ADVERTISEMENT

Fifty colleges with $60,000 or more in tuition

retired711

Heisman Winner
Nov 20, 2001
18,796
9,083
113
73
Cherry Hill
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.

Fifty colleges
 
Compare that list to the starting & mid career salaries published by payscale.com for graduates at those schools.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
I'll go with no a single one, at least without the discount. Quarter of a million for a four year degree, good god - how could that ever be worth it.

I guess there are just alot of rich people who don't mind shelling out alot of money just to prove that they can.
 
Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
Wow. I considered 4 of the top 12. Of course back then the tuition was about 10 percent of what it is now.
 
Originally posted by Upstream:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
Wow. I considered 4 of the top 12. Of course back then the tuition was about 10 percent of what it is now.
I considered one of the top 12, but when I realized that the only way to swing it would be to live at home, and hope for scholarships I decided against it.
 
Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
I'll go with no a single one, at least without the discount. Quarter of a million for a four year degree, good god - how could that ever be worth it.

I guess there are just alot of rich people who don't mind shelling out alot of money just to prove that they can.
OOS sticker price at Rutgers is about $40K per year. So the real question is whether it is worth an extra $80K over 4 years to go to Columbia vs Rutgers.
 
Wow...Drexel is one the top 5 OOS schools for NJ residents...how is that justified, on what planet I'd love to know. Ivies, JHU, I get it. But even NYU. Brandeis et al I think you need to stop for a second but Drexel really?
 
Originally posted by Upstream:

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
I'll go with no a single one, at least without the discount. Quarter of a million for a four year degree, good god - how could that ever be worth it.

I guess there are just alot of rich people who don't mind shelling out alot of money just to prove that they can.
OOS sticker price at Rutgers is about $40K per year. So the real question is whether it is worth an extra $80K over 4 years to go to Columbia vs Rutgers.
Well thats only if you are OOS. If you are in state (and most of the population is in a state with a state university at least as good as RU) then its probably closer to $150,00 or $200,000 for the cheaper states (I'll assume that anyone who could get into Columbia can get into RU or better.

Its certainly a dilemma is you are the 40% of the population that doesn't have a state school as good as RU. But for the other 60% it would hard to make the argument that a Columbia education is worth $150,000 more, let alone Harvey Mudd College.
 
There are a lot of smart kids who wouldn't flourish at a massively-sized campus.. Some need more individualized contact that at a large university. For them, it is reasonable to at least consider an elite alternative. In addition, some of these schools carry a lot of cachet, e.g. the Ivies, Duke, Stanford. Probably someone coming out of such a school would have a better chance at attracting a lot of recruiters. That said, there are a number of schools on that list (e.g. Boston College) which are just plain not worth that much.
 
Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by Upstream:

Originally posted by derleider:

Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Thought this would interest you. You can decide which of these colleges would be worth it for a bright kid. Notice that these are "sticker prices," and so they do not represent the discounts given to many students.
I'll go with no a single one, at least without the discount. Quarter of a million for a four year degree, good god - how could that ever be worth it.

I guess there are just alot of rich people who don't mind shelling out alot of money just to prove that they can.
OOS sticker price at Rutgers is about $40K per year. So the real question is whether it is worth an extra $80K over 4 years to go to Columbia vs Rutgers.
Well thats only if you are OOS. If you are in state (and most of the population is in a state with a state university at least as good as RU) then its probably closer to $150,00 or $200,000 for the cheaper states (I'll assume that anyone who could get into Columbia can get into RU or better.

Its certainly a dilemma is you are the 40% of the population that doesn't have a state school as good as RU. But for the other 60% it would hard to make the argument that a Columbia education is worth $150,000 more, let alone Harvey Mudd College.
Yes. For an NJ resident, you are talking $140K more for Columbia vs Rutgers over 4 years. That is really pushing it. $140K more for Boston College vs Rutgers is insane.

But if you live in Massachusetts, you might pay the $80K more for Columbia vs Rutgers OOS when UMass is your other option.


(BTW, look up Harvey Mudd. It is one of the Claremont colleges, sort of a west coast version of Swarthmore.)
 
As a NJ resident, it's the difference between paying $25k/yr to go to Rutgers vs $61k/yr for BC... $100k vs $244k. Anyone going to BC (or most of those schools) over Rutgers for that price is beyond nuts.

Btw, Harvey Mudd has the highest starting ($73,300) & mid-career ($143,000) salaries according to payscale.com. Stevens is 3rd.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
I don't get these parents. Why don't you tell the kids go to RU and I'll put a down payment on a house or pay your wedding or something?

Also, not just RU...if you don't want a big school there is TCNJ.

Now I can see if you don't get into RU or TCNJ, but then, I would want my kids to go to another OOS public like a SUNY or WVU or Temple.

Money doesn't grow on trees. That ridiculous tuition is part of the problem and outside of the Ivies these schools are all too happy to take that money while kids are graduating making 30-40k on a good day in many cases. Pathetic.

Certainly some schools there is an argument, Ivies, Duke, Stanford...etc...but lots of employers would hold RU in equal regard if not superior- like Drexel or Stevens.
 
Originally posted by camdenlawprof:

There are a lot of smart kids who wouldn't flourish at a massively-sized campus.. Some need more individualized contact that at a large university
. For them, it is reasonable to at least consider an elite alternative. In addition, some of these schools carry a lot of cachet, e.g. the Ivies, Duke, Stanford. Probably someone coming out of such a school would have a better chance at attracting a lot of recruiters. That said, there are a number of schools on that list (e.g. Boston College) which are just plain not worth that much.
I can only speak for Cook and I'm sure it's changed but back in the day, mid 80's (and I guess depending on your major) there was a lot of individual attention.

If was there if and when you needed it.

But the "cachet" thing wasn't there then (University wide) and I am not sure it is is there today.
 
I have no doubt it's there at SEBS, but I wonder about SAS. A campus of 40,000 students is a big campus. I was at Berkeley, when there were 27,000 there, and it was a challenge for many students then. I'm sure that hasn't changed.
 
Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
I have no doubt it's there at SEBS, but I wonder about SAS. A campus of 40,000 students is a big campus. I was at Berkeley, when there were 27,000 there, and it was a challenge for many students then. I'm sure that hasn't changed.
I think NIRH makes a good point. Its not like the state can't provide a quality small campus education. TCNJ exists. W&M exists. Other schools like say GT or UVa are smaller than the huge state behemoths. If you can't get into them, then you are probably WASTING alot of money going to a private school.

Either way - lets not beat around the bush. ALOT of it is well off kids (and their complicit parents) doing everything they can to make sure they get to hang with other well of kids, in an atmosphere befitting their wealth.

Private schools (which it seems that the US has alot more than the rest of the West) have in many ways created a very weird education system in the US that is MUCH MUCH more about the experience than the education.
 
In many (maybe all) other Western countries, public schools are the best. McGill is widely regarded as Canada's best school, and if you live in Quebec, it costs less than RU...and there were riots about tuition increases. In Brazil, the wealthy go to private school...until college where public schools are considered the best.

The NJ attitude (also found in wealthy areas from Boston to Northern VA) that more money equals better is what keeps half that list going.

I can agree with a parent who sends their kid OOS if he or she gets rejected from RU and TCNJ as the NJ public schools beyond that are mostly unknown outside of NJ. But there are a lot of small public schools that are cheap. The SUNYs OOS cost similar to NJ instate, and a lot of them are small and better known than say, Montclair. But to many NJ residents, that's not the goal- the goal is to best your neighbor and education has become the latest Mercedes in the driveway. Frankly I don't understand how people can be so stupid with money. Just think of what you could invest that money in and really set your kid up for success.
 
It's not the fact that they believe more money equals better education (at least most people). It's the fact that many of these schools serve to feed the elite networks and relationships they want their child to be included in. That is the bread and butter of many of the small liberal arts northeaster schools. I'm not knocking their academics but a large part of their prestige is the fact that if you are a member of many upper class social circles you don't send your kid to public school - they are expected to go to a name that has a reputation that was built on being exclusively for the wealthy (regardless if that is still true today).
 
Not to pick on Drexel, but what elite network are they apart of?

I went to Fordham for law school, which is their most prestigious school. And really, I wouldn't say its' part of an elite network. May it was before 2007, and then after, the alums would come back and not hire anyone. My guess is that's not terribly different from most of the schools on that list. And I really don't think the undergrad has a prestigious network, considering that up until 10-20 years ago, the school was more prestigious St. John's with commuters from Bronx. One of the guys who hired me out of law school did have a Fordham law degree- but then my next job, a RU alum hired me...so not sure there's a difference.

There are elite schools on that list, Ivies, Duke, Stanford, JHU- where that is the case. Are people falling all over themselves for Oberlin grads? (Insert Girls reference here). Or Connecticut College?

Joe Schmo employer in any major city would just as impressed by RU, I think, as probably half that list, as would a lot of other colleges for the half the price in states where the applicants come from.
 
Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
In many (maybe all) other Western countries, public schools are the best. McGill is widely regarded as Canada's best school, and if you live in Quebec, it costs less than RU...and there were riots about tuition increases. In Brazil, the wealthy go to private school...until college where public schools are considered the best.

The NJ attitude (also found in wealthy areas from Boston to Northern VA) that more money equals better is what keeps half that list going.

I can agree with a parent who sends their kid OOS if he or she gets rejected from RU and TCNJ as the NJ public schools beyond that are mostly unknown outside of NJ. But there are a lot of small public schools that are cheap. The SUNYs OOS cost similar to NJ instate, and a lot of them are small and better known than say, Montclair. But to many NJ residents, that's not the goal- the goal is to best your neighbor and education has become the latest Mercedes in the driveway. Frankly I don't understand how people can be so stupid with money. Just think of what you could invest that money in and really set your kid up for success.
NJIT, Rutgers-Camden, and Rutgers-Newark are all very good schools. I am sure there are other good schools in NJ, I am just not that familiar with current universities. I know some folks here consider Camden and Newark as "satellite" campuses, but IMHO both are very good schools in their own right.
 
Originally posted by Scarlet Pride:
It's not the fact that they believe more money equals better education (at least most people). It's the fact that many of these schools serve to feed the elite networks and relationships they want their child to be included in. That is the bread and butter of many of the small liberal arts northeaster schools. I'm not knocking their academics but a large part of their prestige is the fact that if you are a member of many upper class social circles you don't send your kid to public school - they are expected to go to a name that has a reputation that was built on being exclusively for the wealthy (regardless if that is still true today).
I think the elite network thing is overblown. While some of that may exist, it is far and few between, and going to an elite university does not likely to gain you entrance into an upper-class network, unless your family is already a member of that network.

What going to an elite college does provide is:

(1) Friends who are also bright and talented and are likely to be successful. Most of my friends from Hopkins have become fairly successful in their careers, and therefore are in a better position to open doors for me (and vice versa). However I also have friends who went to Rutgers (and other top public schools) who are equally successful. But at an elite college, you may find that 90% of your friends end up very successful versus 70% at Rutgers and 40% at a lesser public school.

(2) Opportunities for special programs and projects. For example, as an undergrad at Hopkins, I had the opportunity to work with one of my professors on cutting edge research and I was separately offered a unique internship. One of my friends received funding for an independent study program he proposed. While some of that may exist at Rutgers, it is a lot easier to take advantage of those opportunities when you are competing with 2500 students instead of 25,000. (A lot of large public schools address this problem by creating honors programs, like the one Rutgers is creating, where you are now only competing with the subset of students in the honors program instead of the whole student body.)
 
On the other hand, most of the schools we are talking about here arent elite research universities (obviously some are.)
 
Originally posted by derleider:


Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
I have no doubt it's there at SEBS, but I wonder about SAS. A campus of 40,000 students is a big campus. I was at Berkeley, when there were 27,000 there, and it was a challenge for many students then. I'm sure that hasn't changed.
I think NIRH makes a good point. Its not like the state can't provide a quality small campus education. TCNJ exists. W&M exists. Other schools like say GT or UVa are smaller than the huge state behemoths. If you can't get into them, then you are probably WASTING alot of money going to a private school.

Either way - lets not beat around the bush. ALOT of it is well off kids (and their complicit parents) doing everything they can to make sure they get to hang with other well of kids, in an atmosphere befitting their wealth.

Private schools (which it seems that the US has alot more than the rest of the West) have in many ways created a very weird education system in the US that is MUCH MUCH more about the experience than the education.
C'mon, do you really believe TCNJ is as great as it says? Virtually every college on that list is substantially better. And even GT and UVa are large schools compared to many on that list.

Yes, I agree there are elements of snobbism and conspicuous consumption in sending your kid to a school like those on the list. OTOH, as the country stratifies, it is more and more important for parents to find ways to make sure their kids do things that will help them be very prosperous.
 
TCNJ I think is more impressive than Drexel or Oberlin or Connecticut College or a few others on that list to NJ employers, and maybe NYC/Philly ones. It probably depends what you want to do. But if you want to be a teacher, TCNJ is definitely better. If you want to work in NJ forever, TCNJ is probably the better choice too.

Re: NJIT and the RU satellites, they are not in the greatest locations and have a lot of commuters. I can see why some parents may want to avoid that.

Similarly I think a lot of grad schools typically take from the same undergrads. Small private schools are going to come up for them, and be just as rare, as TCNJ.

Even if you think those schools are more impressive, are they more impressive in tune the tuition difference?

Assuming John Doe in NJ has the option and his parents can pay, based on Upstream's numbers, it seems to me that his parents would financially benefit themselves and their kid by sending him to TCNJ, putting the rest into a condo, rent it for 4 years, and then give it John or sell for a profit (and yes there are places in NJ where 180k buys a condo, or where you can buy and the tenant would pay mortgage + expenses).
 
Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
TCNJ I think is more impressive than Oberlin
Not by a long shot. Oberlin is one of the top Liberal Arts colleges in the country. While not quite at the level of a Williams, Swarthmore, or Pomona, Oberlin is not even in the same ballpark as a TCNJ.

That doesn't mean that Oberlin is worth $60K per year. But it is absurd to suggest that TCNJ is a cost-effective alternative to Oberlin.
 
Originally posted by NotInRHouse:
Not to pick on Drexel, but what elite network are they apart of?

I went to Fordham for law school, which is their most prestigious school. And really, I wouldn't say its' part of an elite network. May it was before 2007, and then after, the alums would come back and not hire anyone. My guess is that's not terribly different from most of the schools on that list. And I really don't think the undergrad has a prestigious network, considering that up until 10-20 years ago, the school was more prestigious St. John's with commuters from Bronx. One of the guys who hired me out of law school did have a Fordham law degree- but then my next job, a RU alum hired me...so not sure there's a difference.

There are elite schools on that list, Ivies, Duke, Stanford, JHU- where that is the case. Are people falling all over themselves for Oberlin grads? (Insert Girls reference here). Or Connecticut College?

Joe Schmo employer in any major city would just as impressed by RU, I think, as probably half that list, as would a lot of other colleges for the half the price in states where the applicants come from.
I wasn't speaking specifically about every school (that's why I said "many") in this list but more to the comments about why do people (particularly in the Northeast) send their kids to expensive schools when they could send them to RU or another public university. My point is it's not all about academics or getting hired somewhere.

And it's not some mystical alumni network that gets you hired that I'm talking about. The people I'm talking about, for the most part, already have their network in place. They don't need the school to open doors - rather it merely helps further cement their standing within those networks/communities.

It's the parents that send their kids to the Peddie School, whatever Country Day School, etc, that are then sending their kids to places like Williams, Bucknell, Bates, Skidmore, etc... Or those that choose the select public high schools that carry certain cache because of the wealth of those neighborhoods. There is a very real class structure that people want to maintain and/or be a part of - that doesn't mean everyone at those schools fits into this category but it is very real.

And you may dismiss Connecticut College but it's historically been considered one of the "Little Ivies". That may mean nothing to you but to a segment of the northeastern wealthy it does mean something. Just like attending Jesuit schools like BC, Fairfield, Fordham, etc also are particularly attractive to a certain group of people and carry more weight in their communities than it might in yours.

A big part of my job is building relationships with individuals and understanding people and one of the things (one of many) that I have learned to take note of is where do their kids go to school. Because that often speaks a lot about their social/peer circles or their upbringing. It's not a universal truth with everyone but there are very real generalizations.

I've met plenty of public school grads who valued their degree and now find themselves (partly because of that education) in a much better place but would never consider sending their kid to public school. And again I'm not making judgments on anyone's decisions or preferences just commenting on why someone might choose to pay twice the price or more to attend private schools.

All this is also not even addressing the point that very few people at any of these schools will ever pay $60k - the sticker price (when it's that high) is rarely the real cost to anyone.





This post was edited on 7/11 4:56 PM by Scarlet Pride
 
The enrollment at many of these elite, small liberal arts schools like Oberlin is equivalent to the enrollment at Bridgewater-Raritan High School (~2,900) & some are smaller. TCNJ is more than twice that size & UVA & GT are more than 5 times bigger.

Even if you don't pay full price for many of these schools, is it still worth $40k vs $25k (& likely less with aid &/or scholarship) at Rutgers? My best guess is that you'll always pay a ton less to go to Rutgers & that has to be a huge factor these days.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
I understand that position- I just think there's a fundamental flaw to it. So many of the problems in this country are based on people- especially rich people- having no clue how the "other half lives". RU is a fantastic lesson in that. I learned a ton just from staying up late talking to people in my dorm that grew up different than I did. Going to institutions like some on that list (not all) will just be a shield from reality that will lead people to forming opinions on those of different backgrounds based on stereotypes.

I'll never forget, one of my first days of law school, a professor asked people whose parents' were lawyers to raise their hands. Probably at least 1/3 of the class. And there I was, and my parents didn't even go to college. I went to public school my whole life before that, which probably was strange to some there.

To each his own, but to me, I just don't agree with the investment.
 
FWIW -- the children of faculty and staff at my law school don't pay tuition if they go to Rutgers. I can think of some staff who sent their kids to Rutgers (often because they felt they couldn't afford anything else.) I can only think of one or two faculty who did. Others sent their kids to places like Skidmore, Yale, Penn, U. Virginia, Cal-Berkeley, and Duke -- and their kids uniformly reported loving the undergraduate experience at those schools. . Colleagues also sent kids to places like Kean if the kid was not a high achiever and was felt to need a small college experience. (I can't think of anyone who sent a kid to TCNJ.) And McCormick's kids definitely didn't go to Rutgers. (Maybe he knew too much about the place!) And my colleagues, although prosperous, are not "rich." This is of course anecdotal and the plural of "anecdote" is not "data," but I think it is revealing.
 
Upstream- agree.

Camden- I wouldn't argue with the schools on your list. Also, I'm quite sure that many professors have degrees from those places themselves- which always helps! Most of my RU and law school professors had a degree from an Ivy.
 
NiRH: yes, some of the faculty graduated from the same schools their kids are going to: I think of a woman who is sending her son to Yale, and a Harvard graduate whose child got into Harvard -- and, interestingly enough, disliked it intensely.

I should point out that one of the faculty who sent her child to Rutgers lives in the Philly Main LIne suburbs in Pennsylvania. . I don't know what the child's alternatives were. Possibly (to confirm your thoughts,),she decided that Rutgers was a better deal than Penn State, in part because Penn State is so far away and not that great anyway. And, given Rutgers' generous tuition policy, it's not as though she had to pay a premium to send her child to Rutgers the way other suburban parents would.

Another colleague sent her son to Rutgers because of the availability of an honors program, and this was many years ago. I am sure that child could have had some good alternatives. He ended up at Harvard Law School so he certainly did not make a poor choice of undergraduate institution.

In other words, people can make legitimate choices of either Rutgers or other places. What bothers me is when a parent sends a child who could have gotten into Rutgers to an inferior school.
 
Haven't seen this mentioned but it's tuition, fees, room, and board. R&b is adjustable if you live at home or off campus and fees are an increasinly larger percentage as departments, schools, and individual colleges find additional ways to boost their own bottom line
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT