ConMan345 wrote: Rotor wrote:
FWIW, I no longer considered going to Berkeley because of the tuition hikes. What people largely overlook is that, while the price is going to market, the cost is going to be considerably higher given that Berkeley gives much less grant money (median yearly grant at Harvard: ~$18,000, median grant at Berkeley: ~$8000, I think).
This is only the up front money. Don't forget to compare the back end for LRAP if your career asperations make LRAP likely. Half of the tuition increase is designated for improving the FINAID
(considering more than just LRAP, too, FWIW. Just not sure how much and exact modalities).
The other half of the increase is to keep up the faculty growth and quality, facility improvements, etc.
So instead of getting a top private caliber education at public prices, you'd be getting a top private caliber education at a comparable (or slightly lower cost). What more can you ask for? Do you get pissed off when you go to the Porsche dealership and they won't sell you a 911 for the price of a Kia just because Porsches used to cost less than $15k back in the day?
As to the increase in FinAid, that's certainly a valid point, though the lack of information as to how it will shake out isn't helping Berk's case when I go to crunch the numbers. In any case, I can't imagine the median grant doubling....
As to the car analogy and TripleK's incredulity, why I no longer consider Berkeley isn't because my expectations weren't met, I understand perfectly and accept the circumstances which brought about the increase; rather, for a large number of reasons about which we could quibble, Berkeley was a really great car for a great price, while other, higher ranked schools were really, really great cars for market price. Now, if the prices are the same (I'm not particularly interested in LRAP), who would still pay for the former over the latter?
I'm a pretty special case given where I fall in the admissions game, but I have to imagine Berkeley is going to lose out....
FWIW, a Berkeley alumnus I know said he wouldn't have gone to Berkeley had the cost been what it's going to be (he chose it over Stanford).
Sticking with the car analogy a bit longer: I'm not saying that everyone should want the Porsche at the price. If you want a Ferrari or a BMW or a Kia instead, go for that. But my point is you should make it based on the complete package-- of which price is one factor-- but I've seen so many reflexive "I'm not going to Berkeley because they jacked up the price" comments, I just wanted to throw in my $0.02 to make sure that folks are looking at the big picture...upfront costs, back end costs, educational quality, QOL, etc.
In the end, none of us is happy about paying more. But there are plenty of folks who would rather be here than CCN (and maybe even a few who have YHS in hand), even at parity pricing. Will we lose some individuals who go elsewhere because of the price? Sure. I'd be silly not to think so. But I don't think that it will be a wholesale exodus as some (not necessarily you...) are suggesting.