see which, if any, are turned down. It also depends on where she ranks on each coach's list — it doesn't really matter how big the crumbs are if you're 4th on the waiting list.

 

You mentioned that she was offered $17K from somewhere, which would be roughly equivalent to a 1/4 scholarship at an expensive private school, and that's probably a good ballpark estimate of her "value" as an athlete — so they should really be looking at the COA for the schools she applied to and figuring out how, or if, they could afford to pay the other 3/4. Because if they can't afford that at any of the schools she applied to, she needs to come up with a Plan B super fast.

Edited by Corraleno
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My applications fees were waived because my family was broke and my parents' income was a non-factor because their credit made it impossible for them to borrow even if they wanted to. This.still.happens. Every kid is not coming from a solid, two-parent household with credit, assets and means (of any kind, however limited).

You may get significant aid if both destitute and brilliant. The situation for working class above average students is very different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may get significant aid if both destitute and brilliant. The situation for working class above average students is very different.

 

I can assure you that I am not brilliant and my parents weren't destitute in the way you seem to imply. They were unemployed and had bad credit so we were living off my mother's severance. I've worked with many working class families that would receive similar assistance today. The population on this board likes to consider itself middle class when, in reality, many here are on the upper end of the income scale even with one income.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pew says that with an income of about 70,000 to 200,000 a family of 8 is in the middle 55% of households in Colorado.  

 

I don't know that FAFSA takes family size or location into account, though.

 

These boards do skew richer than the average household, sure - but I doubt too too many of them are above 200k in annual earnings, even in higher COL places than Colorado.

 

FWIW, I had basically no idea as a teenager how college aid worked (and of course this was also 15 years ago, when things were cheaper).  I knew my parents had nary a dime to give me and I wasn't going to ask them to take out loans, so I thought my only chance was basically merit aid.  Lots of schools were still giving full rides for NM then, including the one an hour away from home, so I didn't worry too much.  But I did apply to a few public ivies, thinking they'd be more likely to admit me and give me money than selective private schools.  For some reason I thought public schools all gave more merit-based aid than privates gave need-based or merit-based (even to out of state students), which was so 100% wrong that I'm not sure how I got that idea.  I didn't apply to any meets-need schools; in retrospect I probably wouldn't have had to come up with much as my parents had lowish income and no savings, no equity, mediocre credit.  I was happy to go where I did, though - close to home, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Pew says that with an income of about 70,000 to 200,000 a family of 8 is in the middle 55% of households in Colorado.  

 

I don't know that FAFSA takes family size or location into account, though.

 

These boards do skew richer than the average household, sure - but I doubt too too many of them are above 200k in annual earnings, even in higher COL places than Colorado.

 

FWIW, I had basically no idea as a teenager how college aid worked (and of course this was also 15 years ago, when things were cheaper).  I knew my parents had nary a dime to give me and I wasn't going to ask them to take out loans, so I thought my only chance was basically merit aid.  Lots of schools were still giving full rides for NM then, including the one an hour away from home, so I didn't worry too much.  But I did apply to a few public ivies, thinking they'd be more likely to admit me and give me money than selective private schools.  For some reason I thought public schools all gave more merit-based aid than privates gave need-based or merit-based (even to out of state students), which was so 100% wrong that I'm not sure how I got that idea.  I didn't apply to any meets-need schools; in retrospect I probably wouldn't have had to come up with much as my parents had lowish income and no savings, no equity, mediocre credit.  I was happy to go where I did, though - close to home, etc.

 

Well sure.

 

I guess I sometimes get the feeling that people would rather be the child/family with no income/assets at all, as if it's easy or, oh gee, lucky for them/snark. 

 

Is it more financially taxing to be a middle class family with assets when it comes time to send the kids to college, yes. Does it hurt to give up some of what we've accumulated, yes. Would I give up what we have, begrudge people who are 'destitute' the assistance or opportunities they're afforded, or speak of them derisively? God, no.

 

NPCs typically say our kids get nothing unless they go to a selective private school but we have assets and savings that make that doable and, for the love of God, it didn't take super high earnings for us to manage that. Even with 6-figure student loans of my own and an AGI that averaged 70K for the last ten years, we managed. 

 

I wouldn't ever want to trade places with my poorer self and had I heeded the standard advice usually given here, and not applied to the selective private schools that I did, I would have been screwed just as the financial rug was pulled out from under us. The big publics would have given me next to nothing to close the gap.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure.

 

I guess I sometimes get the feeling that people would rather be the child/family with no income/assets at all, as if it's easy or, oh gee, lucky for them/snark.

 

Is it more financially taxing to be a middle class family with assets when it comes time to send the kids to college, yes. Does it hurt to give up some of what we've accumulated, yes. Would I give up what we have, begrudge people who are 'destitute' the assistance or opportunities they're afforded, or speak of them derisively? God, no.

 

NPCs typically say our kids get nothing unless they go to a selective private school but we have assets and savings that make that doable and, for the love of God, it didn't take super high earnings for us to manage that. Even with 6-figure student loans of my own and an AGI that averaged 70K for the last ten years, we managed.

 

I wouldn't ever want to trade places with my poorer self and had I heeded the standard advice usually given here, and not applied to the selective private schools that I did, I would have been screwed just as the financial rug was pulled out from under us. The big publics would have given me next to nothing to close the gap.

I know I don't agree with wishing to be poor in order to get more grant aid. We are very blessed to have the lifestyle we have. But equally, we are not willing to sacrifice our financial stability for our kids' college educations. Knowing how FA works means our kids have affordable options and can attend college, not wallowing in resentment bc they can't afford to attend a list of expensive schools.

 

Stating that aid is based on income and assets and if you cannot afford your familial contribution that schools expect then the school is unaffordable is simply a fact. That is the way the current system works. If parents can afford to pay, kids have lots of options. If kids have parents who can't, they have limited options.

 

It actually goes back to the fact that families are best served having their students focus on applying to schools that they can afford. Affordability is not based on website sticker price. For families seeking institutional grant aid, there are currently around 70 schools in the country that profess to meet 100% of need. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need But, bc of that, most are extremely competitive for admissions which equally works against lower income students who face more educational hurdles. They also meet need in different ways. Some include loans. Some don't.

 

This list includes schools that also meet approx 93% of need and includes an explanation of how need is calculated: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need

 

Low income families with students accepted into meets full need schools, especially those that do so without loans, are definitely best served by those schools over other options. But, the reality is that the majority of low income students are not going to meet their admission thresholds. The same is true for the majority of students across most income brackets. The admissions' bar is incredibly high. These schools enroll a very small % of the college-attending population even though they are the schools that get the most chatter.

 

MC families, otoh, may or may not be best served by applying to meets full need schools. Depends on the family and their financial circumstances. Our family isn't, so our kids don't apply. We pursue a different list of schools that make attendance possible bc without a different list, our kids' options are limited to commuting to the nearest CC or directional U. No resentment over how FA works. It is just a fact.

 

In terms of the bolded, in today's college loan system, it is impossible for UG students to take out 6 digits in loans without a cosigner. One financial situation that students face is they try to attend on large loans is that their cosigner is not approved for all 4 yrs. There are posts every yr on CC where students are describing losing their loans and they are unable to finish their degree.

 

Financing college is a serious hurdle. My goal in even posting is in hopes that families can find options that they can afford. Affordable options are going to depend completely on the individual family and the academic profile of the student applicant.

Edited by 8FillTheHeart
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I don't agree with wishing to be poor in order to get more grant aid. We are very blessed to have the lifestyle we have. But equally, we are not willing to sacrifice our financial stability for our kids' college educations. Knowing how FA works means our kids have affordable options and can attend college, not wallowing in resentment bc they can't afford to attend a list of expensive schools.

 

Stating that aid is based on income and assets and if you cannot afford your familial contribution that schools expect then the school is unaffordable is simply a fact. That is the way the current system works. If parents can afford to pay, kids have lots of options. If kids have parents who can't, they have limited options.

 

It actually goes back to the fact that families are best served having their students focus on applying to schools that they can afford. Affordability is not based on website sticker price. For families seeking institutional grant aid, there are currently around 70 schools in the country that profess to meet 100% of need. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need But, bc of that, most are extremely competitive for admissions which equally works against lower income students who face more educational hurdles. They also meet need in different ways. Some include loans. Some don't.

 

This list includes schools that also meet approx 93% of need and includes an explanation of how need is calculated: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need

 

Low income families with students accepted into meets full need schools, especially those that do so without loans, are definitely best served by those schools over other options. But, the reality is that the majority of low income students are not going to meet their admission thresholds. The same is true for the majority of students across most income brackets. These schools enroll a very small % of the college-attending population even though they are the schools that get the most chatter.

 

MC families, otoh, may or may not be best served by applying to meets full need schools. Depends on the family and their financial circumstances. Our family isn't, so our kids don't apply. We pursue a different list of schools that make attendance possible bc without a different list, our kids' options are very limited to commuting to the nearest CC or directional U.

 

In terms of the bolded, in today's college loan system, it is impossible for UG students to take out 6 digits in loans without a cosigner. One financial situation that students face is they try to attend on large loans is that their cosigner is not approved for all 4 yrs. There are posts every yr on CC where students are describing losing their loans and they are unable to finish their degree.

 

Financing college is a serious hurdle. My goal in even posting is in hopes that families can find options that they can afford. Affordable options are going to depend completely on the individual family and the academic profile of the student applicant.

 

Those weren't a total of undergraduate loans. My 6-figures includes graduate and professional education. My UG loans were just over 30K, federal only, and you are eligible for UDSL w/o a cosigner when your parents cannot sign. Again, that is not an insurmountable hurdle for most people.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those weren't a total of undergraduate loans. My 6-figures includes graduate and professional education. My UG loans were just over 30K, federal only. Again, that is not an insurmountable hurdle for most people.

No, that isn't. But equally, federal student loan amts are not going to open the doors to attending schools of choice. There are huge gaps between federal loan limits and actual costs. That is the bridge that needs to be met and what this thread is about.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It did for me. YMMV.

Unfortunately what worked for us as parents in the 80s and 90s does not translate to current college costs. Federal student loan amts will pay for CC, possibly commuting from home and working to pay the difference between tuition and books at local 4 yr schools. Very few 4 yr colleges have an annual cost of $5500 for tuition, fees, and books.

 

Only schools that actually meet families at the financial pt of what they can spend and what they receive are classified so easily as "it works for me." Unfortunately, for most students, affording college is more difficult to navigate.

Edited by 8FillTheHeart
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I don't agree with wishing to be poor in order to get more grant aid. We are very blessed to have the lifestyle we have. But equally, we are not willing to sacrifice our financial stability for our kids' college educations. Knowing how FA works means our kids have affordable options and can attend college, not wallowing in resentment bc they can't afford to attend a list of expensive schools.

 

Stating that aid is based on income and assets and if you cannot afford your familial contribution that schools expect then the school is unaffordable is simply a fact. That is the way the current system works. If parents can afford to pay, kids have lots of options. If kids have parents who can't, they have limited options.

 

It actually goes back to the fact that families are best served having their students focus on applying to schools that they can afford. Affordability is not based on website sticker price. For families seeking institutional grant aid, there are currently around 70 schools in the country that profess to meet 100% of need. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need But, bc of that, most are extremely competitive for admissions which equally works against lower income students who face more educational hurdles. They also meet need in different ways. Some include loans. Some don't.

 

This list includes schools that also meet approx 93% of need and includes an explanation of how need is calculated: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2017-09-21/colleges-that-claim-to-meet-full-financial-need

 

Low income families with students accepted into meets full need schools, especially those that do so without loans, are definitely best served by those schools over other options. But, the reality is that the majority of low income students are not going to meet their admission thresholds. The same is true for the majority of students across most income brackets. The admissions' bar is incredibly high. These schools enroll a very small % of the college-attending population even though they are the schools that get the most chatter.

 

MC families, otoh, may or may not be best served by applying to meets full need schools. Depends on the family and their financial circumstances. Our family isn't, so our kids don't apply. We pursue a different list of schools that make attendance possible bc without a different list, our kids' options are limited to commuting to the nearest CC or directional U. No resentment over how FA works. It is just a fact.

 

In terms of the bolded, in today's college loan system, it is impossible for UG students to take out 6 digits in loans without a cosigner. One financial situation that students face is they try to attend on large loans is that their cosigner is not approved for all 4 yrs. There are posts every yr on CC where students are describing losing their loans and they are unable to finish their degree.

 

Financing college is a serious hurdle. My goal in even posting is in hopes that families can find options that they can afford. Affordable options are going to depend completely on the individual family and the academic profile of the student applicant.

 

By the same token someone saying, hey, that doesn't apply in the following circumstances but here's what did work isn't an indictment of you or your approach. It is an alternative for those with fewer resources (or those who unexpectedly find themselves in similar straights) and doesn't require constant rebuttal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately what worked for us as parents in the 80s and 90s does not translate to current college costs. Federal student loan amts will pay for CC, possibly commuting from home and working to pay the difference between tuition and books at local 4 yr schools. Very few 4 yr colleges have an annual cost of $5500 for tuition, fees, and books.

 

Only schools that actually meet families at the financial pt of what they can spend and what they receive are classified so easily as "it works for me." Unfortunately, for most students, affording college is more difficult to navigate.

 

I actually have run the NPCs for myself and the family I was once part of and, yes, it would still work the same way. Current tuition and fees exceed 69K/year and even my family would get a 50% discount. Every 4-year state school where we've lived exceeds $5500 for tuition, fees and books.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually have run the NPCs for myself and the family I was once part of and, yes, it would still work the same way. Current tuition and fees exceed 69K/year and even my family would get a 50% discount. Every 4-year state school where we've lived exceeds $5500 for tuition, fees and books.

 

 

NC state schools are quite reasonable.  And with the new NC Promise program, 3 schools are below $5500 for tuition, fees, and books.

 

My middle son applied and has been accepted to one of them, Western Carolina.

 

Tuition is $1000 TOTAL for the year starting next year

Fees will run $3,220 for the entire year, but they include book rental so there are no book costs at all

 

It is 3 hours from us, so he will need a dorm and food, which run almost $13,000, so it isn't cheap still.

 

But with transportation costs, our local 4 year school will cost the same as him going away to Western.

Edited by DawnM
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing how FA works means our kids have affordable options and can attend college, not wallowing in resentment bc they can't afford to attend a list of expensive schools.

 

...

 

Financing college is a serious hurdle. My goal in even posting is in hopes that families can find options that they can afford. Affordable options are going to depend completely on the individual family and the academic profile of the student applicant.

 

I think this is what we're all working toward (those not willingly full pay anyway) - understanding financial aid.  Everyone adding their (recent) experiences gives those trying to understand it all some idea of what to look for (as they can identify with those who are similar).  There is no single "this is what always happens" experience.  Families differ.  Students differ.  States differ.  Schools differ.  What works out well for one may not work out at all for another.

 

If kids are high stat, there's one set of advice.  If families can meet their EFC, there's another.  If neither happens, it can get more tricky and require more effort.  Hopefully there is something that can work for everyone wanting it to work.  Sharing our experiences - good and bad - can only help those trying to figure their situation out.  Granted, some of what's shared won't apply to any given individual, but I expect more (recent) advice can help someone.

 

Those weren't a total of undergraduate loans. My 6-figures includes graduate and professional education. My UG loans were just over 30K, federal only, and you are eligible for UDSL w/o a cosigner when your parents cannot sign. Again, that is not an insurmountable hurdle for most people.

 

My middle son will have in excess of 6 figures once he's done with med school as that's an expense we just couldn't take on.  I've been assured by many that it will be fine (not counting those offering the loans!).  Time will tell.  That level of loans - even for a doctor - sure made me pause, but the cheaper alternatives (Caribbean) did not seem to fit him and his aspirations at all.

 

We have told him that we might be able to help by living in his basement and contributing to the expense account (when we can break away from our video games) once he has a job.   :lol:

 

We've discussed the differences in COL areas with all of our lads.  It's not just college that makes a difference.  We'd never be able to travel the way we do if we had such high everyday expenses.  They'll have to make their own judgments about where they want to settle down.  Oldest has already shifted some (away from HCOL).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NC state schools are quite reasonable.  And with the new NC Promise program, 3 schools are below $5500 for tuition, fees, and books.

 

My middle son applied and has been accepted to one of them, Western Carolina.

 

Tuition is $1000 TOTAL for the year starting next year

Fees will run $3,220 for the entire year, but they include book rental so there are no book costs at all

 

It is 3 hours from us, so he will need a dorm and food, which run almost $13,000, so it isn't cheap still.

 

But with transportation costs, our local 4 year school will cost the same as him going away to Western.

 

NC is definitely among the best cost-wise.  For anyone curious to see averages, here's how the states compare (look at the blue for in-state cost).  PA is still the third most expensive.

 

https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/2017-18-state-tuition-and-fees-public-four-year-institutions-state-and-five-year-percentage

 

cp-2017-figure-6.png

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is what we're all working toward (those not willingly full pay anyway) - understanding financial aid.  Everyone adding their (recent) experiences gives those trying to understand it all some idea of what to look for (as they can identify with those who are similar).  There is no single "this is what always happens" experience.  Families differ.  Students differ.  States differ.  Schools differ.  What works out well for one may not work out at all for another.

 

If kids are high stat, there's one set of advice.  If families can meet their EFC, there's another.  If neither happens, it can get more tricky and require more effort.  Hopefully there is something that can work for everyone wanting it to work.  Sharing our experiences - good and bad - can only help those trying to figure their situation out.  Granted, some of what's shared won't apply to any given individual, but I expect more (recent) advice can help someone.

 

 

My middle son will have in excess of 6 figures once he's done with med school as that's an expense we just couldn't take on.  I've been assured by many that it will be fine (not counting those offering the loans!).  Time will tell.  That level of loans - even for a doctor - sure made me pause, but the cheaper alternatives (Caribbean) did not seem to fit him and his aspirations at all.

 

We have told him that we might be able to help by living in his basement and contributing to the expense account (when we can break away from our video games) once he has a job.   :lol:

 

We've discussed the differences in COL areas with all of our lads.  It's not just college that makes a difference.  We'd never be able to travel the way we do if we had such high everyday expenses.  They'll have to make their own judgments about where they want to settle down.  Oldest has already shifted some (away from HCOL).

 

It's a combo of grad school and law school. We live on one income at the moment, by choice, but if I went back to work at even 2/3rds of my last salary it'd be paid off in two years. Is it a lot of money, sure. Is it a deal breaker, nope. My GFs who followed UG with Cornell law and Pepperdine law are already finished paying b/c they never took any time off like I did. It's a pain but it's not the devil incarnate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a combo of grad school and law school. We live on one income at the moment, by choice, but if I went back to work at even 2/3rds of my last salary it'd be paid off in two years. Is it a lot of money, sure. Is it a deal breaker, nope. My GFs who followed UG with Cornell law and Pepperdine law are already finished paying b/c they never took any time off like I did. It's a pain but it's not the devil incarnate.

 

That matches what we've heard.  He mainly needs to keep living on his shoestring budget once he's done and get it paid off before changing too much of his expenses, but we want him to be able to get a house, get married and have kids (assuming he wants to, of course), so... there may still be some assistance getting him going if needed at that point.  Time will tell.  We're a close enough family to continue discussing it and none of my lads have to go it alone if we can help (and they're doing their part).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the caveat to that is that they pay their teachers diddly squat to compensate.

 

We wouldn't make it here on my salary alone.  

 

 

NC is definitely among the best cost-wise.  For anyone curious to see averages, here's how the states compare (look at the blue for in-state cost).  PA is still the third most expensive.

 

https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/2017-18-state-tuition-and-fees-public-four-year-institutions-state-and-five-year-percentage

 

cp-2017-figure-6.png

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the same token someone saying, hey, that doesn't apply in the following circumstances but here's what did work isn't an indictment of you or your approach. It is an alternative for those with fewer resources (or those who unexpectedly find themselves in similar straights) and doesn't require constant rebuttal.

 

 

I actually have run the NPCs for myself and the family I was once part of and, yes, it would still work the same way. Current tuition and fees exceed 69K/year and even my family would get a 50% discount. Every 4-year state school where we've lived exceeds $5500 for tuition, fees and books.

 

I am completely confused as to what you are saying that disagrees with anything that I posted then.  Essentially, it sounds like you are saying your family can meet your familial contribution with the institutional grant aid your children would receive.  Otherwise a 50% discount off of 69K with no parental contribution would mean 33k to student cost and there is no way for a student to meet the gap between federal loans and total cost.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been thinking about recruiting, in part due to the comment about unicorn rarity of scholarships, and because girls on my dd2's club team are in recruting high gear (spring of jr year) and we are headed into dd2's recruiting time (officially starting July 1, but dh and I are already drawing up lists). These statements are for girls. Swimming is an equivalency sport at D1 and D2 levels, which as explained above means everyone can have a different percentage scholarship. The important thing to remember is that even in major conference D1 recruiting, grades matter. And it is grades (not test scores) that coaches look at because grades are the best indicator they have that athletes have good time management skills and some sort of work ethic.

How good do you have to be? Honestly the answer is not that great. Swimmers with a sectional level time can swim division one, swimmers without can swim D2. Most of the smaller conference schools also stack aid, so swimmers can get athletic money and academic money. This can add up to a full-ride, so people aren't exactly lying, just keep following up with questions when you talk to parents.

To pursue athletic money, you can't be wedded to a school, an area of the country or a future major. The most successful girls in the recruiting process just followed the money. And most of them ended up pretty happy, graduating from that school with little to no debt. The most unhappy were girls who went to teams that were too fast for them with too little money. Nearly every one of those girls I know transferred back to our state and ended their swimming careers and graduated with debt.

D1 athletics is not for the faint of heart. No matter what coaches say during recruiting, being an athlete comes first, before being a student. And in the recruiting process, the coaches hold all the power, so parents and students need to  arm themselves with information-know your numbers, stats, ranking, know your financial situtation, talk to everyone you know, club coaches, other swimmers, other parents. Information is power. Getting athletic money and being recruiting is a job. The pay off is worth the effort.

Frankly, we followed much the same script with our non-athletic boys. Of course, they had undecided liberal arts majors and we could follow money much more easily than other people. Know your numbers-all of them- and know them as early as possible. That's the only advice I ever give to people.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am completely confused as to what you are saying that disagrees with anything that I posted then. Essentially, it sounds like you are saying your family can meet your familial contribution with the institutional grant aid your children would receive. Otherwise a 50% discount off of 69K with no parental contribution would mean 33k to student cost and there is no way for a student to meet the gap between federal loans and total cost.

I’m saying that a student in the same or similar circumstances today, as I was then, would still be able to go to their school of choice b/c the federal loans would still meet their EFC. That’s it.

 

$33k would be the cost of my DD attending my alma AFTER institutional grants are applied but BEFORE federal aid (loans and work study) based on DHs income today. If I put in my family of origin’s stats I get essentially the same EFC that I faced...2k.

 

Also, FTR, I didn’t graduate in the 80s. My DH was born in 1980. I’ve only been out of school for 10 yrs. Things in FinAid haven’t changed that much since my time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m saying that a student in the same or similar circumstances today, as I was then, would still be able to go to their school of choice b/c the federal loans would still meet their EFC. That’s it.

 

$33k would be the cost of my DD attending my alma AFTER institutional grants are applied but BEFORE federal aid (loans and work study) based on DHs income today. If I put in my family of origin’s stats I get essentially the same EFC that I faced...2k.

 

Also, FTR, I didn’t graduate in the 80s. My DH was born in 1980. I’ve only been out of school for 10 yrs. Things in FinAid haven’t changed that much since my time.

 

 

I think we have been having 2 completely different conversations. ???? The post originally responded to was rebutting the OP of the thread.  The OP purported that investigating costs first mattered.  The rebuttals stated, " I operated under the bull-headed assumption that where there is a will, there's a way...... I am promoting moving forward toward something a student really wants, rather than throwing in the towel before the journey begins. Visiting that school would tell the student whether the financial effort and battle was worth it. " 

 

You then stated, "it can STILL be done by some kids and that there are still people doing it (for me it was the late 90s)I went to a similar school that I fell in love with, not the cheaper one offering an almost free ride, with little/no research or parental support other than filling out the FAFSA. I hadn't even visited before I was accepted. I graduated with about the same amount in UG loans as I made in a year just two years after graduating. It didn't cripple me financially."  

 

But above you are describing parents paying their EFC which is what the entire point of the OP in the thread---parents not paying their familial contribution.   :confused1:   If your dd didn't have parents supplementing the difference between $33,000 - $5500 and possibly work study (not all schools offer work study opportunities to students with a familial contribution that high bc they have limited funds to offer to students who qualify), how would she pay the bill? This is the scenario that is being described by Hoggirl's OP and the one that I have been addressing.  Nothing a student does or wants will bridge a $27,500/yr gap if parents cannot pay expected contribution.  That school is unaffordable for that student, and there is no financial effort or battle that will make it work.

 

If I now understand you correctly, then I agree with you.  If you are stating that kids with very low EFCs which can be covered by federal student loans are accepted into 100% meets need schools then they will end up with less debt that other options, I agree.  

 

But if you are saying that students who get into schools that meet their family's need, then they can afford to attend with federal student loans, I disagree. Students are dependent upon parents to pay their parental portion.  If parents won't or can't pay, students cannot afford to attend if their EFC is significantly beyond approx $5500 + summer earnings. (which is the only point people were making in counter to the original rebuttal.)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The percentage of kids that get into 100% meets need schools is quite low, and many (most?) of those kids are also generally eligible for close to 100% merit scholarships at other schools, or at least have a hope of them.

 

But we're not talking about even 15% of college applicants, right?  And in any case, while students with almost 100% need can afford these schools, most students don't have 100% need or close to it - most students have an EFC that, even in a lottery meets-need school, their parents cannot afford.  (or for some, will not afford).  

 

I'm sure our EFC for Stanford is like $60k/yr.  There is zero universe in which we're paying $60k/yr, even for Stanford.  Certainly we're not doing it times 7 (7 kids, so far).  So DD can apply to all the meets need schools she likes, but the chances she gets to go to one are remarkably slim because we will not pay.

 

Conversely, it makes a lot more sense for her to use the stats to apply to schools with significant merit aid.

 

If she didn't/doesn't have the stats, as I'm sure at least some of our kids will not, she'll have seriously limited college choices, as many (most) college-bound kids do.  No amount of applying just to see is going to make a school that costs $50k/yr and has no significant merit aid for her level of accomplishment/talent affordable for her.  She'd might as well buy scratch-offs with the application fee and work at Wal-Mart for the time it takes her to write the essays.

 

If there's a school she absolutely loves that does have merit aid possibilities, even if she's a bit out of range, okay - go for it.  But gearing your main college search this way is silly.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the benefit of being from a family with a very low EFC vs a family with a higher EFC, that's obviously pretty complicated and can vary a lot between students.

 

For the most part it doesn't matter because most students won't be able to attend a meets-need school anyway, and have to come up with the money somehow.  In that case, whether your parents have no EFC or whether they have a significant one but won't or can't pay it, your situation is just about the same separate of a Pell Grant, which doesn't cover much these days.

 

It does make meets-need schools available to kids with no EFC, though, while they are not available to kids with an EFC their parents won't or can't pay.  

 

Of course, living as a poorer kid is in some ways more difficult than living as a middle/upper-middle class kid, and certainly for some kids it makes a difference as far as educational opportunities during high school.

 

I went to a very good public high school in a fairly wealthy bedroom community; my parents were on the very low end of income for that community and had no savings or equity, so my EFC was probably nada but I got the benefit of a PS education good enough to allow me National Merit, 30+ hours of college credit through IB scores, etc.  My mom had planned it that way when they moved to the area when I was in 5th grade, and it was a smart move.  So I got the benefits of a wealthy community and school without the negative of having an EFC - but for me it didn't matter anyway, as I didn't know meets-need schools existed and just took a full ride for NM back when they were still somewhat ubiquitous.  DD12's options will be much narrower both because large merit scholarships are harder to come by and because we are certain to have an EFC we can't/won't pay.  I think many kids are in that boat these days.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can assure you that I am not brilliant and my parents weren't destitute in the way you seem to imply. They were unemployed and had bad credit so we were living off my mother's severance. I've worked with many working class families that would receive similar assistance today. The population on this board likes to consider itself middle class when, in reality, many here are on the upper end of the income scale even with one income.

 

You said they had terrible credit and had no income. How is that not destitute? They had no income and no credit and they had kids!

 

My mom was a single mom with an AS degree. She made $50k for three people. The scale doesn't go, $0, $75k, $200k.  That was below the national median and I still didn't qualify for need aid.  In reality, a lot of people live between $50k and $70k, or between $80 and $100k.

 

The "donut" folks here are in those ranges. $35-65k is working class. Below that is very poor, poverty, especially with kids. The $80-100k is another hard range if you're in a big city, because rent is so high and you end up with all kinds of other nutty costs including higher taxes, parking, blah blah blah, plus higher groceries and utilities, and you qualify for jack all when it comes to benefits or scholarships later on.

 

You can't on the one hand say "well I was super poor and I did it" and then argue with everyone "oh they weren't destitute (though they had no jobs and no credit)" and "well anyone could get aid".

 

People aren't getting that aid. They just are not. I used to evaluate dropouts. Two years of my life on this exact problem. They are not getting aid unless they are, as you were, incredibly low-income. And in those cases they still dropped out because Pell was too low to cover living expenses, and they had to work to support other people. And they had no support. And their cars would break down and the bus would be late and then it would all fall apart.

 

I read hundreds of these cases with the scholarship committee every single quarter.Saying that you did it so it's possible is not just ignorant. It's deceitful and harms efforts to get an actually just system of education based on academic merit set up in the United States. People who think it is as just as it once was are saying "so we don't have to do better".

 

But that is not the case. Kids are slipping through the cracks and kids are giving up. Talented kids. It's not right.

 

 

 

I’m saying that a student in the same or similar circumstances today, as I was then, would still be able to go to their school of choice b/c the federal loans would still meet their EFC. That’s it.

 

The federal loan system is being dismantled and privatized and the new lenders are selling off to unscrupulous usurers. I myself had a loan sold to one company. They immediately put me in collections--ME! I have a 780 credit score! I called a lawyer and magically they apologized... but they didn't change the fact that it was impossible to make a payment on time because they hadn't given that option in the online or paper-based statements. Disgusting.

 

Federal loans require a co-signer, and moreover, they are not a viable financial option.

Edited by Tsuga
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we have been having 2 completely different conversations. ???? The post originally responded to was rebutting the OP of the thread.  The OP purported that investigating costs first mattered.  The rebuttals stated, " I operated under the bull-headed assumption that where there is a will, there's a way...... I am promoting moving forward toward something a student really wants, rather than throwing in the towel before the journey begins. Visiting that school would tell the student whether the financial effort and battle was worth it. " 

 

You then stated, "it can STILL be done by some kids and that there are still people doing it (for me it was the late 90s)I went to a similar school that I fell in love with, not the cheaper one offering an almost free ride, with little/no research or parental support other than filling out the FAFSA. I hadn't even visited before I was accepted. I graduated with about the same amount in UG loans as I made in a year just two years after graduating. It didn't cripple me financially."  

 

But above you are describing parents paying their EFC which is what the entire point of the OP in the thread---parents not paying their familial contribution.   :confused1:   If your dd didn't have parents supplementing the difference between $33,000 - $5500 and possibly work study (not all schools offer work study opportunities to students with a familial contribution that high bc they have limited funds to offer to students who qualify), how would she pay the bill? This is the scenario that is being described by Hoggirl's OP and the one that I have been addressing.  Nothing a student does or wants will bridge a $27,500/yr gap if parents cannot pay expected contribution.  That school is unaffordable for that student, and there is no financial effort or battle that will make it work.

 

If I now understand you correctly, then I agree with you.  If you are stating that kids with very low EFCs which can be covered by federal student loans are accepted into 100% meets need schools then they will end up with less debt that other options, I agree.  

 

But if you are saying that students who get into schools that meet their family's need, then they can afford to attend with federal student loans, I disagree. Students are dependent upon parents to pay their parental portion.  If parents won't or can't pay, students cannot afford to attend if their EFC is significantly beyond approx $5500 + summer earnings. (which is the only point people were making in counter to the original rebuttal.)

 

Sort of to the first part. It's not that they will necessarily end up with less debt but they are more likely to end up with less of a gap between their total award and COA.These are the students that I was/am discussing. Not exactly to the second part. Of course parents are expected to contribute. My EFC was low, it wasn't non-existent. I've never met a family with no EFC. Do these even exist? When a parent cannot meet the EFC tho (literally unable to pay or borrow), there are still alternatives.

 

In my case, my custodial parent was required to apply for the PLUS loan to cover the EFC and be denied. With denial in hand, the (needs met) school adjusted my financial aid award to remove the PLUS loan and increase institutional aid (a combo of grant aid and additional federal loan eligibility). Even with all of that, my total UG debt was less than a moderate family sedan. No cosigner was required.

 

I get that many people are uncomfortable with loans of any kind and that not all schools will meet need but it's also statistically true that, for this population of students, attending a private institution with loans yields more 6-year graduates than the 2-year/CC plus transfer or live at home approach. IMHO, bright, low-income kids are given that advice a lot and it leads to under-matching and attendance at institutions that do not or cannot provide the kinds of on-campus services (childcare, housing, healthcare, counselling, etc.) that make completion more likely.

 

So I offer my experience as a counterpoint because apparently I'm a unicorn that no one actually believes exists.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never met a family with no EFC. Do these even exist?

Yes, apparently. There is some sort of Questbridge program where high achieving and low income kids can be matched with elite schools. A few of the kids report EFCs of 0. There aren't many, though.

 

[Edited to add link to program.]

Edited by RootAnn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I offer my experience as a counterpoint because apparently I'm a unicorn that no one actually believes exists.

 

You're not alone.  ;)

 

BUT, one can't count on aid always being there.  I've seen it go both ways for kids in similar circumstances.  So much seems to depend upon their application (perhaps essay, perhaps LORs).  Something has to catch the eye of admissions and/or financial aid for kids to get a really good deal at some of these schools.  There aren't many that seem to be cut and dry.  State schools generally are more predictable than private though.  It's worth trying for kids IME, and certainly helps if parents can contribute their Fafsa EFC.

 

Yes, apparently. There is some sort of Questbridge program where high achieving and low income kids can be matched with elite schools. A few of the kids report EFCs of 0. There aren't many, though.

 

Questbridge is an awesome program IMO.  If one qualifies for it, definitely try to get in it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Questbridge is an awesome program IMO. If one qualifies for it, definitely try to get in it.

I would be curious as to how successful Questbridge students are once they arrive at their schools. I, too, believe it's an awesome program - in theory. But, I wonder how it plays out. Being academically qualified to attend an elite school is only one aspect of whether or not a student will have success.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not alone.  ;)

 

BUT, one can't count on aid always being there.  I've seen it go both ways for kids in similar circumstances.  So much seems to depend upon their application (perhaps essay, perhaps LORs).  Something has to catch the eye of admissions and/or financial aid for kids to get a really good deal at some of these schools.  There aren't many that seem to be cut and dry.  State schools generally are more predictable than private though.  It's worth trying for kids IME, and certainly helps if parents can contribute their Fafsa EFC.

 

 

Questbridge is an awesome program IMO.  If one qualifies for it, definitely try to get in it.

 

Oh absolutely. Getting in was no small feat. I was just as passionate then as I am now and I'm sure it was evident in my essays. But I wasn't a Rock Star Student with an impeccable GPA and 95th percentile test scores. I nearly dropped out of HS as a junior. :lol:  I'd been knocked around a bit by life and it showed in my record. They, apparently, cared that I got back up, kept trying, and didn't take no for an answer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, bright, low-income kids are given that advice a lot and it leads to under-matching and attendance at institutions that do not or cannot provide the kinds of on-campus services (childcare, housing, healthcare, counselling, etc.) that make completion more likely.

 

So I offer my experience as a counterpoint because apparently I'm a unicorn that no one actually believes exists.

I would never have disagreed with this point, and, no, I don't think you are a unicorn. Kids with this scenario post on CC all the time (more are international students than US students, though, bc apparently the international community is better informed about some schools meeting need than most US residents.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, for students with very low or no EFC, certainly if you can get into a meets-need school or if your state schools have very low COA, you're in luck.

 

The problem, imo, isn't for kids with no or low EFC, it's for kids whose parents have a significant EFC - more than the kid can cover on their own - that they can't or won't pay.  So for us, if DD12 gets into a meets-need school and doesn't get pretty much full tuition merit aid, she's SOL, because we're not paying our EFC or taking out loans, certainly not for 7 kids for $50-$60k/yr.  Or even $20-$30k/yr.  It wouldn't be a matter of being denied a plus loan and then having DD take one out on her own - we would be approved, and we wouldn't sign for it.

 

Many kids are in that boat, I think - whether their EFC is $10k that they can't afford or $50k that they can't afford, it's still money that just doesn't exist for them.  They can't get a loan for it, their parents can't or won't pay it, and so they must look at schools where they can get enough merit aid to make up the difference or where the COA is so low that they can afford it with undergraduate stafford loans and a part-time job, maybe living at home.  

 

 

DD12 will apply to very good schools at which she has a chance of getting significant merit aid.  There is no reason for her to apply to Harvard, unless our circumstances change.  She cannot pay for it.

 

What I wonder is why there aren't more loans for undergrads to take out on their own to pay for school?  For instance, if a kid is going to MIT, surely the rate of return on that loan is pretty good?  I would expect most graduates to be able to repay it and to repay it on time.  The only reason I can think that there aren't loans like this available for undergrads (because surely there's a market for it on the consumer side) is because the rate of repayment is so dismal.  Otherwise you'd think it would be a guaranteed money maker for the lender.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, for students with very low or no EFC, certainly if you can get into a meets-need school or if your state schools have very low COA, you're in luck.

 

The problem, imo, isn't for kids with no or low EFC, it's for kids whose parents have a significant EFC - more than the kid can cover on their own - that they can't or won't pay. So for us, if DD12 gets into a meets-need school and doesn't get pretty much full tuition merit aid, she's SOL, because we're not paying our EFC or taking out loans, certainly not for 7 kids for $50-$60k/yr. Or even $20-$30k/yr. It wouldn't be a matter of being denied a plus loan and then having DD take one out on her own - we would be approved, and we wouldn't sign for it.

 

Many kids are in that boat, I think - whether their EFC is $10k that they can't afford or $50k that they can't afford, it's still money that just doesn't exist for them. They can't get a loan for it, their parents can't or won't pay it, and so they must look at schools where they can get enough merit aid to make up the difference or where the COA is so low that they can afford it with undergraduate stafford loans and a part-time job, maybe living at home.

 

 

DD12 will apply to very good schools at which she has a chance of getting significant merit aid. There is no reason for her to apply to Harvard, unless our circumstances change. She cannot pay for it.

 

What I wonder is why there aren't more loans for undergrads to take out on their own to pay for school? For instance, if a kid is going to MIT, surely the rate of return on that loan is pretty good? I would expect most graduates to be able to repay it and to repay it on time. The only reason I can think that there aren't loans like this available for undergrads (because surely there's a market for it on the consumer side) is because the rate of repayment is so dismal. Otherwise you'd think it would be a guaranteed money maker for the lender.

We are in the same position with our kids bc schools expect us to be able to pay close to $1,000,000 for our kids to attend college. It is laughable. If our kids had overlapped in college by all being close in age or had been multiples, that number could be reduced to significantly. ;) Our fault for having kids spread out over more than 20 yrs. But our kids face very limited college options. It hasn't negatively impacted them at all. They have done extremely well for themselves at their lower-ranked affordable schools.

 

I am glad your last paragraph does not exist bc if kids didn't graduate they would face the debt and no degree. I am not for allowing students to take on greater debt.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that must be a significant part of the calculation re: undergraduate loans -banks won't loan the money because the numbers of kids graduating with no degree (and thus likely unable to repay the loans) is too high.

 

This makes one wonder to what degree paying that much money OOP or in PLUS loans is really worth the cost, in terms of return on investment.  For some kids and some degrees and some schools, definitely.  For other kids or other degrees or other schools, probably not.  If the banks don't think it's worth lending the money, financially speaking (not in terms of personal development or whatever for the child, but in terms of the education being worth the price in terms of future earnings or job security), why are parents expected to think it's worth it in all cases? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the information about loan default rates is highly underutilized in screening colleges. The data is readily accessible. Most defaults are concentrated in the for-profit/online sector. Other institutions with high default rates are those that serve more non-traditional, part-time students. Student loan default rates, in general, are quite low especially when you consider that it’s an unsecured loan. Until the feds took over the lending, private lenders were guaranteed profits even if there were defaults.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...