4 ms·

For what it's worth, the majority of public US institutions are similar in cost. The outlandish prices are either private schools or out-of-state tuition rates.

by jofer 11y ago

For what it's worth, the majority of public US institutions are similar in cost. The outlandish prices are either private schools or out-of-state tuition rates. It's been ten years, but my undergraduate tuition at a modestly well respected engineering-focused university was ~$2000-year. I think the rates at tech are now about $4000-year, but it's not too outrageous.

lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
Honestly saying "just look at instate costs" is just as misleading. Restricting access to a quality education / future job options (depending on your field, etc) based on geography is one of the most telling failures of American Federalism. The sooner state schools are re-bundled into a federal program for affordable access to all Americans the better.
- giaour 11y ago
  I don't see that happening in our lifetime. What's more likely is an increase in the number of interstate agreements and consortia, where two or more states agree to charge each other's residents in state rates.
- Amezarak 11y ago
  I'm not aware of major educational problems with in-state schools. I've compared my curriculum at a nobody southern in state school with the CS curriculum at MIT and I don't see any major differences and I don't feel shortchanged. I'm pretty sure the only your school matters in the real world is at the most elite levels of a few fields and even then its mostly just about hiring people who went to the same school as you and the perception elites must come from the ivy league.
  - lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
    My ancedote here is that it's more about opportunity than educational quality. The "secret sauce" of higher education isn't the course work, or even the individual lecturers (although there is a certain minimum bar there) as evidenced by the growing trend to offer those for free. It is rather a case of brand recognition and access to a given network. The graduate of MIT has pull in pretty much anywhere of her choosing, the Georgia Tech grad faces friction as soon as she leaves the south east, the Clemson grad faces that same friction as soon as she leaves South Carolina (top tier private, top tier public, mid teir public for engineering), all other things being equal. Given the unequal distribution of employment across the nation it seems ridiculous that there are these huge paywalls in connecting qualified students to institutions best suited for them based solely on something as ephemeral as which state their parents are working when they turn 17.
    - gohrt 11y ago
      You can't just send EVERYONE to Berkeley/SUNY/UW. "Prestigious" is inherently anti-universal-access. The only solution is to crush the power of these prestigious universities.
      - lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
        I think you're missing the point. The issue isn't that every student can't go to Berkeley, it's that identically qualified students students can be charged 500% more for the opportunity purely because of geography. I suspect this disparity might actually be weakening the "prestigious" nature of many schools given there is now a monetary incentive to accept unqualified students if they are out of state (or even out of country for even more fees).
- ChuckMcM 11y ago
  Given that you can become a resident of a state by not being claimed as a dependent by your parents and having an in state address, makes it possible for most students to get the in-state rate if they choose. Typical path seems to be spend a year at a community college which can transfer credits into your chosen university, attend that college until you have filed a tax return with you as your only dependent, transfer to the state school in the fall (or summer sometimes).
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  It's a natural outcome of federalism. State A invests revenues heavily in a world renowned university. State B invests little in its postsecondary education. It is each states prerogative to decide how much to spend on education- federalism. Naturally many State B residents will want to attend the world class university in State A. But they didn't pay a dime of taxes to support it. Hence, higher tuition rates for out of staters. You see it as restricting access to education, but I see it more as reaping the the seed you sow. Each state chooses how much to spend on education, and lives with the results of their choices.
  - lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
    Except the people effected are not the people making the choices. No child today voted for a reduction in education budgets. Given how much the volatility of job market causes people to move many people don't have much of a choice when choosing which state to live. Disadvantaging people because their parents happen to work in South Carolina and members of their parents generation decided to cut funding is the exact opposite of "reaping what you sow". An out dated view for a system designed before instant access communication.
    - sliverstorm 11y ago
      Children grow up in a world that was not created by them, but by their parents. News at 11. Running education at the federal level is not going to suddenly lift education funding to a "10" in all states. I am not doing a good job explaining this eloquently, but the point is federalism allows states to cut education budgets, or be lavish with them, without answering to other states. States that want to be lavish do not have the clout to force the entire country to be lavish. "Every state has top quality schools with extremely generous education spending" is not an option on the table, because the states that don't want to spend money on education have a vote, too.
- rconti 11y ago
  Saying it's a failure assumes/implies that we know which model is perfect, and that everyone can just agree to adopt it. Which clearly isn't the case, or we wouldn't have such vastly different systems in different states.
  - S4M 11y ago
    We also have vastly different levels of social mobility in different states. Since access to quality education for the poorest and social mobility should be correlated, we could have some idea of what education model is the best, and my guess is that it will not be the one in the US.
- gohrt 11y ago
  A US state is pretty similar to a EU nation, in terms of population and economy size.
rileymat2 11y ago
At a large state school. https://admissions.msu.edu/finances/tuition.asp https://admissions.msu.edu/finances/tuition.asp 13k, for tuition alone.

by jofer 11y ago

lordCarbonFiber 11y ago

Honestly saying "just look at instate costs" is just as misleading. Restricting access to a quality education / future job options (depending on your field, etc) based on geography is one of the most telling failures of American Federalism. The sooner state schools are re-bundled into a federal program for affordable access to all Americans the better.

giaour 11y ago
I don't see that happening in our lifetime. What's more likely is an increase in the number of interstate agreements and consortia, where two or more states agree to charge each other's residents in state rates.
Amezarak 11y ago
I'm not aware of major educational problems with in-state schools. I've compared my curriculum at a nobody southern in state school with the CS curriculum at MIT and I don't see any major differences and I don't feel shortchanged. I'm pretty sure the only your school matters in the real world is at the most elite levels of a few fields and even then its mostly just about hiring people who went to the same school as you and the perception elites must come from the ivy league.
- lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
  My ancedote here is that it's more about opportunity than educational quality. The "secret sauce" of higher education isn't the course work, or even the individual lecturers (although there is a certain minimum bar there) as evidenced by the growing trend to offer those for free. It is rather a case of brand recognition and access to a given network. The graduate of MIT has pull in pretty much anywhere of her choosing, the Georgia Tech grad faces friction as soon as she leaves the south east, the Clemson grad faces that same friction as soon as she leaves South Carolina (top tier private, top tier public, mid teir public for engineering), all other things being equal. Given the unequal distribution of employment across the nation it seems ridiculous that there are these huge paywalls in connecting qualified students to institutions best suited for them based solely on something as ephemeral as which state their parents are working when they turn 17.
  - gohrt 11y ago
    You can't just send EVERYONE to Berkeley/SUNY/UW. "Prestigious" is inherently anti-universal-access. The only solution is to crush the power of these prestigious universities.
    - lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
      I think you're missing the point. The issue isn't that every student can't go to Berkeley, it's that identically qualified students students can be charged 500% more for the opportunity purely because of geography. I suspect this disparity might actually be weakening the "prestigious" nature of many schools given there is now a monetary incentive to accept unqualified students if they are out of state (or even out of country for even more fees).
ChuckMcM 11y ago
Given that you can become a resident of a state by not being claimed as a dependent by your parents and having an in state address, makes it possible for most students to get the in-state rate if they choose. Typical path seems to be spend a year at a community college which can transfer credits into your chosen university, attend that college until you have filed a tax return with you as your only dependent, transfer to the state school in the fall (or summer sometimes).
sliverstorm 11y ago
It's a natural outcome of federalism. State A invests revenues heavily in a world renowned university. State B invests little in its postsecondary education. It is each states prerogative to decide how much to spend on education- federalism. Naturally many State B residents will want to attend the world class university in State A. But they didn't pay a dime of taxes to support it. Hence, higher tuition rates for out of staters. You see it as restricting access to education, but I see it more as reaping the the seed you sow. Each state chooses how much to spend on education, and lives with the results of their choices.
- lordCarbonFiber 11y ago
  Except the people effected are not the people making the choices. No child today voted for a reduction in education budgets. Given how much the volatility of job market causes people to move many people don't have much of a choice when choosing which state to live. Disadvantaging people because their parents happen to work in South Carolina and members of their parents generation decided to cut funding is the exact opposite of "reaping what you sow". An out dated view for a system designed before instant access communication.
  - sliverstorm 11y ago
    Children grow up in a world that was not created by them, but by their parents. News at 11. Running education at the federal level is not going to suddenly lift education funding to a "10" in all states. I am not doing a good job explaining this eloquently, but the point is federalism allows states to cut education budgets, or be lavish with them, without answering to other states. States that want to be lavish do not have the clout to force the entire country to be lavish. "Every state has top quality schools with extremely generous education spending" is not an option on the table, because the states that don't want to spend money on education have a vote, too.
rconti 11y ago
Saying it's a failure assumes/implies that we know which model is perfect, and that everyone can just agree to adopt it. Which clearly isn't the case, or we wouldn't have such vastly different systems in different states.
- S4M 11y ago
  We also have vastly different levels of social mobility in different states. Since access to quality education for the poorest and social mobility should be correlated, we could have some idea of what education model is the best, and my guess is that it will not be the one in the US.
gohrt 11y ago
A US state is pretty similar to a EU nation, in terms of population and economy size.

rileymat2 11y ago

At a large state school. https://admissions.msu.edu/finances/tuition.asp https://admissions.msu.edu/finances/tuition.asp 13k, for tuition alone.