
Parents with annual family incomes below $125,000 will pay no tuition - Link-
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/march/new-admits-finaid-032715.html
======
eatonphil
This is nothing new. This happens at every top 20 _private_ college/university
respectively. I went to Haverford College [1] and paid nothing on tuition.
Divorced parents and 10 siblings... That'll do it. A friend from high school
went to Duke free too for similar reasons. And another friend went to Penn for
free because of her parents' state too.

The only sad thing is how few people know about this. Under-privileged
students think they can only afford state schools. In truth, I couldn't even
afford a state school. Only a private college/university would give me the
full financial aid that I needed to attend.

Thankfully programs like Questbridge[2] (it's not spam, surprisingly) help
facilitate under-priveleged students applying to and attending top private
schools.

[1] - [http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-
colleges/...](http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-
colleges/haverford-college-3274)

[2] - [http://www.questbridge.org/](http://www.questbridge.org/)

~~~
loganfrederick
'The only sad thing is how few people know about this. Under-privileged
students think they can only afford state schools.'

This is a huge problem that, in retrospect, was rampant where I came from. A
pretty typical middle-class suburban high school, but one which rarely to
essentially never sent any graduates to Ivy League schools. Why? Because it
wasn't part of the community's culture.

How do you fix this? In anything other than upper to upper-middle class
suburbs, the parents themselves probably went to state schools and have middle
class jobs (which themselves are under pressure now). So the parents and
neighbors didn't know anything about Ivy League schools or how to propel their
own kids into the upper class.

By the time most kids learn how the culture works, it's too late, they're
already in whatever college and life track they happened to fall into. It's
takes especially thoughtful parents or other older role models (like great
teachers or counselors) to see a kids potential and tell them about their life
options.

Some kids have this experience (maybe it's a family friend or distant relative
that happens to be very wealthy and shines a light on possibilities to the
kid), but most do not.

~~~
briandear
And does Stanford really make a difference over a state school over the long
term? Motivation and talent are more more important than a particular school.

~~~
Matachines
Yes, it does. While at the end everything depends on the student, Stanford
offers better connections with companies, a brand name that helps get
interviews, and really, just better education. I've watched plenty of Stanford
lectures and every professor I watch there is way better than most of mine.

All of this makes a big difference when getting your first couple of jobs.
After that, it doesn't matter as much.

~~~
Kephael
Looking at the earnings of graduates, it doesn't appear that Stanford
graduates earn much more than other graduates. It seems like the degree mix
the institution awards and the cost of living of the area have the greatest
impact on post college earnings. We also need to remember that computer
science students comprise just a small portion of the overall student body.
[http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/full-
list...](http://www.payscale.com/college-salary-report-2014/full-list-of-
schools)

In regards to the online content, keep in mind that this content has been
developed and published with the knowledge that tens of thousands of people
will watch it, so it is important to ensure it is of high quality.

~~~
seestheday
In general, I'm really starting to question any reports on salary alone once
it gets past $100K/year.

After that point, performance bonuses in their many forms can have such a
large impact and that doesn't seem to be represented in salary comparisons.

------
sporkenfang
Essentially, colleges (and the government) expecting a family contribution to
tuition meant I went into extensive debt on my own, though cosigned by my
stepdad (who made it clear he would in no way take on any of the financial
obligation of the loans) for college. Most of my friends' parents were the
same way, and did not contribute to their children's college (and I'm not sure
where all these kids whose parents are paying for their college are even
going, really... or what kind of money those parents must be making to be able
to pay outright for college tuition) -- at a top tier U.S. school. In an
engineering program.

Working at a thrift store full time making minimum wage and going to
engineering school full time for the first two years, then doing tech support
full time and going to engineering school full time for the last two years was
no joke, and I still have debt remaining, two years out of school with a good
job.

Why should it be the _parents '_ income that anyone cares about?

Students are expected to contribute? Don't make me laugh. It's their
education, they are of majority age, they likely will be paying for it and
then some. How are PARENTS expected to contribute at all? Mine honestly did
not and do not make enough money to have any left over after taking care of my
two younger siblings (ten years younger), and yet on the FAFSA right there, an
"expected family contribution".

Edit: they do, of course, make enough money combined that the government
expects that they'd want to send their kid to college and could theoretically
contribute something to it. They did what they could, but that wasn't what
fulfilled expectations laid down by the Powers That Be.

~~~
downandout
It's extremely difficult to gain admittance to a place like Stanford if your
parents are not supportive of your educational ambitions. This is both because
your academic results earlier in life (upon which admittance would be based)
will tend to reflect an unsupportive family, and a place like Stanford wants
students with supportive families. That's why parental support matters.

~~~
donatj
Because kids with bad parents don't deserve good educations. Sigh.

~~~
downandout
Of course they do, but most won't get it. It's one of life's many crappy
realities. There's a line from a song... _" Where it ends...usually depends on
where you start"_. There are of course exceptions, but this generally holds
true.

------
pkrein
The whole system of need-based financial aid seems to be effectively moving
tuition towards perfectly elastic pricing based on how much students _can_
pay.

Universities raise the price of tuition, then increase financial aid for the
subset of students who can't pay the increase. Incremental revenue for the
university still goes up as they get more revenue from anyone who can
reasonably afford the increased "base tuition" amount.

~~~
morgante
Yup, it's classic monopolist pricing.

~~~
whybroke
There maybe a sort of monopoly here but monopolies never set their prices to
free (unless they're trying to destroy competitors which is obvious not the
case here)

There may indeed be grotesque stratification problems with the system but that
doesn't mean some part may do the right thing occasionally. Frequently even
monopolies moderate their behavior out of fear of regulation. Here perhaps
schools fear the reputation hit of graduating too high a percentage of rich
dimwits.

~~~
morgante
I do think it's mostly altruistic in intent, but the outcome is roughly the
same as the price discrimination you'd see in a perfect monopoly.

Also, I actually think an intelligent monopoly might set their lowest price to
0 (for those who couldn't pay anything). It protects their market domination.

------
techtivist
I am always conflicted about these. I was fortunate enough to get a full ride
(all grants, no loans) to a top University, even as an international student.
My parents couldn't afford to pay for my flight here, which the University
did. In a way that has allowed me to take a riskier career trajectory by
quitting a 6 figure starting salary at a top tech company after graduation
within 3 months and starting a startup. So I am ever so grateful for policies
like this.

But I wonder if universities should offer some sort of deferred payment (5
years after graduation for instance) to students instead (not a 3rd party
loan). If you go to Stanford you are pretty much guaranteed a stable income
when you graduate. Yes ,granted, a lot of alumni do donate without feeling the
necessity to do so, but having such an option will help universities, perhaps
more for those with smaller endowments "recover" some of the cost.

Universities could always make exceptions some time down the line on a case by
case basis, depending on student's current income which will vary violently
even for top universities, with some students deciding to work for a non-
profit while others choosing a more lucrative job, just like income tax works.

Again, I am really not sure, just throwing it out there.

~~~
ProAm
> Yes ,granted, a lot of alumni do donate without feeling the necessity to do
> so

You should pay it forward. It worked for you, help make it work for someone
else.

~~~
kroosaidher
I'm glad I didn't go to college, so I don't have to give any money out of
guilt to a place which wastes so much of it on landscaping and sports.

That's what I saw when I visited more privileged friends at Universities,
anyway.

I'd really rather give money directly to someone that needs it than to a
dysfunctional organization (and they are pretty much all dysfunctional). I
wish that was actually feasible.

------
rdl
I dropped out of MIT both to do a startup overseas (ITAR) and because my
parents wouldn't contribute any of the "expected family contribution" and I
couldn't get enough loans on my own.

Rather than all the crazy games, I'd prefer if education were genuinely market
priced, or if individuals could take reasonable debt loads or sign indenture
agreements. A commercial organization should be allowed to do something like
ROTC; paying an undergrad full college costs in exchange for a guaranteed
employee for 2-4y post graduation at market rate.

~~~
morgante
> A commercial organization should be allowed to do something like ROTC;
> paying an undergrad full college costs in exchange for a guaranteed employee
> for 2-4y post graduation at market rate.

I'm fairly certain they can. In fact, tuition reimbursement programs aren't
uncommon amongst elite employers.

~~~
rdl
Generally those are for additional classes taken by current employees --
either individual classes or a graduate program. Very rarely would that be for
a full undergrad degree, and wen less likely they would hire a high school
dropout and pay for full time college tuition for 4y first. ROTC is pretty
unique in that respect because they have legal force of government for the
contract.

------
jgalt212
This is, of course, good news for many families of current and/future Stanford
students. That being said, the upper middle class continues to get screwed in
this country. UMC produces most of the GNP, and pays most of the taxes (sorry
no carried interest tax loopholes available to those who draw salaries), and
then we still have to pay these crazy tuition fees.

The oligarchs, of course, don't care who much college costs be it 0$K, $100K
or $200K year. Any at cost basis, it just doesn't make a dent in their wallet.

Down with the oligarchs!

~~~
claar
Yeah, I feel pretty bad for the top 13% wage earners in the US
([http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-p...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-
percent-map.html?_r=0)). They really have it rough.

------
jlebar
I went to Stanford as an undergrad just a few years after this bidding war
between top universities began. The additional financial aid I received saved
my family and me more than $100k -- that figure would be much higher if we
factor in the interest on the loans I didn't have to take -- and I will be
forever grateful. I applaud Stanford for expanding this program.

But I'm also a little sad about the way this is playing out, because the net
effect is to set the top private universities even further apart from the many
great universities that nonetheless can't afford policies like this. There's
already so much pressure on a lot of kids to get into a top private
university, and now many of them are in a position where if they don't get
into one of the top four, their only option is a public school. (And yes,
there exist public schools, such as Cal, which one can argue deserve to be
mentioned in the same sentence as H/P/Y/S, but certainly there isn't a UC
Berkeley in every state, and going to a public school out of state can be as
expensive as going to a private school.)

If you really want to be sad, take a look at how short is the list of schools
with need-blind admission that claim to meet all demonstrated need:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need-
blind_admission#U.S._insti...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need-
blind_admission#U.S._institutions_that_are_need-
blind_for_U.S._applicants_and_meet_full_demonstrated_need)

This is a supremely low bar, because schools get to define how much you need;
there's no standard for this. And of course schools can meet your need with
loans. But even still, the schools on this list are the only ones in the
country which even claim to be meritocratic in their admission of US
applicants.

------
borgia
I fundamentally disagree with this, and its implementation seems to be a
significant attack on dual income, middle class families who are doing well
for themselves.

This doesn't hit the rich, it hits the middle earner and it hits them
extremely hard. It's frankly pathetic but I suppose what can you expect in an
era of hard pressed populist socialism.

~~~
philwelch
Statistically, $125,000 is not a middle income household income in the United
States.

~~~
kansface
California, particularly the Bay Area, is quite different. 125K for a family
is squarely middle class.

~~~
harryh
Median household income for SF is 72,947.

For San Mateo it's 87,633.

For Santa Clara it's 89,064.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_income](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_income)

~~~
ericd
I would just keep in mind that the difference in housing cost between
newcomers and those who have lived here for a long time can be very
significant because of prop 13, rent control, and a local housing market that
has inflated rapidly over the past 30 years.

------
WalterBright
One wonders about the people who make $125,001 - $170,000 who are then on the
hook for the full tuition (around $45K). They'd find it cost effective to
substantially lower their income.

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
And they can probably afford enough CPA to make that happen.

~~~
sukilot
What is CPA?

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
A Certified Public Accountant. You pay them to find the best solutions to your
taxes. The FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) uses the student's
family's taxable income to determine if they qualify for aid.

------
thoman23
Man I wish this had been in place in the 90's when I went to Stanford. I grew
up lower middle class in the Central Valley. My parents did everything they
could to help, but that didn't make a dent of course. Stanford was fairly
generous with outright grant money, but I still graduated with enough debt
that it really handicapped my wife and I in our early adulthood years, and
that was after taking 2 years off to work full time to help save money for
tuition.

Still, I can't complain. I wouldn't trade my Stanford experience for anything.
And for what it's worth, it would have actually cost me more to go to Berkeley
as the aid package there wasn't nearly as generous.

------
aabajian
Hate to bash Stanford, but as a current master's student in CS, I've found
their financial aid to be horrendous. The only real options are RAships and
TAships. I don't consider these to be "aid packages" because they entail a
tremendous amount of work. My current employer matched what was going to be
offered by the TAship with less hours overall.

EDIT: Just for kicks, here are some emails here that demonstrate the reality
of Stanford financial aid at the master's level.

Last quarter:

Nov. 17th: Hold on registration due to account balance... Nov. 18th: This is a
friendly reminder that you have unpaid charges on your account... [PAYS
$10,000 of tuition]

This quarter:

Feb. 16th: Your Stanford student account has been placed on hold* due to an
outstanding balance... Feb. 17th: This is a friendly reminder that you have
unpaid charges on your account... Mar. 18th: Student Account Notice... Today:
We are sorry to inform you that you are not currently eligible to participate
in the StanfordCardPlan...due to financial hold. [PAYS $5,000 of tuition]

This cycle has gone on for the past year now. For some context, I take two
classes per quarter and live on-campus (on-campus housing is the cheapest you
can get in Palo Alto). My total tuition + housing is $15,562 per quarter.

~~~
philwelch
A CS masters is the last kind of degree Stanford would give good financial aid
for. For a bachelors degree, you can get need based aid, and for a Ph.D, it's
customary that you're pretty well subsidized, but masters programs are where
they get you. I'm not sure why.

~~~
sukilot
Because terminal masters are only sought by indivuals pursuing significant
financial reward, and Stanford wants a cut.

~~~
_delirium
A substantial proportion are also foreign students from wealthy families
looking to get their students a prestigious U.S. degree. Such families are
quite willing/able to pay, so there's no great incentive for Stanford to
subsidize them.

------
JDiculous
My family was making about $150k/yr when I was in school. We didn't get any
assistance.

It's great that children from lower income families are getting subsidized,
but with these kinds of policies there's always a hard cutoff point, and the
people just above that cutoff point are the ones who get screwed.

Money shouldn't be in education period. If whether or not you can study is
even partly determined by the finances of your parents, then the system is
wrong.

------
analog31
I don't want be a troll, but I am struck by something. I think this may be the
first TB thread I've seen, about college education, where there isn't a strong
sentiment (approaching 50%) questioning the value of college education at all,
dismissing it as "signaling," and demanding "disruption" of the entire higher
education system.

Is Stanford that powerful of a brand?

~~~
jliptzin
I'm biased, because I went there, but I think people need to break down a
college education into two parts: (1) the education you receive (the things
you know at graduation minus everything you knew as a day 1 freshman) and (2)
the people, friends, and connections you've formed.

Part 1 is quickly becoming a commodity for many study topics that are
available online, for free or close to it, so it's hard to justify a $200k
price tag for something you can teach yourself.

Part 2 is much more difficult to supplant with alternative education. The
people I've met while at Stanford have been invaluable to me in starting my
career, and I don't even consider myself great at networking. There's just
such a huge brain trust there it's hard to even question the value of being
there. I'm sure the same can be said of the top 20 schools, however that
probably quickly drops off past that.

~~~
analog31
Those are interesting points. I think there are some other factors as well:
College provides kids with the experience of face-to-face interaction in an
academic setting, which is sufficiently similar to a professional setting. And
it also may provide psychological conditions necessary for some kids to
actually finish. I would have had a hard time earning my BS degree sitting in
front of a screen all day every day for 4 years, while living in a my
backwards little hometown.

As a thought-experiment, imagine going down the hallway at a large company,
talking to all of the new entry level recruits, and trying to guess which ones
went to college and which ones studied at home, just from their behavior. Now
guess which ones will move up the ladder and which ones won't.

If colleges are driven out of business, affluent parents will find other ways
to provide their kids with those extras, poor kids won't know why their online
education hasn't made them employable, and we'll just be back to the same
disparities as before.

I'm obviously pushing a particular agenda here, but I think it's worth
considering.

~~~
pitt1980
thats an interesting take

I don't know that that doesn't happen at real schools too though

while I'm sure college works as a smoothing function

but it seems to me that certain (almost always UMC) kids show up and
immediately get what the valuable connections to make at the school are

they get what sorts of fraternities are worth trying to get into, what sort of
extracirricular activities are likely to prove valuable in the future, what
sort of internships are worth angling for, that sort of thing

while alot of the less clued in students sort of fumble around almost at
random

it strikes me that the degree of clued in'ness' usually breaks down along
class lines

(this might be more of a finance, politics, business thing than a tech thing)

------
chx
What I find even more important:

> In either case, students will still be expected to contribute toward their
> own educational expenses from summer income, savings and part-time work
> during the school year. Students are expected to contribute at least $5,000
> per year from these sources but are not expected to borrow to make the
> contribution.

~~~
mrowland
Agreed. Student earnings requirements aren't much of a problem for
CS/engineering students (who can get paid summer jobs related to their field),
but they are difficult for students trying to get into industries where unpaid
internships are effectively a requirement. You would think Stanford would have
made a change to this as well.

~~~
sloanesturz
I'm a current Stanford undergrad. Most Stanford kids are able to pay for their
"student contribution" by getting on campus work-study jobs (like in the
Library or career development center), working as dorm staff in the
underclassmen dorms, or working as paid researchers in professors' labs.

~~~
mrowland
I've had on-campus jobs throughout college, and making $5000 from those jobs
alone would require working somewhere in the neighborhood of 15-20 hours a
week. Certainly possible (and many do it), but at that point it starts to have
a pretty noticeable affect on your schoolwork and personal life.

~~~
adevine
What? $5000 a year is a straightforward, achievable contribution, especially
with work-study jobs. When I was an undergrad at an ivy league school I made
significantly more than that working at the dining hall during the year and
the course review guide in the summer, and this was in the mid 90s.

~~~
mrowland
Here's my math:

15 weeks / semester * 2 semesters = 30 weeks. $5000 / 30 weeks = $166 / week.
At $8 an hour, that's 20 hours a week; at $10 an hour it's 16 hours. (Ignoring
taxes, which are low but still push the hours needed higher.)

This is not accounting for summer jobs, but my original point was that having
the student contribution at that level will make some students take a paying
but dead-end summer job over an unpaid internship or other opportunity that
would benefit them more in the long run. (Another reason unpaid internships
are questionable ethically...)

~~~
jorgeortiz85
Wages for campus jobs for undergraduates at Stanford start at $13.25/hr, and
can go quite high.
[http://financialaid.stanford.edu/aid/employ/wage_scale.html](http://financialaid.stanford.edu/aid/employ/wage_scale.html)

And there are plenty of off-campus jobs (SAT tutoring, etc) that can pay
$35+/hr.

------
leelin
The financial aid site clarifies the definition of typical assets. Seems like
families with under $300K qualify, excluding retirement accounts and primary
residence home equity beyond 1.2 times annual income. As others have
mentioned, it's designed to prevent families who have large savings from
manufacturing an artificially low income (an extreme case is retiring early
for a few years to show no income).

The takeaway is, maxing out retirement accounts like a 401k and dumping
savings into paying off the primary residence mortgage are ways to accumulate
net worth without accumulating "above-typical" assets.

[http://financialaid.stanford.edu/site/faq/index.html#faq_20](http://financialaid.stanford.edu/site/faq/index.html#faq_20)
===========

What do you mean by "typical assets"?

For applicants who report total annual parent income up to $125,000, we
generally consider "typical assets" to be an adjusted total net worth of less
than $300,000. Adjusted total net worth usually reflects the sum of the
following amounts:

Cash, savings, checking Investments Home equity, capped at 1.2 times annual
income Equity in real estate other than the home Business net worth

We do not include formal retirement assets (401k, 403b, IRA, Keogh) in our
analysis.

------
suyash
This is interesting, I wonder what does it mean for international students?
$125K in family income for students from developing countries, will probably
cover most of the students.

~~~
reubenmorais
It'd definitely cover all of the international students from developing
countries, but I don't think they're included in this policy. IIRC Stanford
only does need-blind admission for US students. $125K/yr is an order of
magnitude more than upper middle class families in Latin America make, for
example.

I looked into going to a US university when I was finishing high school in
Brazil but the reality is that even with aid packages and all of the
assistance you can get, the process involves a significant chunk of money
being spent on paperwork (official translations of dozens and dozens of
documents are expensive, US visas are expensive, intl travel is expensive, the
standardized English exam is expensive, etc.).

A free ride to Stanford for me when I was going into college 3 years ago would
have put my family in debt. Today I know that I could've remedied that with a
single internship in the US, but back then all of the costs intimidated me and
I gave up.

~~~
eitally
I just relocated one of my managers from Campinas to Huntsville and I think he
paid about $4000 for official translations. I couldn't believe it. The company
paid, but even so -- that's insane. And apparently there are different levels
of translation, ranging up to about $75/pp.

------
timtas
Boy, wanna talk about perverse incentives? How about this "typical assets"
business? One more way today's world proves you're a sucker to be frugal and
save. Stanford is indeed a luxury, and there's no reason a well-off family
should not pay for it. But these free rides are not coming only from
endowments. If you're paying full freight, you're not covering just your kid
but a couple other kids too. This is a mad way to price products. Only maybe
healthcare is less rational.

~~~
teej
I hate to break it to you, but if you pay taxes you are subsidizing a lot more
than "a couple other kids" going to Stanford.

The incentive is the American dream. Starting from nothing and making it to
the top. I'm sad that you're offended by that.

~~~
timtas
You misread me, and put words in my mouth. I'm not objecting to getting or
giving a hand.

Consider two families. One makes $100k/year and has $750k saved. They drive
modest cars, live in a modest home, take modest vacations and drive their kid
across town every day to the public (free to them) magnet school. The other
family lives very well, has nothing saved, a house that they can't afford, and
debt from paying for private school. Which one should get the free ride at
Stanford? Which one will?

With real interest rates below zero and a bailout culture, which family is
living the modern version of the American dream?

------
brador
Why use a fixed value and not a sliding % scale?

What about the family that makes 126,000 who pays tuition and is now in a much
worse position that a 124,000 family.

~~~
rmah
They do use a sliding scale.

------
sehutson
Every time I see this, I get a little sick thinking about the ~$100k in loans
I accumulated getting a BA at University of Chicago and Wash U in St. Louis (I
transferred). I got some merit scholarships and a good amount of grant aid,
but policies like this starting going into effect not long after I graduated.
Based on the current policies at Wash U, I would have paid nothing :/

~~~
derekp7
I have a feeling that the reason some of these policies are going into effect
(or getting expanded) is due to the increased dialog about rising tuition
costs. They'd rather make it affordable for those who need the aid, so they
can keep on getting the high tuition from those who can afford it. That way,
they avoid any legislative action that would crush their money making machine.

~~~
sehutson
Yeah, I understand why they're doing it, and I think it's great since you
can't really expect kids who grew up poor to have that kind of money at 17 or
18. If you're coming out of a sub-par school system and you spent your
childhood constantly worried about money issues, you're doing well just to
qualify for those kinds of schools.

I just wish there would have been SOME kind of retroactive forgiveness for
those of us who were well below the family income threshold but were born just
a couple years too soon. Don't get me wrong, I understood the implications of
taking out huge loans and I'm doing pretty well now (finally making progress
on the loans) - but it kills me to think I could have had the same education
without the crushing debt.

------
tacon
Rice University (originally Rice Institute) began teaching in 1912 and didn't
charge tuition until 1965, as they were also amending their charter to admit
other than white students. My understanding is that Rice still provides a
relatively large amount of student aid compared to most elite universities.

~~~
saryant
Anecdotally, a number of my high school friends went to Rice and all claimed
to be paying very little or nothing in tuition (2008). My high school
girlfriend received a full ride offer there (as she did from Caltech, which is
what she chose). IIRC 38 students from my high school graduation class
received offers from Rice.

------
mg1982
Can any one explain what '...and typical assets means'? I took it to mean the
value of normal things you own such as a house and cars. This seems like a
massive caveat against the headline (basically anyone who owns their home),
but since it's being ignored, I assume I'm wrong.

~~~
morgante
Owning your own home would be considered fairly typical for an American
household.

It's to protect against people who have a million dollars in assets but make
"only" $100,000 a year.

~~~
sukilot
And support families who blow their income on fancy cars and vacations instead
of saving

------
TheBeardKing
Instead of straight income, would a better method look at AGI, or account for
cost of living in some way? Colleges doing this would be a boon for people in
small towns like mine, but would offer smaller advantage to those living in
high expense cities.

~~~
byoung2
I find myself asking the same question as a resident of Los Angeles, where the
cost of living is high, so salary is high. If I moved to San Antonio or
Atlanta I could live a better lifestyle on a fraction of the salary and still
take advantage of offers like these (and all the tax credits I currently don't
qualify for).

~~~
roel_v
And yet, by staying where you are, your revealed preference is that you value
you living there higher than the claimed 'better lifestyle' and foregone
grants, subsidies etc...

(not a personal attack, just an observation - usually lots of 'grass is
greener' talk in this sort of threads, but still urban centers grow at the
expense of so-called 'low CoL areas')

------
Futurebot
This is a great step. I wonder if there are any plans to expand this to would-
be adult learners. That would be amazing. If other top universities follow
suit (I'd love to see this at NYU and Columbia, personally), that'd be even
better. Not going to solve the student loan crisis, but it'll certainly help a
bit. Encouraging to see this.

Another thing I like about this is the "only contribute $5000 a year" part
(especially if it does expand to adults) - that means if you've built a small
personal safety net, you won't have to watch it all go up in smoke instantly.
That adds a margin of safety you don't get right now.

------
nraynaud
My girlfriend works in the US education system (in an other state), and there
seem to be a trend were the marketing power of those schools is good enough to
attract rich kids from foreign countries paying full tuition, so that on the
US side they could maintain appearances of some equality (without touching
their budget, it's not on the table).

Of course, one of the problems is that the selection based on money is very
different from selection based on school grades, and the whole sport story is
set to play again with Saudi students.

------
pitt1980
I'm conflicted,

on one hand this is good in that they are recognizing that debt burdens are a
real hinderence to their graduates

on the other hand, this is used to pitch the line that 65K tuition is no big
deal

which you're in line for at the full rate at combined 225K income

look, I get that in modern internet culture, no sypathy is supposed to be
shown to people with household income over 200K, but that is still really alot

its also not at all obvious that the return on any investment of 200K for
education is worthwhile

I'll just link to:
[http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159](http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159)

[http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education...](http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education..).

[http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education...](http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education..).

for the general case against

also even if it does pay off, you have to work like a dog to make it pay off,
its not a passive investment

if you're buying a website on flippa, the degree to which your investment is
passive or active factors pretty heavily into the price,

it should be the same for colleges

(I'd also love to see a breakdown of exactly how much of Stanfords admitted
class comes form < 125K parent income, between 125K and 225K parent income,
and > 225K parent income)

\--------------------------------------------------------

also, I have a problem with the meme that elite colleges are now cheaper than
state colleges

I get that merit scholarship vary by college, but students qualified enough to
get into Stanford or Harvard will almost certainly qualify for full merit
scholarships at most if not all state schools

(maybe not at Cal or UCLA, but almost certainly at UCSB or UCD or San Jose
State or Fresno State)

that meme should stop

------
rckrd
Honest question: Lets take a hypothetical worst case scenario. You are
admitted to a top school. However, your parents make well over $125k but are
for some reason unwilling to provide any contribution. You are responsible for
full payments.

Is there no bank that will let you take out these loans? isn't it possible to
take out a combination of federal and private loans to cover the cost?

Disclaimer: I was fortunate enough to go to a top university and pay nothing
for tuition and housing.

~~~
Domenic_S
During my time at school 10+ years ago, the answer was no -- you had to fill
out a FAFSA (with your parents' tax information), and you had to take the
maximum allowed Parent PLUS loans before you could take federal or private
loans in your own name. If your parents would not take the PLUS loan, you were
SOL.

------
paparush
My son goes to UNC Chapel Hill. He was his high school's valedictorian and had
excellent SAT's. He won an academic scholarship (The Johnston) that has a
needs based criteria as well. My wife (she's disabled and receives Social
Security Disability) earn less than $100K. Based on our income, our son's
scholarship is whittled down to all of $1000.00 per semester. I'm paying
nearly $9,000.00 per semester so he can graduate with no loans.

------
a-dub

        7,018 undergraduates   [1]
        9,118 graduates        [1]
        2,118 faculty          [1]
        2,872 clerical         [2]
    

It appears that Stanford has a very competitive student to bureaucrat ratio. I
would think twice before handing them $60k/yr.

[1] [http://facts.stanford.edu/](http://facts.stanford.edu/)

[2]
[http://facts.stanford.edu/administration/](http://facts.stanford.edu/administration/)

------
spiritplumber
I didn't get to go to Stanford.

So, when I got my rejection letter, I replied with "I reject this rejection"
like in the Snopes story.

Then went to talk to the admissions folks, who thought that I had literally
hopped on a plane and flew half the planet just to make good on a joke (I was
already in the US for work actually).

Ended up working with a Stanford prof for a semester, after which I decided I
was done with academia.

------
dbbolton
It would seem to me that using a single cutoff like this versus a continuous
graded scale incentivizes people just above the cutoff to lie about their
income.

Even if the expected contribution for a family with $130k is very small, it
would be tempting to fudge the number and put that tuition money towards other
expenses.

------
outside1234
What does 'typical assets' mean? Parents that haven't saved for retirement?

------
egillie
With "typical assets" \-- my family was below the income thereshold but didn't
receive any aid from Stanford in '06 because our family farm was worth quite a
bit. Lots of ways to slip through the cracks with these policies...

~~~
roel_v
Well not to make this personal, but how would you consider this 'slipping
through the cracks'? If your family is worth 1mm or 2mm or whatever, would you
feel it's 'fair' (for lack of a better word) that you'd get a full ride? 2mm
in real estate is enough to retire on, would it be 'fair' if somebody (or
their children) who essentially lives off the returns on their capital gets a
'needs based' grant?

~~~
wlphoenix
Owning land that has gone through 3 or 4 generations in the same family, while
technically an "investment asset", usually isn't treated the same way from a
planning perspective as, say, apartments you purchase with the intention to
liquidate upon retirement. There may be a lot fewer ways to generate revenue
from it, so in all reality you may barely be breaking even on upkeep. You're
then forced to decide between giving your children an excellent education
which will set the up well in life vs keeping the land which you have a strong
emotional attachment to and wish to share with future generations.

------
plg
but you still need a high family income to send the kid to a school (private)
where there will be a teacher who will have the connections with ivy league
schools so they can write a letter of recommendation that will be read and not
summarily discarded

at my (private) school the ONLY way to get into an ivy league (no matter how
high your grades were) was to get a letter from the teacher with the
connection to Harvard ... or the (other) teacher with the connection to
Stanford ... or the (other) teacher with the connection to Yale

students even decided early on which courses to take so that they would have
exposure to these teachers early on

------
acadien
Why not just make it a graduated tuition based on parental income?

~~~
EduardoBautista
What things like FAFSA and even what Stanford is doing never consider is
whether or not the parents are even going to help pay at all.

~~~
acadien
Yes, I remember friends having that problem in undergrad in Canada. There was
a way around it but it was an application process with an interview. I believe
they were concerned with people trying to game the system to get lower tuition
fees.

------
octatoan
As an Indian junior, this makes me even sadder. Especially considering that
there are like 7 schools in the US that are need-blind for overseas
applicants. :/

------
dejv_cz1
Although it isn't anything new, it's v good to still work with this idea, coz
education shouldn't be limited by money...

------
h43k3r
Is this applicable for foreign students. If it is, a lot of Indian wouldn't
have to take big loans for doing their masters.

------
airnomad
I wonder what chances you have to get into Ivy League in the first place if
your parents earn less then 125k.

~~~
stephencanon
Given that all the ivies have need-blind admissions for American students, and
half are need-blind for everyone, the odds are about as good as they are for
anyone else. Also, Stanford isn't an ivy.

------
jamdavswim
Not having this is why I went to Cal.

------
shamney
how will this make any difference? if you're a non urm who doesn't already
know that top colleges provide very generous financial aid, it's highly
unlikely that you will have developed the right all round profile to get a
place at stanford.

------
rvn1045
Why is this even news?? This happens at pretty much every top tier
private/public university. Colleges price discriminate between people of
different incomes. The true cost per student is not 50k at a private school,
it's probably more like 30k, and people pay between 0 and 50k depending on
their income.

------
tux
Looks like Standford is learned something :-) Not everyone that can afford to
pay is smarter then the one who can't. Students should be accepted upon
knowledge and skills and not there financial situation. I vote for free
education!

------
fapjacks
This is what a step in the right direction looks like, folks.

------
anovikov
Now at least we have know the real threshold of poverty.

------
shamney
seems a little silly to support low income students like this yet continue
with class biased "holistic" admissions

------
wwwpatrick
cool. But is access limited by money to pay, or by a system that can favor
kids from fancy schools/backgrounds?

------
curiously
well i wasn't smart enough to get into standford and i already paid my student
loans so...

------
bunkydoo
Well, when the whole world found out how easy it was to cheat at Stanford this
morning - they just said fuck it and made it free.

source: [http://www.mercurynews.com/health/ci_27799963/stanford-
unive...](http://www.mercurynews.com/health/ci_27799963/stanford-university-
reports-allegations-cheating-by-students)

------
ezequiel-garzon
What happens for a family making $125,001? Are they expected to pay full
tuition? I applaud the initiative in any event.

~~~
lkbm
> Families with incomes at higher levels, typically up to $225,000, may also
> qualify for financial assistance, especially if more than one family member
> is enrolled in college.

~~~
ezequiel-garzon
Thanks for your reply. I would imagine there is some sort of gradual scale
from no tuition to full tuition. My goodness, I thought it was a reasonable
question, but it earned me a -4 in Hacker News!

------
inthewoods
This is a good start. Just my opinion, but I think Harvard should be
considered a for-profit company unless all students go free.

~~~
fastball
If all students were free they would be cashflow negative which is worse than
non-profit?

~~~
inthewoods
That assumes no other source of revenue - the endowment generates about $5b a
year.

