3 ms·

This was my first thought as well, but my understanding is that if you are accepted at Harvard they will provide financial aid for 100% of need, which means par

by whyenot 17y ago

This was my first thought as well, but my understanding is that if you are accepted at Harvard they will provide financial aid for 100% of need, which means parents pay what they can afford -- it can actually be cheaper to go to Harvard than a state school that doesn't have the funds to meet 100% need. Maybe single children have better academic preparation? Should be easy to look at that.

jackowayed 17y ago
Need is a hazy thing. They will meet all of what they define as your need, but what you "can pay" often means a substantial sacrifice when it comes to standard of living. This is especially bad if your parents have been paying what they "can pay" for the last 4 years for an older sibling. Also, it's gotten a lot better in the last few years, which is after he moved through Harvard. About 3(?) years ago, they, along with a few other upper-echelon colleges (I know Stanford did) moved to a much more liberal definition of need and totally got rid of loans from financial aid programs. Now, theoretically, if your family makes <$60k, you pay nothing, and <$100k you pay no tuition, but pay room & board and such. There's more variables than just family income, and you always have to add to the "nothing" or the "no tuition" a reasonable figure for the student to make from having a part-time job during the year and full-time over the summer, but it's still substantially more generous than it was. It would be interesting to see if those policies changed the percentage that are only children.
- jessriedel 17y ago
  That's quite a liberal definition of "need".
  - jackowayed 17y ago
    Yes, it is. It used to be substantially worse, though, and other than a few top colleges, it still is. Example of the difference: my "estimated family contribution" according to the FAFSA is about $10k more than what Stanford estimates they'll make me pay (though I haven't seen the final number, yet).
Mz 17y ago
Some random-ish thoughts: Cambridge is expensive to live in even if you aren't paying tuition. All other factors being equal, going off to college elsewhere is both more expensive and logistically harder to arrange than going to the local college where you happen to already be. I happen to think there is a little truth to the "birth order" theories. My first born older sister has always been more interested in getting societal validation of the sort that sends people to Harvard than I have been. But then I also believe in astrology. :0 (No, not "sun sign" astrology.)

by whyenot 17y ago

jackowayed 17y ago

Need is a hazy thing. They will meet all of what they define as your need, but what you "can pay" often means a substantial sacrifice when it comes to standard of living. This is especially bad if your parents have been paying what they "can pay" for the last 4 years for an older sibling. Also, it's gotten a lot better in the last few years, which is after he moved through Harvard. About 3(?) years ago, they, along with a few other upper-echelon colleges (I know Stanford did) moved to a much more liberal definition of need and totally got rid of loans from financial aid programs. Now, theoretically, if your family makes <$60k, you pay nothing, and <$100k you pay no tuition, but pay room & board and such. There's more variables than just family income, and you always have to add to the "nothing" or the "no tuition" a reasonable figure for the student to make from having a part-time job during the year and full-time over the summer, but it's still substantially more generous than it was. It would be interesting to see if those policies changed the percentage that are only children.

jessriedel 17y ago
That's quite a liberal definition of "need".
- jackowayed 17y ago
  Yes, it is. It used to be substantially worse, though, and other than a few top colleges, it still is. Example of the difference: my "estimated family contribution" according to the FAFSA is about $10k more than what Stanford estimates they'll make me pay (though I haven't seen the final number, yet).

Mz 17y ago

Some random-ish thoughts: Cambridge is expensive to live in even if you aren't paying tuition. All other factors being equal, going off to college elsewhere is both more expensive and logistically harder to arrange than going to the local college where you happen to already be. I happen to think there is a little truth to the "birth order" theories. My first born older sister has always been more interested in getting societal validation of the sort that sends people to Harvard than I have been. But then I also believe in astrology. :0 (No, not "sun sign" astrology.)