How do you save for kids college fund?

[MrsPete]

My brother graduated from WVU in 2006 and he said one year that there were more students from New Jersey in attendance than West Virginia.

It was cheaper for them to pay out-of-state tuition at WVU than go anywhere in-state in NJ.

I can't say we had MORE in NC, but they were a significant presence in the dorms! Many of my classmates said that even with transportation costs and out-of-state tuition, it was a better deal for them than staying home.

This makes me laugh, Mrs. Pete - you have been the most inflexible poster on every single college thread for the last five years. Are you honestly telling us that because your daughter no longer has the more expensive book option, you'll make her pay some of her own tuition or make her pay for something else? And you actually begrudge having to pay for a summer session when you have already made out like a bandit compared to other parents by limiting her to a NC public university?

I will never understand how and why you think like you do about your daughters' educations.

Here's a tutorial on understanding me: Read what I say, read only what I say, and don't add a negative twist from your own imagination.

Inflexible or not, what I am is well-informed. Most parents work with their own kids on the college applications, and they hear stories from their own friends -- who tend to be similar to their own kids. I've been working with seniors for 20 years now, so I know about top-notch kids going to prestigious schools, top-notch kids settling for community colleges, average kids trying to get into their reach schools, kids who've been lazy in high school who are trying last-ditch efforts to get into any school, and more. I know LOTS of stories about successes and failures. I have a great deal of experience with SATs, recommendations, college visits, and more; thus, I know pitfalls and tricks. If you aren't interested in the things I've observed or if you feel they don't generalize to your area, feel free to block me.

As for the books, take in the whole context: We've told our daughter that we'll pay the lion's share of her education . . . but her books, her parking sticker, and her spending money would be her own responsibility. We suggested that working full time during the summer months would be enough for the books and parking sticker, and working part-time during the school year would give her ample spending money while living on campus. Our goal is to give her SOME financial responsibility without asking her to work too many hours and without needing to go into debt. Now it looks like she's going to go to a school that RENTS textbooks; $105 of the tuition goes to pay for the rentals. This changes our plans, and we're not sure how we'll proceed. On the one hand, we've promised to pay tuition. On the other hand, if she chooses this school, she'll be escaping about 50% of her financial responsibilities, and our goal won't be accomplished. Perhaps you thought this was about money -- it isn't. It's about us trying to help her walk a line somewhere between Pampered Princess and Overworked Drudge. Or perhaps you missed the part about how we are ONLY expecting her to pay books, parking, and spending money.

Perhaps you missed the part, too, where we've told her that if she earns a scholarship that essentially pays for college, we'll replace her old gas-guzzler with a brand-new car? We're very willing to pay college expenses -- we just want her to have a bit of financial responsibility along the way too. No, you would've ignored that because it doesn't fit into the picture you've imagined for me.

I don't know why you think I'm begrudging paying for my children's educations -- if you'll look back a few posts, you'll see that I made a comment about it being the best return on any investment I could possibly make. What I said was that we have already realized that all our plans won't work because our oldest's going to have a mandatory summer school. There's a big difference in not anticipating an expense and objecting to paying it.

If our youngest stays on her current course, we'll run into the same thing with her: We've told them that we can pay for 4 years . . . but if she goes into Architecture, that's a 5 year program. If she sticks with Architecture, we'll adjust our plans. You're missing the big point: Our plan was never to assign an arbitrary number; rather, it was to let them know that we expect them to move steadily towards graduation and not assume that we'll foot the bill for them to stay and stay and stay in college.

Also, if we're limiting our kids to NC schools, why'd I pay an application fee to Clemson last week? What I've actually said -- many times -- is that we're telling our kids that we can pay tuition and fees, dorm and meal plan for an NC school for four years. If they choose an out-of-state school, a private school, or if they go beyond four years . . . they have to figure out how to pay the difference. It's not that we can't afford to pay; it's that we feel our schools are a great bargain, and there's really no need to go farther afield. We're not willing to pay-pay-pay just because we can. Life has limits, and learning that sooner rather than later is a positive.

Yes, we are aware that things may need to change, but it is better to tell our kids the plan NOW so that they are prepared.

Oh, I agree that it's good to let them know your expectations, and to help them understand that there are limits to what you can pay. I was just pointing out that when they begin to actually choose, the living at home thing may or may not work out. For example, if one of your kids chooses to go to become a vet at an NC school, he or she will almost certainly go to NC State, and that's out of driving range from my house. I don't think it's wrong at all to let them know -- probably about the time they start high school -- "This is what you can count on us to provide."

 

[DawnM]

Well, maybe if I had only one we would feel the same, but we simply cannot provide that full package on our dime for three children.

Maybe I am a bit biased as well since I not only went to boarding school from the age of 8 on, but I also flew across the world alone to attend college so far from home that I couldn't even call them very easily.

I might be swinging the pendulum too far the other way, but I don't have a requirement for them to get out of the house. In fact, until they are earning income it would be easier for them to live at home.

Dawn

I'm counting the whole package. Living at home is not an option in our mind. We consider living away to be a very important part of the college experience. We've made it clear to DD all along that she will live away for college and she's perfectly fine with that.

 

[AZMermaid]

I am not sure where it became an expectation that the parents foot the bill for the entire cost of college. I think it is awesome to contribute what you can as a parent, but ultimately, the child is the one getting the education and in my opinion, should burden some of the cost be it in spending money, books, loans whatever the parents deem appropriate for their situation. If the parents want to foot the whole bill, that is fine with me, but I don't get parents going into debt themselves just so the child doesn't. My parents contributed very little for my education. They paid for my car insurance and that was it. I worked for the rest. Now, this was 10 years ago before costs skyrocketed, I realize. But, it wouldn't be any different today. And they make $100K-ish combined, for them it was a "my education, my burden" philosophy.

I graduated with about $10K in student loans (that they did give me $1000 to pay towards it after I graduated) and about $1000 in credit card debt that I paid off quickly when I started working. That was the last time I have had credit card debt in my life. I really feel this is because I was not handed everything, I learned to work for myself and the value of my money from a young age. I was also never given any money beyond my $5 a week allowance in high school. If there was a dance or a movie I wanted to see, I had to save my money from the 4 hours a week I worked at my mom's store.

So, although my children will have at least $100K in a fund from my FIL, I don't really plan on contributing beyond that. I feel like they should pay their way in some part.

 

[MrsPete]

Like Mrs. Pete, we've laid out expectations. That doesn't mean there will be no changes. It doesn't mean we can't decide to pay for extra programs, etc. if we choose. What it does mean though is that our kids won't be flabergasted that we're not automatically coughing up more money on a whim if they take longer or run into unexpected costs.

I've known more than a few students who were genuinely shocked that their parents couldn't /wouldn't cough up money for "the whole package" at any college of their choice. I think those are the students who really don't understand just how expensive college really is. It's much kinder to let them know what you can /will pay, and what that will /won't buy.

Textbook rental is a relatively new practice and I'm really not sure how well it works. For an unimportant class that you have to take to fill some requirement it might be okay. For classes related to your major field of study it probably isn't such a great idea. I was a bio major and I often referred back to my textbooks from earlier classes as I proceeded through college. In fact, a couple of my med school classes used the very same textbooks I had used (and owned) in college. Had I rented instead of buying, I would have needed to rent or buy them again at that point.

Buying used is probably a much better idea for the main books and $105 won't go far at all for that. Actually, I'm not sure it'll go all that far for renting.

My old students tell me that they love it. Books are outrageous these days: One of my co-workers tells me that her son spent $900 on his books for his first semester (and that's at my daughter's second-choice school -- yikes! It may be feast or famine for my poor child.). Of course, he also just went to the campus bookstore to buy his books; he didn't make any attempt to buy used or search online.

At the school my daughter's considering, it works like this: $105 of the tuition goes to keep the school in books. They require all English 101 classes, all Psych 101 classes, etc. to use the same book, which means the books get used over and over every semester -- a practical choice. Students take their schedule cards to the window at the bookstore. A worker brings the books to them, and they sign for them. As long as they return them in good condition at the end of the semester, they owe nothing.

My husband brought up the same point you did: What if you want the books later? I'd argue that the books a student'd actually want to keep would be relatively few, and he'd be able to buy those books later when he found them for a good price (rather than being forced to scramble and locate them by the first class).

Also, I'd point out that today's kids have lots of reference material available on the internet -- a resource that we certainly didn't have in college. I was the cool kid on my dorm hall because I had an electric typewriter! I literally knew no one who owned a computer 'til junior or senior year, and -- obviously -- no one had internet.

Also, my daughter's just had to buy her first textbooks for online college classes, and I am AMAZED at the options that're out there for buying textbooks. I mean, it's been years since I bought a textbook, and -- wow -- has the world changed. I bought all my textbooks from the bookstore or from a bulletin board (and by bulletin board, I mean cork board with push pins and index cards left by fellow students). Anyway, my daughter found her book for sale for $138 and $88. Then she said she'd heard of renting books online, but I was wary of that because she needs it for a year-long class, so that'd be two rental fees of (oh, am I remembering right?) $30-something? In less than five minutes of searching, she found it USED on Amazon.com for $12. In the end, I bought her a $15 edition that was described as "like new". Seeing that price, I couldn't pull my credit card out fast enough! Clearly, it'd be foolish to assume that every book would be such a good deal, but we both learned from that transaction.

So I do like the rental option. The student KNOWS what books'll cost. I remember worrying about that when I was in college. And if, as the semester goes on, the student realizes, "This is a book I want to own", he can search it out for a good price at his leisure. Or he can just fail to return it to the bookstore (as if he'd lost it), and it'll be added to his school bill. I'm sure he'd come out ahead in the long run.

One more detail: The rental program is ONLY for undergrads. My husband's cousin has two daughters who both attend the school my daughter is considering (too bad the girls barely know one another), and she says her girls LOVED the rentals but didn't really appreciate it 'til the oldest graduated and started grad school . . . now she knows just how good she had it!

 

[AZMermaid]

I very much agree with Steve about not living at home. This is the one thing I would change about my college experience. I lived at home the first 2 years and I did not have a college experience. My husband has many many stories about crazy college life that I don't have. I have no friends from college. None. I had class friends, but because I lived 30 minutes away, I never really went out with them. I really wish I would have lived in the dorms those first few years.

 

[MrsPete]

Well, maybe if I had only one we would feel the same, but we simply cannot provide that full package on our dime for three children.

Maybe I am a bit biased as well since I not only went to boarding school from the age of 8 on, but I also flew across the world alone to attend college so far from home that I couldn't even call them very easily.

I might be swinging the pendulum too far the other way, but I don't have a requirement for them to get out of the house. In fact, until they are earning income it would be easier for them to live at home.

Dawn

I agree that one vs. three is a whole different ballgame. And while I don't feel that it's necessary to treat one exactly like I treat the other -- mine certainly aren't the same kid! -- I also wouldn't pay "everything" for one and tell the other that her only option is to live at home/hope you like the nearby school.

If I had to make a guess right now -- and this is far-fetched because my youngest is only a freshman -- I'd guess we're going to pay more for our youngest (and not because of costs going up). My oldest has more pure academic ability, and she's going into a field known for offering scholarships. Add to that that she's looking at one of the less expensive schools in our state. On the other hand, the youngest will have no problem being accepted to a good school, but she just doesn't apply herself like her sister does, and she likely won't get much in the way of scholarship money. So we'll end up paying more for her, regardless of where she goes to school.

I think the equalizer between the two girls will be the car. Our oldest drives a hand-me-down of ours right now, and we've promised her something shiney and new IF most of her school costs are paid through scholarships -- it lookos like this is going to happen. On the other hand, we've told her that IF the scholarships don't come through, we'll give her my current car (1-owner, 3-year old Honda, perfect condition) when she's a junior and needs it for student nursing. I suspect our oldest'll get a shiney new car, and our youngest'll get my old car. And that'll be fair because I expect to pay very little for the oldest's education, and I expect other people to pay very little for the youngest's education. Of course, if I'm wrong about the youngest -- if she picks up academically -- I'll be thrilled, and she is showing promise thursfar in high school.

I am not sure where it became an expectation that the parents foot the bill for the entire cost of college.

I don't think there's an expectation that parents'll pay EVERYTHING -- maybe more like an ideal that the parents'll pay everything -- but even when I was a student back in the 80s, almost everyone's parents paid SOMETHING. And even back then I'd say probably half my friends' parents paid all the big basics, leaving them only spending money. It's not new.

I see it as a pay-it-forward-thing. I'll pay the majority of my kids' educations, and they'll do the same for their kids. Parents have a much larger ability to pay than do 18-year olds. By putting aside a little every year for 18 years, the student can have a good start towards his education.

I do agree with the idea that kids should pay something, and I think it should be enough to take real effort on their part -- but it shouldn't be so much that it's stressful or burdensome. If it meant avoiding loans, I'd much rather see my kids choose a less expensive school, live at home, or whatever it took.

I very much agree with Steve about not living at home. This is the one thing I would change about my college experience. I lived at home the first 2 years and I did not have a college experience. My husband has many many stories about crazy college life that I don't have. I have no friends from college. None. I had class friends, but because I lived 30 minutes away, I never really went out with them. I really wish I would have lived in the dorms those first few years.

Living on campus was a great experience for me, and it's really what I'd like for my daughters. I see it as a great half-way step between Mom and Dad's house and a first apartment: independent living with a safety net.

However, it's not something I'd want at any cost. My oldest can't wait to live in a dorm. My youngest, I don't know. She has years to go, of course, and she might change, but I could see her choosing to stay home. If that's what she really wants, I'll push the benefits of a dorm, have her visit dorms . . . but if it's what she wants, she can live at home. Forcing a kid to live in a dorm is usually going to result in an unhappy kid. Also, I feel more strongly about avoiding student debt than I do about living on campus.

My husband and I disagreed about this topic until recently: He never lived in a dorm, always had an apartment -- never even a roommate after freshman year. He visited the dorms on weekends, saw that they were loud and rowdy, saw that the beer ran freely . . . and he mistakenly thought they were like that all the time. I told him that Sunday - Thursday my dorm was quiet after dinner, but it was Party Central on the weekend. He didn't believe me.

Then we started visiting dorms with our daughter -- I was telling her that she'd love living there, he was telling her that apartments are private and quiet. Once he saw students sitting in the study rooms quietly, saw that the elevators weren't full of beer cans, saw that the outer doors lock and a security guard checks IDs after hours . . . he decided that a dorm's a perfect first step for our girl. Which is good 'cause she's hook, line, and sinker ready for dorm life. She's the kind of kid who's made for dorms: Serious about her studies, but also loves to hang out with friends.

 

[crisi]

I think its a give and take....the living at home vs. the not. The private school vs. the public. Almost no one can afford to gift their child their hearts desire and cover everything. And realistically, we should discourage our children from pursing that if it involves large loans.

Ideally, I'd love for my kids to go to a small private liberal arts college and live on campus. Particularly my daughter, who is "that kind" of kid (at least at the moment). I suspect my son is more of a "small, second tier public college" kid - he'll be happy at Mankato State. I'd still like him to live on campus.

But its possible that by the time that date comes around, I won't be able to afford having my kids live on campus even at a state school. They might end up living at home - and getting a degree living at home - even spending two years at community college, is not a bad option.

Its also completely possible that they - particularly my son - will choose trade school. One of my co workers has two kids who are now young adults. The first got a business degree from one of those second tier State schools. The second he was really worried about - ended up living at home and going to tech school (because his dad said "go to school or pay rent" - going to school was easier, but it took him a year to figure that out) and becoming an electrician. Guess who is doing better now five years out of school?

(I could use a plumber in the family.....)

 

[AZMermaid]

We were talking about this in the teacher's lounge the other day (trade schools). Not all kids are meant to go to college and that doesn't mean they are losers. In our high schools they make a huge deal about the IB kids and the AP kids and all that, as they should. But a lot of time those kids who aren't "school kids" end up dropping out, causing trouble, or barely squeaking by with no real skills, because they hear the message "it's college or nothing." It is only when they get put into the alternative school after really messing up that they start getting taught various trades. There is nothing wrong with being a plumber or electrician or refrigerator repairman, but with so much high stakes testing, those kids seem to get shoved aside.

 

[MrsPete]

We were talking about this in the teacher's lounge the other day (trade schools). Not all kids are meant to go to college and that doesn't mean they are losers. In our high schools they make a huge deal about the IB kids and the AP kids and all that, as they should. But a lot of time those kids who aren't "school kids" end up dropping out, causing trouble, or barely squeaking by with no real skills, because they hear the message "it's college or nothing." It is only when they get put into the alternative school after really messing up that they start getting taught various trades. There is nothing wrong with being a plumber or electrician or refrigerator repairman, but with so much high stakes testing, those kids seem to get shoved aside.

Yeah, that's true. Schools tend to show the route to college as the one and only -- and parents want to hear about college, even if their kids clearly aren't good candidates.

On the other hand, trade schools don't "push their wares" as strongly as do colleges. Or they're ignored.

At our school, which I assume is typical, our best and brightest self-select into the AP courses and head to college. Our average-kids who KNOW they're meant for trade schools, apprenticeships, etc. enroll in our school's vocational classes and learn bricklaying, auto mechanics, electrical trades, cosmetology. Both of these groups are doing FINE. The vocational group's strong out of the gate and finds jobs right away, and the college kids are admitted /go even farther once they finish their degrees.

It's our low-level kids who have no chance at college who don't choose anything . . . and who are shuffled into the "default", which is college-prep. They're not interested in academics, and they don't do well enough to get into college. But they (and their parents) don't want to hear that they'd be better off choosing a vocational class that'd teach them a skill. They see that as putting them down. They claim they're going to be pediatricians and lawyers, even though they have 1.8 GPAs, never read for pleasure, and skip school regularly. It's not preparing them for any real future, but they have every legal right to choose (or default to) this path. By choosing something beyond their ability, they miss their chance at what they could've had! So they get out of school and work at the food court at the mall. How much better off would they be if they'd taken carpentry classes! Or dental hygeine? But in high school they see those things as "beneath them".

I'm thinking of one old student in particular. Didn't care a hoot about school. Graduated with less than a 2.0 -- never really tried. She was one of those kids who was quite happy with a 70 -- it's passing, isn't it? Why try for an A? What does it give me that a D doesn't? Senior year she was determined that she was going to a big state university. She wasn't admitted. Wasn't admitted to ANY universities. She was flabberghasted. She believed that doing the minimum would garner the same rewards as earning an A. And, to some extent, the school is to blame for that: We pass kids right on with a grade of 70. They move through the ranks and become seniors. I remember her well because she was very outspoken about HOW UNFAIR it was that she couldn't get into the school of her choice -- after all, she was going to get a high school diploma just like the kids at the top of the class! But a whole lot of our low-level kids THINK this, even if they don't say it. And those are the kids for whom we need better options, better guidance on what's realistic for them.

I know where this mind-set began: Kids used to be divided up into high and low classes -- those of you who were in elementary school with me in the 70s will remember -- and it was clear that the color of a person's skin was a big decision-maker. It was also clear that the "good class" got the best teacher, and when we reached high school the "low class" was shuffled automatically into vocational classes. Also, no one was ever moved from class to class -- if you were judged "low" as a 1st grader, you probably weren't going to escape that label. That all NEEDED to change, but it's changed too far in the other direction. Now we're pretending that we have no low students. We need to view vocational not as "low" but as a different path, and we need to give kids a realistic idea of what they'll be able to do after high school if they choose this path.

 

[DawnM]

I should also add that it is very likely that I will return to work around the time they get to college age. I have considered that as well.

That would change our ability to contribute as our income would be greater.

We are basing what we can contribute on our current situation. Me working or Dh getting raises or promotions with raises will possibly change what we are willing to pay. We will have to see what happens by that time.

But I prefer to give the kids the lowest we are offering to start. If we can give more, and if they need to go somewhere not local, we will sit down and chat and figure some things out.

Right now my oldest has some learning disabilities and some other issues going on. I don't see him thriving in a large group dorm setting. In fact, a small school would be best for him. There is at least one local school (still out of state, but not astronomically priced) where he could live at home and go (right across the state line.)

My other 2 will pretty much be fine no matter where they are thrown. They are just different sorts of kids.

Dawn

I agree that one vs. three is a whole different ballgame. And while I don't feel that it's necessary to treat one exactly like I treat the other -- mine certainly aren't the same kid! -- I also wouldn't pay "everything" for one and tell the other that her only option is to live at home/hope you like the nearby school.

 

[AZMermaid]

Our high schools have no vocational type classes. The kids only see this option once they are expelled from the regular schools and placed into the "alternative school." They are generally very well performing schools with an upper middle class population, so only the college message is out there, which I agree, partly comes from parent pressure.

 

[DVCLiz]

I can't say we had MORE in NC, but they were a significant presence in the dorms! Many of my classmates said that even with transportation costs and out-of-state tuition, it was a better deal for them than staying home. Here's a tutorial on understanding me: Read what I say, read only what I say, and don't add a negative twist from your own imagination.

Inflexible or not, what I am is well-informed. Most parents work with their own kids on the college applications, and they hear stories from their own friends -- who tend to be similar to their own kids. I've been working with seniors for 20 years now, so I know about top-notch kids going to prestigious schools, top-notch kids settling for community colleges, average kids trying to get into their reach schools, kids who've been lazy in high school who are trying last-ditch efforts to get into any school, and more. I know LOTS of stories about successes and failures. I have a great deal of experience with SATs, recommendations, college visits, and more; thus, I know pitfalls and tricks. If you aren't interested in the things I've observed or if you feel they don't generalize to your area, feel free to block me.

As for the books, take in the whole context: We've told our daughter that we'll pay the lion's share of her education . . . but her books, her parking sticker, and her spending money would be her own responsibility. We suggested that working full time during the summer months would be enough for the books and parking sticker, and working part-time during the school year would give her ample spending money while living on campus. Our goal is to give her SOME financial responsibility without asking her to work too many hours and without needing to go into debt. Now it looks like she's going to go to a school that RENTS textbooks; $105 of the tuition goes to pay for the rentals. This changes our plans, and we're not sure how we'll proceed. On the one hand, we've promised to pay tuition. On the other hand, if she chooses this school, she'll be escaping about 50% of her financial responsibilities, and our goal won't be accomplished. Perhaps you thought this was about money -- it isn't. It's about us trying to help her walk a line somewhere between Pampered Princess and Overworked Drudge. Or perhaps you missed the part about how we are ONLY expecting her to pay books, parking, and spending money.

Perhaps you missed the part, too, where we've told her that if she earns a scholarship that essentially pays for college, we'll replace her old gas-guzzler with a brand-new car? We're very willing to pay college expenses -- we just want her to have a bit of financial responsibility along the way too. No, you would've ignored that because it doesn't fit into the picture you've imagined for me.

I don't know why you think I'm begrudging paying for my children's educations -- if you'll look back a few posts, you'll see that I made a comment about it being the best return on any investment I could possibly make. What I said was that we have already realized that all our plans won't work because our oldest's going to have a mandatory summer school. There's a big difference in not anticipating an expense and objecting to paying it.

If our youngest stays on her current course, we'll run into the same thing with her: We've told them that we can pay for 4 years . . . but if she goes into Architecture, that's a 5 year program. If she sticks with Architecture, we'll adjust our plans. You're missing the big point: Our plan was never to assign an arbitrary number; rather, it was to let them know that we expect them to move steadily towards graduation and not assume that we'll foot the bill for them to stay and stay and stay in college.

Also, if we're limiting our kids to NC schools, why'd I pay an application fee to Clemson last week? What I've actually said -- many times -- is that we're telling our kids that we can pay tuition and fees, dorm and meal plan for an NC school for four years. If they choose an out-of-state school, a private school, or if they go beyond four years . . . they have to figure out how to pay the difference. It's not that we can't afford to pay; it's that we feel our schools are a great bargain, and there's really no need to go farther afield. We're not willing to pay-pay-pay just because we can. Life has limits, and learning that sooner rather than later is a positive. Oh, I agree that it's good to let them know your expectations, and to help them understand that there are limits to what you can pay. I was just pointing out that when they begin to actually choose, the living at home thing may or may not work out. For example, if one of your kids chooses to go to become a vet at an NC school, he or she will almost certainly go to NC State, and that's out of driving range from my house. I don't think it's wrong at all to let them know -- probably about the time they start high school -- "This is what you can count on us to provide."

Whatever. All you've talked about for the past year is that your daughter has two choices - App and Wilmington. I didn't know Clemson was such a front runner. And no matter what your intention is, your post came across as though your daughter had snuck something by you when you discovered she wasn't going to have to pay what you thought for books. At most I 'd have said, "Hey, isn't that great? Now you'll have a little bit of a nest egg against next year's budget." Making her pay more of her money for tuition is just not something that would have crossed my mind.

And where do you live in North Carolina that NC State is out of driving range? It's in the middle of the state - how can it be out of driving range when it would only be 3 to 4 hours from any spot in the state?

 

[Piecey]

I can't say we had MORE in NC, but they were a significant presence in the dorms! Many of my classmates said that even with transportation costs and out-of-state tuition, it was a better deal for them than staying home. Here's a tutorial on understanding me: Read what I say, read only what I say, and don't add a negative twist from your own imagination.

What I'm learning from this thread is that my kids will be forbidden from attending college in NJ

I doubt that is the case at WVU anymore, actually, as the Promise scholarship has increased WV post-secondary education quite a bit. My brother was in the first class to receive it, though, so not everyone was eligible whereas in the future students knew what they had to do to get it. So recipients and attendance skyrocketed after his class.

 

[disykat]

Whatever. All you've talked about for the past year is that your daughter has two choices - App and Wilmington. I didn't know Clemson was such a front runner. And no matter what your intention is, your post came across as though your daughter had snuck something by you when you discovered she wasn't going to have to pay what you thought for books. At most I 'd have said, "Hey, isn't that great? Now you'll have a little bit of a nest egg against next year's budget." Making her pay more of her money for tuition is just not something that would have crossed my mind.

And where do you live in North Carolina that NC State is out of driving range? It's in the middle of the state - how can it be out of driving range when it would only be 3 to 4 hours from any spot in the state?

I'm getting the problem now. You're not paying attention. She was replying to someone who was talking about having her kids live at home.

 

[DVCLiz]

I'm getting the problem now. You're not paying attention. She was replying to someone who was talking about having her kids live at home.

I'm paying perfect attention, disykat. Mrs. Pete's post about the money her daughter wasn't going to have to pay for books struck me in a certain way and I responded to it.

 

[MrsPete]

Whatever. All you've talked about for the past year is that your daughter has two choices - App and Wilmington. I didn't know Clemson was such a front runner. And no matter what your intention is, your post came across as though your daughter had snuck something by you when you discovered she wasn't going to have to pay what you thought for books. At most I 'd have said, "Hey, isn't that great? Now you'll have a little bit of a nest egg against next year's budget." Making her pay more of her money for tuition is just not something that would have crossed my mind.

And where do you live in North Carolina that NC State is out of driving range? It's in the middle of the state - how can it be out of driving range when it would only be 3 to 4 hours from any spot in the state?

No, that's your imaginative twist on the truth: She has visited quite a few schools, and from those visits she developed two favorites. Favorites by far. Honestly, they aren't the schools I would've predicted for her earlier -- I had her pegged as an NC State girl, but as we visited and saw what she liked, she developed two strong preferences. I happen to think they're both good fits for her. I also didn't say that Clemson is a frontrunner. I said she's applied.

Really, go back to what I said: Read what I've written. Just what I've written. Without a twist. Without additions. Without negative assumptions.

As for 3-4 hours, that's a fine distance for a kid who's going to live in a dorm/apartment, but that offshoot discussion was about kids living at home and commuting to school. It wasn't about my child personally.

Books again; you're determined that this is negative. We discussed her paying for books -- that was to be her part of the financial responsibility. Now it appears that books may be free -- or, a better phrase, included at no additional cost. The point is to give her some financial responsibility. If circumstances take that away, where's the lesson?

Here's an analogy, which will probably fall flat, but here goes: Suppose you and I are supposed to bring lunch to a club meeting. We agree that I'll bring the main entree and the side dishes, and you'll take care of dessert. This is acceptable to us both, even though I'm doing the majority. As the event nears, a bakery suddenly/unexpectedly donates desserts, eliminating the need for your portion of the meal. If your responsibility suddenly disappeared, wouldn't you expect to say, "Wow, this is great. This has been provided for us. Now I should take on one of the side dishes."? It's about shared responsibility.

What I'm learning from this thread is that my kids will be forbidden from attending college in NJ

Honestly, I don't see how y'all can afford to live in New Jersey. I know wages are higher up North, but they can't be THAT MUCH higher.

I'm getting the problem now. You're not paying attention. She was replying to someone who was talking about having her kids live at home.

Yes, it's becoming clear to all of us. You can't read clearly and be that off-base.

I'm paying perfect attention, disykat. Mrs. Pete's post about the money her daughter wasn't going to have to pay for books struck me in a certain way and I responded to it.

See, it's not about money. I have money. I can write a check this very minute for her first year of college, even if she doesn't get a penny of scholarship money. It's about responsibility.

 

[disneysteve]

I am not sure where it became an expectation that the parents foot the bill for the entire cost of college.

I don't think that is the expectation. We are saving for college but depending on where she goes, we won't be paying 100%. We've got 40K+ in her 529 so that will be a real good start, and we've got 3 more years to save, but we expect her to pay/borrow for some of it, too.

 

[DVCLiz]

Here's an analogy, which will probably fall flat, but here goes: Suppose you and I are supposed to bring lunch to a club meeting. We agree that I'll bring the main entree and the side dishes, and you'll take care of dessert. This is acceptable to us both, even though I'm doing the majority. As the event nears, a bakery suddenly/unexpectedly donates desserts, eliminating the need for your portion of the meal. If your responsibility suddenly disappeared, wouldn't you expect to say, "Wow, this is great. This has been provided for us. Now I should take on one of the side dishes."? It's about shared responsibility.

Honestly, Mrs. Pete, I understand every word you've said - and I have for the last 5 years, during which you've set yourself up as an expert because you work with college bound seniors. And you are entitled to your opinions, really you are. My issue is that this is YOUR CHILD, and you are treating her in my opinion as though she has violated her parole. As far as your analogy goes, yes of course I would rearange the finances and equalize things with a friend. But this is your child you are talking about, and it just puzzles me as to why you would insist on continuing to look at it as a business transaction. My God, isn't your daughter already one of the most responsible students on
the planet?

Letting your child save an unexpected windfall against the future seems to be, to you, a bad thing. I paid all of my daughter's college expenses, soup to nuts, so she could have the opportunity to save and graduate with no debt and a nest egg. I couldn't ask for a better, more successful, more responsible, more financially savvy young woman. If I'd taken those summer earnings and used them to offset tuition, she'd be that much further behind in her savings goals today. And she's the farthest thing from a pampered princess it's possible to be, despite your little nasty jab in an earlier post which I assume is what you think of anyone whose parents provided them with a full ride.

 

[allison443]

Is anyone else waiting to see which of the two North Carolina ladies says "bless your heart" first?

Seriously I think both of you have good perspectives on the whole thing. It goes back to each family doing what they feel is right. I will add that so often these things are shaped by our past personal experiences-just look at all the posters who say they paid for college themselves, so their kids will too; or they had to struggle through, so they don't want their kids to struggle; or their parents paid for them, so they want to pay for their kids, etc.

The only thing I will say about the book rental discussion, is that I remember Mrs. Pete bringing it up several times about discussions in picking colleges, evaluating costs, etc. and saying what an advantage it was at this one particular college. Isn't it possible that your dd, knowing books were a cost she was responsible for, counted the book rental as a "plus" for App State because she (wisely) wanted to reduce her costs? Just like her being able to get scholarships at a particular school (reducing the parental contribution) is a plus for that school.
If she is still going to be responsible for some arbitrary amount (what books would have cost somewhere else?) then there's no savings in it for her.

Anyway good luck to her!

 

[SaraJayne]

Textbook rental is a relatively new practice and I'm really not sure how well it works. For an unimportant class that you have to take to fill some requirement it might be okay. For classes related to your major field of study it probably isn't such a great idea. I was a bio major and I often referred back to my textbooks from earlier classes as I proceeded through college. In fact, a couple of my med school classes used the very same textbooks I had used (and owned) in college. Had I rented instead of buying, I would have needed to rent or buy them again at that point.

Buying used is probably a much better idea for the main books and $105 won't go far at all for that. Actually, I'm not sure it'll go all that far for renting.

My college rented textbooks 17 years ago and I loved it. Purchasing the book at the end of the semester was always an option. You could buy either a new or used copy.

Our rental fee was $75 and that covered ALL books for the entire year. It was a yearly fee...and that was all we paid for textbooks.

If professors required extra materials, that was clearly outlined in the syllabus and those we had to purchase. I was an English major, so most of them were novels/reference books that I would have wanted to purchase, anyway.