WSJ College Rankings Out - Purdue #5 Public; #43 Overall. Monroe County Community College - #138
- Thread starter hunkgolden
- Start date
You are correct, we are #5. Note: Cornell is a hybrid with some public and some private parts of the university. That may be causing confusion. Also, some people think that the U of Pennsylvania is public but it is an Ivy and thus private.
I'd be curious what the "real" tuition average per student is with scholarships, non-loan financial aid, etc. i.e. is freezing tuition negatively impacting Purdue's ability to offer more financial aid. We know that Purdue's made a concerted effort to get more out-of-state/international students which obviously equals more $. But simply freezing tuition doesn't necessarily make college more affordable overall. Financial aid achieves that. I haven't seen much put out about it - not sure if there's a resource to see true cost of attendance?
That puts this list into question for me. If UNC is top 5 I think I could start my own University out of my home and be top 10.
Mitch has stated statistics on a fairly dramatic drop in average student debt for our graduates over that time frame. I don’t have the specific data in front of me but that’s at least one measure Purdue has become more affordable as well.
It must be the UNC African Studies program that elevated the school. No doubt the one paragraph term papers filled with grammatical and spelling mistakes are top 5 material. What a f%#&ing joke.
Having a son at Purdue, for the great education and controlled costs I can only say, "Thanks Mitch!"
Purdue's data digest (which has lots of interesting numbers - I forgot about it) has financial aid numbers that I found - the dollars awarded to undergraduates from Purdue has only gone up $14 million since 2012-13. Federal undergraduate financial aid has gone down from $179 million to $136 million in that same span. So overall, financial aid dollars have gone down $29 million since 2012-13.
Interestingly, Purdue's yield rate has actually gone down. I'm guessing this has to do with admitting more out-of-state students who don't end up coming, as this population has grown (likely to cover the frozen tuition). Purdue's acceptance rate has actually gotten higher over the last several years.
Since this IS a basketball board.......
http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mor...most-popular-sports-team/ss-BBMCOIn?ocid=ientp
Nice result in "bang for the buck" education though....
McHoop
http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mor...most-popular-sports-team/ss-BBMCOIn?ocid=ientp
Nice result in "bang for the buck" education though....
McHoop
Why include the word "only?" If the aid has gone up at all while tuition has been frozen, it seems to answer your question in the negative-- freezing tuition has not negatively impacted the amount of financial aid Purdue has been able to provide.
Isn't the Federal aid (1) out of Purdue's control, and (2) similar across all universities? So in that sense, I don't see how it's relevant at all.
Lastly, I don't see why we should consider financial aid at all. It seems to me the end goal is to actually make education cheaper, not just to subsidize it.
$14 million over 4 years is a rather meager amount. Federal aid is NOT under Purdue's control - but the point is still that it appears that financial aid is going down at Purdue because of this - and the increase that Purdue's putting in is not remotely close to off-setting it.
You're trying to make this a black and white issue. Saying things like we shouldn't consider financial aid at all is silly - that's still part of the cost of attendance to go to a university. For instance, Princeton's tuition is $60k - yet most anyone that comes from a family making $160,000 or less - pays $0. I don't know why you'd ignore that as a factor of someone considering college.
Also, wouldn't you consider shifting demographics of admitted students just shifting where the money is coming from, just like your argument on financial aid? It's not actually making it cheaper - it's just finding more people to pay more.
Overall, Purdue's doing a good job of managing its budget - it actually has done a very good job with this for 20 years (I'm not super familiar/recall Beering years). The Presidents, BOT, etc. all deserve credit for this. However, things like "tuition freezing" is more of a gimmick than anything else. I think higher ed public education has undergone a massive transformation over the last 15-20 years because especially since 2008, the public funding has been slashed - which has forced many public schools to operate like a private school. Purdue's done a wonderful job of staying as a true public university, particularly for in-state students. I'm glad an effort to curb this has taken place. However, you also see something else in the stats I gave you - it's actually getting easier to be admitted to Purdue because the yield is lower for out of state students. And you need more out of state students, and you don't have a whole lot more aid to give - so you're just getting wealthier out of state students, even if they necessarily would have gotten in with an admit rate 5-7% lower.
I'd like to see Purdue compete with the Michigans, Cals, etc. of the world for these out of state students. Not just trying to get more out of state students so they can cover the cost of keeping tuition frozen. That's what exactly what you're complaining about - subsidizing it.
I think you missed the point of the thread. However I don’t find that surprising.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...... I fully appreciate the point of the OP. I just had to respond because of the "Monroe County CC " shot....
McHoop
Of course I'd like to see Purdue attract the best students. But I don't think it's necessarily a negative to accept more students. Speaking only from an engineering perspective, the US needs more highly trained engineers. Purdue has answered that call and is trying to get more students through the curriculum. If they can get through the classes, why not have more students?
I'm not complaining about anything.
I'm simply stating that it is more important that universities including Purdue address the cause of the high costs per student, rather than simply masking the problem with subsidies (including out of state student dollars as you said).
I don't think that's oversimplifying it. We can reasonably discuss measures that would ease the burden on particular students through things like financial aid. But if the cost per student isn't coming down, we are never going to solve the real problem.
This is a great resource - it really feeds my nerdy side. Some notes:
- Is anyone else surprised that there are nearly twice as many students from Tippecanoe County than Marion? Marion has 5x the population.
- It doesn't seem like yield rate is a proper metric for "selectivity". Sure it shows how many of the top interested students you get, but that's not the same as being selective. Purdue could purposely not accept someone who is destined for MIT, and improve their yield rate. The college of Engineering has a yield rate of 26%. Liberal Arts has a yield rate of 28%. Does that mean that LA is a more selective/better school than Engineering? I don't know what it's a measure of.
- The fact that the average ACT score is 31 for the college of engineering seems especially impressive.
- On the budgets graph, it shows "total expenditures" at $1.2 B, and "total revenue" at $2B. Does this mean that Purdue had a surplus of $800M? That seems like an awful lot for one year, especially considering income from endowment was only $110M. Entire endowment shows $2.4B. So they just increased that by 33% in one year?
- I thought the "peer group" was not just the B10 conference... I thought for sure it included schools like Cal, Georgia Tech, etc.
Well, one major issue is not funding public schools. The funding Purdue's received from the state has literally been gutted over the last 20 years. To eliminate significant funding sources and say "deal with it" - you can't magically just replace the money. Fundraising is great - but fundraising in 2008 wasn't great, for example. And really, fundraising is not ideal to rely on for budgetary purposes - usually it is focused on scholarships/aid.
Purdue's tuition has always been a bargain - it's not new with this tuition freeze. Purdue was one of the few schools that didn't have major financial problems surrounding the 2008 financial collapse. And tuition still remained lower than our peers.
What I don't like about more of a marketing gimmick like a tuition freeze is what I have talked about - and it's hard to tell without full transparency from the university. Frozen tuition is great - but if it's:
1. Taking away fundraising/aid dollars to cover, that's not necessarily a benefit if people are receiving smaller aid packages.
2. Admitting more out-of-state students and making it easier to get into Purdue in order to cover the budget dollars lost by keeping tuition flat.
Purdue's done a great job from Jischke to today in improving the quality of student at Purdue - and increasing the retention rate, which is an important factor (see the US News formula update). However, in my certainly humble opinion, Purdue needs to be focused on taking the next step in quality of education - which means attracting the best students - not necessarily just getting them to apply.
Michigan and Purdue have the same undergraduate student body size. It also has basically the same number of applicants a year. Michigan's acceptance rate is 35 point less than what Purdue's is. So what's the difference?
Michigan had nearly a 50% yield rate - meaning almost half of the students admitted also enrolled. Purdue's yield rate is around 30%.
Purdue's attracting people to apply - but they're ultimately choosing somewhere else to go more often than other peer Big Ten schools. So Purdue's tuition may be frozen - but when a student is admitted to Purdue and school X - the other school may be more expensive in general, but could be significantly cheaper to attend with the aid package given.
At the end of the day, Purdue's total cost of attendance - including tuition & fees, but also financial aid, is what matters. Michigan has a reputation as a better school than Purdue. Money talks - if it's cheaper for a student to go to Michigan than Purdue, chances are they'll choose Michigan. If it's similar in price - chances are they'll choose Michigan. If Purdue is cheaper overall than Michigan, Purdue has a much better shot at landing them.
What this heavily boils down to is out of state students. If Purdue's just letting them in in hope that they'll come here and pay out of state tuition to cover the cost of a tuition freeze - that's not improving the quality of student or education. We need to compete for these out of state students with the Michigans, Cals, UVAs, etc.
The student data may be skewed based on where a student lists their home address. Once they move to Purdue, they may update their address from their parent's address to where they're living off campus. Same thing with grad students - they move and claim residency.
With my daughter being a freshman at Purdue this fall I've had this conversation with many parents of kids who graduated high school this year. My daughter received a full tuition ship from IUPUI and she received 32k from IU. She received nothing from Purdue. Every single other parent I've spoken to has a similar story of receiving money from every other college they applied to...but Purdue. We all just assumed that Purdue had tightened up the purse strings on the scholarship budget since they were not increasing tuition.
Thanks for sharing - obviously a small subset of people, but seems to be jiving with the numbers. Freezing tuition is great, but if you aren't keeping up with others in financial aid, it's rather meaningless as the difference between attending IU and Purdue is not $32k obviously.
This goes back to my last post - people are applying and ultimately choosing other schools. Our yield rate has gone down 7% since 2013. Last year was a 10 year low (and I don't have the data further back...so it could be the worst in quite some time).
I am surprised! Shocked actually. I just can't believe you l quote a woman's waist size in metric.
In case you don't know, 43 cm works out to about 16".
What a waist of time you are.
