In new rankings, MU is ranked #82. Fair/Appropriate?
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/marquette-university-3863
This seems like a fair assest of MU. Student reviews were accurate, and I think a true and positive review of the school.
As fair as any USN&WR ranking can be....
Quote from: nyg on September 13, 2011, 08:11:43 AM
In new rankings, MU is ranked #82. Fair/Appropriate?
The ranking is reasonably appropriate. The location of your post is absolutely not.
Validates the "middle of the road" designation.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on September 13, 2011, 10:16:02 AM
Validates the "middle of the road" designation.
Yep, just like the dental school.
Caveat emptor. Everyone knows that these rankings can be skewed by student reviews, in state tuition, excellent grad programs. Overall, I don't think it is the gold standard for undergrad information.
In state tuition has nothing to do with it. The criteria are simply bizarre. 22.5% (the largest single category) of it is based on "academic reputation." This is simply what other campus Presidents, and high school counselors, *think* about the institution.
The other criteria are more objective, but also flawed in some ways. For instance, they grade you on the % of students in the top 10% of their high school class. What does that have to do with the quality of the education they receive? Then they also grade on graduation rates - which are usually directly tied to the % of students in the top 10% of the class.
It is a completely flawed system that everyone should simply ignore...but they won't.
Quote from: jmayer1 on September 13, 2011, 10:16:38 AM
Yep, just like the dental school.
I'm an undergrad alum as well, thank you
In state tuition does play a role in the "Best Value" category, doesn't it?
Oh yeah...I was just talking about their national rankings. The ones we are touting here.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on September 13, 2011, 10:54:03 AM
I'm an undergrad alum as well, thank you
pretty middle of the road. kinda like roadkill.
Can anyone provide a list of % breakdown of how they put together the national rankings?
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/09/12/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2012
Worth pointing out that as a Catholic school, it's pretty much apples and oranges compared to the state schools or Ivies.
MU is still (and has been for the past few years) in the Top 5 of Catholic universities with Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, and Fordham.
Above other Catholic schools like SLU, Villanova, DePaul, Xavier, St. John's, Seton Hall, Loyola, Dayton, Gonzaga, etc.
You missed Holy Cross
Whats the definition of a national university? I would think Nova would be considered one but its not.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 13, 2011, 10:49:12 AM
In state tuition has nothing to do with it. The criteria are simply bizarre. 22.5% (the largest single category) of it is based on "academic reputation." This is simply what other campus Presidents, and high school counselors, *think* about the institution.
Absolutely correct. A few years back I did my own mini-analysis of the rankings and found that, generally speaking, the larger and more publicly known an institution (i.e. the big state schools), the better your "academic reputation" will be. And the better your "academic reputation," the better your overall ranking. In other words, the large administrations and faculties at big state schools think highly of the large administrations and faculties at other big state schools. The Ivies and a ahndful of the other elite private schools can avoud this, but once you get outside the top 25 or so, it becomes the rule.
There were several instances were a smaller private school, like Boston College, topped several state schools ranked ahead of it in all, or nearly all, of the other categories, but because it didn't have the same
reputation it was lower in the overall rankings. And, of course, reputation becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy with these rankings.
Quote from: muhs03 on September 13, 2011, 01:14:08 PM
Whats the definition of a national university? I would think Nova would be considered one but its not.
Regional Universities offer a full range of undergrad programs and some master's programs but few doctoral programs. Regional Universities include Providence College, James Madison University, Creighton University, and Santa Clara University.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-north
Nova is ranked 1st in the North Region - tough to tell where that would lead them to fall in the national rankings but just looking at their rankings, scores and key indicators compared to ours, I would have to say, they would be ranked ahead of us.
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/marquette-university-3863/rankings
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/villanova-3388/rankings
as a grad of the dental school I hardly considered my education a " middle of the road" experience .
Quote from: Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup on September 13, 2011, 12:05:06 PM
Worth pointing out that as a Catholic school, it's pretty much apples and oranges compared to the state schools or Ivies.
MU is still (and has been for the past few years) in the Top 5 of Catholic universities with Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, and Fordham.
Above other Catholic schools like SLU, Villanova, DePaul, Xavier, St. John's, Seton Hall, Loyola, Dayton, Gonzaga, etc.
Where have you seen that published?
Quote from: drbob on September 13, 2011, 02:26:55 PM
as a grad of the dental school I hardly considered my education a " middle of the road" experience .
That was just a light-hearted jab directed at 4everwarriors, who i know is/was a teacher/graduate?? of the dental school and likes to say the MU's undergraduate program is "middle of the road".
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 13, 2011, 10:49:12 AM
In state tuition has nothing to do with it. The criteria are simply bizarre. 22.5% (the largest single category) of it is based on "academic reputation." This is simply what other campus Presidents, and high school counselors, *think* about the institution.
The other criteria are more objective, but also flawed in some ways. For instance, they grade you on the % of students in the top 10% of their high school class. What does that have to do with the quality of the education they receive? Then they also grade on graduation rates - which are usually directly tied to the % of students in the top 10% of the class.
It is a completely flawed system that everyone should simply ignore...but they won't.
Many schools tout the percentage of students they have in the Top 10% of their graduating class. It speaks directly to the quality of students they attract.
In a very recent Newsweek poll, students rated UW-Madison's undergraduate program as one of the least challeging....... :D
Quote from: Pakuni on September 13, 2011, 01:23:41 PM
Absolutely correct. A few years back I did my own mini-analysis of the rankings and found that, generally speaking, the larger and more publicly known an institution (i.e. the big state schools), the better your "academic reputation" will be. And the better your "academic reputation," the better your overall ranking. In other words, the large administrations and faculties at big state schools think highly of the large administrations and faculties at other big state schools. The Ivies and a ahndful of the other elite private schools can avoud this, but once you get outside the top 25 or so, it becomes the rule.
There were several instances were a smaller private school, like Boston College, topped several state schools ranked ahead of it in all, or nearly all, of the other categories, but because it didn't have the same reputation it was lower in the overall rankings. And, of course, reputation becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy with these rankings.
This is very true. I did my undergrad Miami University in Ohio and its still a point of pride when people are impressed and compliment me with "great school" or similar comments. Yet it trails schools like MSU, Iowa, and Minnesota which, while good schools, I know for a fact were "safety" schools for alot of my peers from those states at Miami. And no offense, but schools like Auburn and Alabama being above schools like Miami and Marquette are ridiculous.
Its interesting, Ohio State has been climbing these rankings for years. When I was a freshman in college 8 years ago, Miami was firmly above OSU and everyone would tell you that. But rankings like this and associated buzz changed some people's opionions, and couple that with intelligently distributed scholarship money by OSU, the gap began to close, though the rankings then inflated wildly. In many ways, its much like Wisconsin, fantastic graduate programs, lesser so undergrad work (though UW is a better undergrad institution than OSU).
I stopped taking US News and World Report seriously when schools I respected began to plummet year to year. I mean, this is the NATIONAL list. If you're looking for a job across the country, people are going to be more impressed by the Colorado School of Mines than Marquette, Miami, TCU, or the University of Missouri? GTFO
The question I have is does not having a football team lower our ranking?
Georgetown seems to be doing OK without one.
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on September 13, 2011, 07:56:44 PM
Georgetown seems to be doing OK without one.
Georgetown is in Washington DC.
They specifically mentioned that we do not have a football team, so I wondered if that played into their rankings.
Quote from: bilsu on September 13, 2011, 09:02:00 PM
Georgetown is in Washington DC.
Really? I had no idea. I thought I was in Baltimore when I saw the game at the Verizon Center last year.
Bilsu, Dayton has a football team. Look at their ranking.
LOL....the peer reviews.
UF President ranks his school on par with Harvard and grades all other Florida schools low (2009).
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20090616/ARTICLES/906169915
According to one former senior reporter who worked on the rankings in the early '90s: "We were roped around the neck to get us to write the serious journalistic stories in the issue, but none of us had a clue how the rankings worked." According to another former staff writer who contributed to the "Best Colleges" issue: "The rankings are completely ridiculous. But they totally pay your salary."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_9_32/ai_65160614/
Quote from: muhs03 on September 13, 2011, 09:22:20 PM
LOL....the peer reviews.
UF President ranks his school on par with Harvard and grades all other Florida schools low (2009).
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20090616/ARTICLES/906169915
According to one former senior reporter who worked on the rankings in the early '90s: "We were roped around the neck to get us to write the serious journalistic stories in the issue, but none of us had a clue how the rankings worked." According to another former staff writer who contributed to the "Best Colleges" issue: "The rankings are completely ridiculous. But they totally pay your salary."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_9_32/ai_65160614//Quote
Whats interesting about the peer reviews is that UF graded the entire Florida public system AS WELL AS MIAMI (a private school). Does that mean that the entire UW system grades Marquette (and vice-versa)? I guess so.
Quote from: nyg on September 13, 2011, 08:11:43 AM
In new rankings, MU is ranked #82. Fair/Appropriate?
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/marquette-university-3863
Time for a new PR agency. All the money Marquette inevitably spent and the best they could do was 82?
C'mon, at the end of the day, who cares? Picking a university is a multi-variable, linear regression equation that seeks optimization based on a variety inputs, including student capability, campus life, available resources and even quality of dorm food! What's important for me probably is irrevelant to a good percentage of peers.
The biggest rap on Marquette is cost/benefit. A tuition that puts Marquette among the higher cost universities in the country is a major negative to an arts and sciences major whose undergraduate program, no matter how good, amounts to a 7-11 management training program (are you listening philosophy and sociology majors). Marquette's standing in the "real" world
(for all you professors, that's where most of your students will be within the next four years. The walls aren't ivy covered and most of us are not blindly liberal. It's dog eat dog out here and canine stew can be yummy!) isn't proportional to its tuition and outside of Wisconsin and maybe Northeast Illinois, nobody has heard of us except for basketball.
Imagine paying $160,000 for four years of Marquette to find out your wonderous Communications Degree will pay you $25,000 annually on a local newspaper in West Bumfork, Texas? Or 10 cents a word to blog for the Rantng Lunatick Political Blogsight! That's the reality of a Marquette education outside business and engineering (and maybe law) today.
I love Marquette dearly and my education was great, but damnation, that tuition today makes even the Red Rodent look attractive.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 14, 2011, 01:12:03 PM
Time for a new PR agency. All the money Marquette inevitably spent and the best they could do was 82?
C'mon, at the end of the day, who cares? Picking a university is a multi-variable, linear regression equation that seeks optimization based on a variety inputs, including student capability, campus life, available resources and even quality of dorm food! What's important for me probably is irrevelant to a good percentage of peers.
The biggest rap on Marquette is cost/benefit. A tuition that puts Marquette among the higher cost universities in the country is a major negative to an arts and sciences major whose undergraduate program, no matter how good, amounts to a 7-11 management training program (are you listening philosophy and sociology majors). Marquette's standing in the "real" world (for all you professors, that's where most of your students will be within the next four years. The walls aren't ivy covered and most of us are not blindly liberal. It's dog eat dog out here and canine stew can be yummy!) isn't proportional to its tuition and outside of Wisconsin and maybe Northeast Illinois, nobody has heard of us except for basketball.
Imagine paying $160,000 for four years of Marquette to find out your wonderous Communications Degree will pay you $25,000 annually on a local newspaper in West Bumfork, Texas? Or 10 cents a word to blog for the Rantng Lunatick Political Blogsight! That's the reality of a Marquette education outside business and engineering (and maybe law) today.
I love Marquette dearly and my education was great, but damnation, that tuition today makes even the Red Rodent look attractive.
Your degree is what you make of it...if you accept $25k and 10 cents then apparently you agree with your employer that that is all your worth. If your not happy with it, then do something else.
I graduated with one of those worthless Arts and Sciences degrees and made more than $25k my first year out in the early 90's and was making 6 figures by the end of the decade.
Bottom line if you are happy to settle for something as the best you can get then dont expect something better to simply knock on your door.
Canadian Dimes,
I know you think that your success out of undergrad was 100% due to your heart/hustle/refusal to accept a low-paying job. It also just so happened to coincide with one of the largest economic booms in the history of the world. That type of economy is just not the reality for many recent graduates.
The only reason I'm "calling you out" is because your attitude (look what I did when I graduated, why can't you do that now) is pervasive among the older generation who does not realize that times are really tough for recent college grads.
If you think the early 90s was some sort of boom time for recent graduates with liberal arts degrees, you are nuts. I graduated at the same time Dimes did and it was smack dab in the middle of a recession. I got very, very lucky when I landed my first real job out of Marquette. But everything I have done since then has been due to hard work, good decisions, and the education I received at MU and elsewhere.
There is nothing wrong with taking a $25,000 job in West Bumfork, TX - it fact, in the long run you will be better for it. But it how you use what you learned after that which will determine your success. And remember I work at a university...I know how hard it is on recent college graduates. But those who are aggressive, and don't limit their search on geography, usually turn out alright.
Back in the day I delivered newspapers in the snow in my barefeet just to put bread on the family table. Hell, now we dine regular at Old Country Buffet.
Quote from: JWags85 on September 13, 2011, 03:26:45 PM
If you're looking for a job across the country, people are going to be more impressed by the Colorado School of Mines than Marquette, Miami, TCU, or the University of Missouri? GTFO
As I'm sure Rocky can attest to, Colorado Mines has some sick academics. Kind of a niche market, but very impressive school.
Quote from: 79Warrior on September 13, 2011, 02:37:57 PM
Where have you seen that published?
Go down the list and count the Catholic schools as they appear.
1.) Notre Dame (#19)
2.) Georgetown (#22)
3.) Boston College (#31)
4.) Fordham (#53)
5.) MARQUETTE (#82)
6.) Saint Louis (#90)
Take campus journalism for what it's worth, but when MU passed SLU 2 or 3 years ago, the SLU paper had a whole feature story on how they weren't in the Top 5 Catholic universities anymore.
Quote from: Canadian Dimes on September 14, 2011, 03:16:31 PM
I graduated with one of those worthless Arts and Sciences degrees and made more than $25k my first year out in the early 90's and was making 6 figures by the end of the decade.
Bottom line if you are happy to settle for something as the best you can get then dont expect something better to simply knock on your door.
Hey dimes, I'm only questioning the value for the dollar of a Marquette education today. I went there in the 1970s and gained a Journalism degree. It was a different world then and I was able to eat on a journalism salary. But the pay for liberal arts graduates doesn't justify the cost, especially when the Red Rodent over in Madison offers the same degree with at least as much visibility for half the price.
For the record, I was a journalist for many years before going back to school and getting an MBA. It was the MBA and the mentor in one of my employers who led me to the senior management position in an investment bank I have today.
I've spoken to Father Wild about this subject in the past and the only answer I got was "we deal off the card" to attract good students and that most of our strudents are on financial aide. Which tells me Marquette has adopted the healthcare financial model -- let a third party pay for it and damnthe consequences of higher tuition.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 14, 2011, 01:12:03 PM
Imagine paying $160,000 for four years of Marquette to find out your wonderous Communications Degree will pay you $25,000 annually on a local newspaper in West Bumfork, Texas? Or 10 cents a word to blog for the Rantng Lunatick Political Blogsight! That's the reality of a Marquette education outside business and engineering (and maybe law) today.
I love Marquette dearly and my education was great, but damnation, that tuition today makes even the Red Rodent look attractive.
"I think everyone should go to college and get a degree and then spend six months as a bartender and six months as a cabdriver. Then they would really be educated."
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 14, 2011, 08:32:16 PM
I've spoken to Father Wild about this subject in the past and the only answer I got was "we deal off the card" to attract good students and that most of our strudents are on financial aide. Which tells me Marquette has adopted the healthcare financial model -- let a third party pay for it and damnthe consequences of higher tuition.
What the liberal arts students don't realize is that their tuition is going to fund the sciences and business programs. If you assume that there is a standard ratio of professors for students in a major, there is a lot higher margin with a history major (whose average prof is making $40k) compared with an accounting major (whose average prof is probably making $160k). Colleges "need" those psych and english lit students to pay for the business profs.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 14, 2011, 08:32:16 PM
Hey dimes, I'm only questioning the value for the dollar of a Marquette education today. I went there in the 1970s and gained a Journalism degree. It was a different world then and I was able to eat on a journalism salary. But the pay for liberal arts graduates doesn't justify the cost, especially when the Red Rodent over in Madison offers the same degree with at least as much visibility for half the price.
For the record, I was a journalist for many years before going back to school and getting an MBA. It was the MBA and the mentor in one of my employers who led me to the senior management position in an investment bank I have today.
I've spoken to Father Wild about this subject in the past and the only answer I got was "we deal off the card" to attract good students and that most of our strudents are on financial aide. Which tells me Marquette has adopted the healthcare financial model -- let a third party pay for it and damnthe consequences of higher tuition.
Drop the political schtik, it sort of ruins the rest of your point.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on September 15, 2011, 06:58:05 AM
Drop the political schtik, it sort of ruins the rest of your point.
I'm not sure he was making a political point. Healthcare has been a third party pay system for many years, and I think it's widely accepted (by those in both parties) that this is one of the reasons for the high cost: the actual consumer isn't paying the bill, so there isn't as much pressure to keep costs down. This is the problem that exists and is not so much a commentary on the competing views on how to fix the problem.
The same problem exists in higher education. The way financial aid works in many cases is that the family pays what it can "afford" and some other party pays the rest (either government, loans, alumni who donate, etc.). Thus, many of he consumers of education don't complain as much as the would if they were paying the whole bill. If a family is going to pay $25K no matter what, the difference between $41K and $44K isn't terribly significant.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 14, 2011, 08:32:16 PM
I've spoken to Father Wild about this subject in the past and the only answer I got was "we deal off the card" to attract good students and that most of our strudents are on financial aide. Which tells me Marquette has adopted the healthcare financial model -- let a third party pay for it and damnthe consequences of higher tuition.
It is the typical private school model. They try to figure out your price point. For the top level students, they will give large scholarships. For the ones below, they will offer less.
Frankly I am hard pressed to justify any private school at the "list" price. It is the discount that matters. (And yes they do it this way to maximize federal financial aid.) I have said this before here, but they essentially get the rich, dumb kids to pay the scholarships for the poor, smart ones.
Quote from: StillAWarrior on September 15, 2011, 07:40:55 AM
I'm not sure he was making a political point. Healthcare has been a third party pay system for many years, and I think it's widely accepted (by those in both parties) that this is one of the reasons for the high cost: the actual consumer isn't paying the bill, so there isn't as much pressure to keep costs down. This is the problem that exists and is not so much a commentary on the competing views on how to fix the problem.
The same problem exists in higher education. The way financial aid works in many cases is that the family pays what it can "afford" and some other party pays the rest (either government, loans, alumni who donate, etc.). Thus, many of he consumers of education don't complain as much as the would if they were paying the whole bill. If a family is going to pay $25K no matter what, the difference between $41K and $44K isn't terribly significant.
I understand. I guess the previous post was the one I had the problem with and I should have quoted that one instead.
Quote from: Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup on September 14, 2011, 08:21:32 PM
Go down the list and count the Catholic schools as they appear.
1.) Notre Dame (#19)
2.) Georgetown (#22)
3.) Boston College (#31)
4.) Fordham (#53)
5.) MARQUETTE (#82)
6.) Saint Louis (#90)
Take campus journalism for what it's worth, but when MU passed SLU 2 or 3 years ago, the SLU paper had a whole feature story on how they weren't in the Top 5 Catholic universities anymore.
There a lot of Catholic schools that aren't on this list, mostly smaller oens, that would probably sneak in in front of MU. Maybe not by the US News rankings, but I don't think we're top 5 yet.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 15, 2011, 07:53:15 AM
It is the typical private school model. They try to figure out your price point. For the top level students, they will give large scholarships. For the ones below, they will offer less.
Frankly I am hard pressed to justify any private school at the "list" price. It is the discount that matters. (And yes they do it this way to maximize federal financial aid.) I have said this before here, but they essentially get the rich, dumb kids to pay the scholarships for the po\or, smart ones.
It will be interesting to see how the private school model changes in the future.
The public school model is subsidized by the taxpayer. The private school model is subsidized by wealthy alumni and rich dumb kids as you say.
An article here from a BC Alum who asks some interesting questions about the current college spending model.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/is_college_over/ (http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/is_college_over/)
Personally, I loved my 4 years of school and I needed it as part of my maturation process. However, I'd be hard pressed to say that it was truly "worth it".
$80k cash (the difference in tuition), and a 4 year degree from a local public college will give you a hell of a jumpstart on life compared to going to MU and paying rack rate.
Quote from: NCAARules on September 14, 2011, 07:38:30 PM
As I'm sure Rocky can attest to, Colorado Mines has some sick academics. Kind of a niche market, but very impressive school.
Indeed, I almost commented on the previous post. If the School of Mines has a degree that you're looking for, it is a very well respected institution. In fact, had I know about it when I as applying for engineering schools, I probably would have given it a serious look (and location is good too!).
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 15, 2011, 09:10:19 AM
It will be interesting to see how the private school model changes in the future.
The public school model is subsidized by the taxpayer. The private school model is subsidized by wealthy alumni and rich dumb kids as you say.
Not much any longer. The UW System schools only get about 15% of their revenue from the taxpayers of the state of Wisconsin.
Public universities actually want to move toward the private school model. It used to be that the State of Wisconsin disallowed the use of taxpayer or tuition dollars to be used for financial aid...that was made legal in the last budget cycle.
Here's the full list
1.) Notre Dame (#19)
2.) Georgetown (#22)
3.) Boston College (#31)
4.) Fordham (#53)
5.) MARQUETTE (#82)
6.) Saint Louis (#90)
7.) Dayton (#101)
8.) University of St. Thomas (#115)
9.) Loyola University Chicago (#119)
9.) Catholic University of America (#119)
9.) San Francisco (#119)
12.) DePaul (#132)
12.) Seton Hall (#132)
14.) St. John's (#152)
IMHO, the most notable omissions from this list are probably Villanova, Holy Cross, Xavier, Providence, St. Mary's, and Gonzaga, but some of them are included on other lists (regional schools, liberal arts colleges). The rankings above are for national universities. "Schools in the National Universities category, such as the University of Pennsylvania and Duke University, offer a full range of undergraduate majors, master's, and doctoral degrees. These colleges also are committed to producing ground breaking research."
As far as how we stack up with our Conference mates, the Big East Conference Nationally ranks
1.) Notre Dame (#19)
2.) Georgetown (#22)
3.) UConn (#58)
3.) Pitt (#58)
5.) Syracuse (#62)
6.) Rutgers (#68)
7.) MARQUETTE (#82)
8.) TCU (#97)
9.) DePaul (#132)
9.) Seton Hall (#132)
11.) Cincinnati (#143)
12.) St. John's (#152)
13.) Louisville (#164)
13.) West Virginia (#164)
15.) South Florida (#181)
Not listed: Providence, Villanova
Quote from: rocky_warrior on September 15, 2011, 09:13:00 AM
Indeed, I almost commented on the previous post. If the School of Mines has a degree that you're looking for, it is a very well respected institution. In fact, had I know about it when I as applying for engineering schools, I probably would have given it a serious look (and location is good too!).
I grew up in that part of the world. Mines played in the same conference as the local college where I grew up, so I saw their football team every year. Very good school.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 15, 2011, 09:10:19 AM
Personally, I loved my 4 years of school and I needed it as part of my maturation process. However, I'd be hard pressed to say that it was truly "worth it".
$80k cash (the difference in tuition), and a 4 year degree from a local public college will give you a hell of a jumpstart on life compared to going to MU and paying rack rate.
Hell yeah it would. I just graduated with a communications degree and agree with a lot that has been said in this thread. I enjoyed my time at MU and made great friends, but I could have done that at any university. Due to the economy, I took a low paying job that is barely in my major. I had to move back home since I am paying so much in loans and other bills that I cannot afford rent. My crappy job would feel a lot better if I was at least living on my own in the city and wasn't shackled by my debt. Yes, it is my own fault for choosing my major and school, but I was 18 and listened to all the BS about how great of a comm school MU had and that you will have no problem finding a job with the alumni base.
I just read somewhere that 85% of graduates move back home. For MU to be worth the pay, you need a major to have 3 things: Pay is worth it, MU has a well-respected program, and it makes sense to be in the city for job connections. So unless you are an engineer, accountant, or something similar, you are just wasting your money at MU.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on September 15, 2011, 10:09:32 AM
you will have no problem finding a job with the alumni base.
Someone must have come up with a marketing slogan awhile ago that "Marquette alums take care of one another" (employment-wise). I say "slogan" because I heard the exact same phrase from too many random people for it to not have come from somewhere.
This really didn't help much when applying for jobs in Chicago with legions of HR staffers who had never heard of Marquette. It's pretty bad when people 90 minutes away are asking whether it is in Marquette, Michigan.
(I don't really blame Marquette for this. You have to be amazingly stupid not to have heard of it if you are in Chicago. It is arguably a fact of life when attending private schools.)
Quote from: warrior07 on September 15, 2011, 10:22:39 AM
Someone must have come up with a marketing slogan awhile ago that "Marquette alums take care of one another" (employment-wise). I say "slogan" because I heard the exact same phrase from too many random people for it to not have come from somewhere.
It's not a marketing slogan, it's the truth. I've had MU job connections all over the US because of my MU Engineering degree. You just have to take some time building your network.
Perhaps it's a little stronger with the college of engineering than it is with other colleges? MU grads always get me to take a long look at their resume when I'm hiring. Even people that I've interviewed with that don't know where MU is (mostly people in CA) immediately mention Dwyane Wade. If not, it helps to have talking points on the University to sell it yourself. If you're enthusiastic and can back up your enthusiasm with data on MU being a great school, the HR + hiring managers won't soon forget it. Think of it as paving a path for yourself as well as the MU grads coming in years after you :)
Quote from: rocky_warrior on September 15, 2011, 09:13:00 AM
Indeed, I almost commented on the previous post. If the School of Mines has a degree that you're looking for, it is a very well respected institution. In fact, had I know about it when I as applying for engineering schools, I probably would have given it a serious look (and location is good too!).
I should have added a caveat with all the kickback that has come. I never implied it wasn't a great school. I had a professor in college that was an alum and he was a brilliant guy. Rather, as some have noted, its an incredibly niche school (as is SUNY School of Forestry which is also above Marquette), which I think has no place being highly ranked on a "national university" ranking. Ohio University has a fantastic journalism program as well as a highly ranked engineering school, but it didn't crack the top 100 cause it only appeals to a small sub section of students. Maybe I'm not making my point well, but its uneven ground when comparing a school like CSM to a school like Marquette or other "major" universities. Its the same reason smaller Liberal Arts schools have their own ranking.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 15, 2011, 09:10:19 AM
Personally, I loved my 4 years of school and I needed it as part of my maturation process. However, I'd be hard pressed to say that it was truly "worth it".
$80k cash (the difference in tuition), and a 4 year degree from a local public college will give you a hell of a jumpstart on life compared to going to MU and paying rack rate.
A fact that is often overlooked is that students are far more likely to take 5 years to graduate at public colleges. Plus, students are far more likely to get financial aid at private colleges and most aren't paying rack-rate. Everyone's situation is different, but a more accurate comparison is often 5 years at public college standard tuition vs. 4 years of reduced private college tuition. Then factor in the opportunity cost of the lost salary from missing the extra year of working right out of school, and the difference isn't as great as the annual tuition sticker price would make it seem.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on September 15, 2011, 10:09:32 AM
Hell yeah it would. I just graduated with a communications degree and agree with a lot that has been said in this thread. I had to move back home since I am paying so much in loans and other bills that I cannot afford rent. My crappy job would feel a lot better if I was at least living on my own in the city and wasn't shackled by my debt. Yes, it is my own fault for choosing my major and school, but I was 18 and listened to all the BS about how great of a comm school MU had and that you will have no problem finding a job with the alumni base.
I just read somewhere that 85% of graduates move back home. For MU to be worth the pay, you need a major to have 3 things: Pay is worth it, MU has a well-respected program, and it makes sense to be in the city for job connections. So unless you are an engineer, accountant, or something similar, you are just wasting your money at MU.
1) I was like Marty in the late 1970s. I left college with a $23,000 Marquette Journalism degree and a job in a city I hated paying all of $10,500 per year. Fortunately, I was saddled with no debt but still had to live in an apartment in a near ghetto with a leaky roof, poor electrical and very bad heating (air conditioning.. are you kidding?). The ratio of my annual pay to the cost of my education on a nominal, pre-tax basis was 0.46x. Today, assuming that same job pays $25,000 a year, the same ratio is 0.16x based on a $160,000 all-in cost of an MU degree. Marty, I feel your pain in that regard. That's a huge difference and goes to my concern about Marquette as a viable option for many middle class families.
2) Marquette has value. There's a lot of things that made me who I am today because of Marquette and its philosophy toward education. I was able to get an MBA with an undergraduate Journalism degree because Marquette taught me to think and to communicate. The reality is that even if you do nothing more with a journalism degree, that basic education will go well in whatever field you choose.
3) Is Marquette a waste? No. It is overpriced at $160,000 for four years, all-in. Good grief yes! My comment about the pricing and the healthcare model was, as previous commenters noted, aimed at the university's apparent commitment to pass through whatever it can through in tuition knowing that the costs of providing an "inflated cost service" are being borne by third parties. That saves the University the difficult task of saying "no" to staff it values. But that comes at a price and the price is that many people who love Marquette and what the university did for them can't send their children to MU.
4) The State University model is, as some note, shifting to a user pay system rather than state support. In Illinois, this has been a huge issue at the University of Illinois. When the legislature in our state proposed cutting the U of I's appropriation, the University countered by proposing to admit more higher-paying out-of-state students at the expense of in-state students. Boy did that cause a ruckus here!
5) With regard to post-collegiate placement, engineers, lawyers and business majors do well. But even these disciplines don't hold a candle to such universities as Notre Dame. If I could send my children anywhere, as much as I hate Notre Dame, that's where I'd start because nobody I've ever come across has a more loyal alumni base. Hire one ND grad and you'll soon have 1000 or more! I wish we were better at that. The basketball team (which is what we should be talking about), very much helps because it creates a buzz (pardon the pun), especially when we're good. That's why a good basketball team is VERY important. I won't hire because of some school's athletic program, but it makes me take a second look because I've heard of the place.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 15, 2011, 09:14:24 AM
Not much any longer. The UW System schools only get about 15% of their revenue from the taxpayers of the state of Wisconsin.
Public universities actually want to move toward the private school model. It used to be that the State of Wisconsin disallowed the use of taxpayer or tuition dollars to be used for financial aid...that was made legal in the last budget cycle.
+100
This is why UW gives more freshman admits to out of state (Coasties) kids. They subsidize the Wi kids low tuition.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on September 15, 2011, 10:34:51 AM
It's not a marketing slogan, it's the truth. I've had MU job connections all over the US because of my MU Engineering degree. You just have to take some time building your network.
Perhaps it's a little stronger with the college of engineering than it is with other colleges? MU grads always get me to take a long look at their resume when I'm hiring. Even people that I've interviewed with that don't know where MU is (mostly people in CA) immediately mention Dwyane Wade. If not, it helps to have talking points on the University to sell it yourself. If you're enthusiastic and can back up your enthusiasm with data on MU being a great school, the HR + hiring managers won't soon forget it. Think of it as paving a path for yourself as well as the MU grads coming in years after you :)
It could be both the truth and a marketing slogan...
I was an Arts & Sciences grad, which was undoubtedly part of the problem. It's hard for a major to build a network when there really aren't many jobs for your degree to begin with.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on September 15, 2011, 10:09:32 AM
Hell yeah it would. I just graduated with a communications degree and agree with a lot that has been said in this thread. I enjoyed my time at MU and made great friends, but I could have done that at any university. Due to the economy, I took a low paying job that is barely in my major. I had to move back home since I am paying so much in loans and other bills that I cannot afford rent. My crappy job would feel a lot better if I was at least living on my own in the city and wasn't shackled by my debt. Yes, it is my own fault for choosing my major and school, but I was 18 and listened to all the BS about how great of a comm school MU had and that you will have no problem finding a job with the alumni base.
I just read somewhere that 85% of graduates move back home. For MU to be worth the pay, you need a major to have 3 things: Pay is worth it, MU has a well-respected program, and it makes sense to be in the city for job connections. So unless you are an engineer, accountant, or something similar, you are just wasting your money at MU.
85% of graduates move back home may be true, but how many of those kids move back home because they are unwilling to look for a job outside a 50 mile radius of their home? If you are willing to move anywhere you will (or at least a better chance) to find a descent job.
Second, you have to weigh the cost-benefit of getting a certain major at Marquette. In my opinion unless you are in the business school, engineering, and some A&S programs, Marquette might not be worth the debt.
Quote from: Litehouse on September 15, 2011, 11:31:39 AM
A fact that is often overlooked is that students are far more likely to take 5 years to graduate at public colleges. Plus, students are far more likely to get financial aid at private colleges and most aren't paying rack-rate. Everyone's situation is different, but a more accurate comparison is often 5 years at public college standard tuition vs. 4 years of reduced private college tuition. Then factor in the opportunity cost of the lost salary from missing the extra year of working right out of school, and the difference isn't as great as the annual tuition sticker price would make it seem.
If you don't change your major, or aren't in a five year program like accounting, you will graduate in four years from a public university. It is probably more accurate to say that students graduate in five years because it is cheaper - students can afford to change their mind later.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 15, 2011, 01:36:24 PM
If you don't change your major, or aren't in a five year program like accounting, you will graduate in four years from a public university. It is probably more accurate to say that students graduate in five years because it is cheaper - students can afford to change their mind later.
As a public school administrator, how accurate would you say the claim is that students can't graduate in four years because they can't get all the classes they want scheduled? I've always thought that this claim was odd, because it would assume that most universities regularly fail to employ as many professors as their students need to fulfill degree/major requirements, and I don't know why this would routinely, universally be the case.
It is incredibly rare for students to not be able to schedule their courses to graduate...unless they have changed majors...are inflexible with their schedule...also want some particular minor or double major...or had academic issues that put them behind.
Thanks. I've heard this excuse from numerous UW students/graduates. Always thought it was odd.
Quote from: Litehouse on September 15, 2011, 11:31:39 AM
A fact that is often overlooked is that students are far more likely to take 5 years to graduate at public colleges. Plus, students are far more likely to get financial aid at private colleges and most aren't paying rack-rate. Everyone's situation is different, but a more accurate comparison is often 5 years at public college standard tuition vs. 4 years of reduced private college tuition. Then factor in the opportunity cost of the lost salary from missing the extra year of working right out of school, and the difference isn't as great as the annual tuition sticker price would make it seem.
Even if you are right about the 5 year thing, let's call the difference $40k.
A smart kid with some hustle and good guidance from his/her parents can get a great jumpstart with 40k and a decent education (hell, a smart person doesn't really need a degree).
I love MU and I'm not bashing it... just saying it's hard to justify if I look at it objectively.
When I was 18, my parents never explained it to me like that, nor did I ever look at it like that.
In general, the market and investments were going well (for a lot of middle class families) so college tuition money was available for more people than it is now.
Value analysis wasn't a huge consideration. It was more about going to the best school that was the best fit. BC and ND weren't interested. Georgetown was a pipedream. MU was next on the list.
I think middle class families are probably having more "value analysis" conversations now, or at least I would.
Quote from: Warriors10 on September 15, 2011, 12:58:41 PM
85% of graduates move back home may be true, but how many of those kids move back home because they are unwilling to look for a job outside a 50 mile radius of their home? If you are willing to move anywhere you will (or at least a better chance) to find a descent job.
Second, you have to weigh the cost-benefit of getting a certain major at Marquette. In my opinion unless you are in the business school, engineering, and some A&S programs, Marquette might not be worth the debt.
That probably makes up a huge number but many move home even with jobs due to debt.
Quote from: Warriors10 on September 15, 2011, 12:58:41 PM
find a descent job.
Skydiving instructor? Repelling Instructor? SCUBA Instructor? Zip line operator? ;)
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 15, 2011, 03:36:38 PM
Even if you are right about the 5 year thing, let's call the difference $40k.
Just throwing out some numbers... current tuition at MU is about $32k, at UW-Madison it's about $10k. I'd guess a decent student at MU is probably on the hook for $25k after all the financial aid is factored in, while the same kid would still be paying $10k at UW.
4 years at MU at $25k/yr = $100k
working for a year making $40k brings it down to $60k
5 years at UW at $10k/yr = $50k
That's a difference of about $10k when it's all said and done. Everyone's situation is different, but that scenario sums up the experience of me and most of my friends that went to UW.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 15, 2011, 03:36:38 PM
Even if you are right about the 5 year thing, let's call the difference $40k.
A smart kid with some hustle and good guidance from his/her parents can get a great jumpstart with 40k and a decent education (hell, a smart person doesn't really need a degree).
I love MU and I'm not bashing it... just saying it's hard to justify if I look at it objectively.
When I was 18, my parents never explained it to me like that, nor did I ever look at it like that.
In general, the market and investments were going well (for a lot of middle class families) so college tuition money was available for more people than it is now.
Value analysis wasn't a huge consideration. It was more about going to the best school that was the best fit. BC and ND weren't interested. Georgetown was a pipedream. MU was next on the list.
I think middle class families are probably having more "value analysis" conversations now, or at least I would.
Thank you. Many have stated that MU's rise in quality of avg. student and rise in fundraising was due to incredible efforts of MU. While MU certainly steered the ship correctly, market forces were definitely at work too.
Many, many private schools (elementary / secondary / college) saw huge building booms and more qualified students, not just MU. It will be interesting to see what the next 10 years looks like.
Also, don't forget that many middle class families used home equity to send their kids to school a decade ago. That isn't as easy any longer.
So making 40k reduces the loan to 60k? I guess you are figuring no taxes, no cost of living, etc. Most kids I know that have student loans pay the minimum on a monthly basis. Heck, I'm taking a class at UChicago and a student told me she had 45k in loans (with another 12k to go to finish her MBA). She told me that the cost to borrow is so low that it makes very little sense to pay anything more than the interest due to TMV.
Quote from: muhs03 on September 15, 2011, 08:51:50 PM
So making 40k reduces the loan to 60k? I guess you are figuring no taxes, no cost of living, etc. Most kids I know that have student loans pay the minimum on a monthly basis. Heck, I'm taking a class at UChicago and a student told me she had 45k in loans (with another 12k to go to finish her MBA). She told me that the cost to borrow is so low that it makes very little sense to pay anything more than the interest due to TMV.
What was she paying as a rate? I know personally my grad school loans for my MBA at the moment are 6.5%. Not exorbitant, but its not like getting some crazy 2% rate like you could get on a car loan.
Also remember that, since student loan interest is tax deductible, that you are effectively reducing the amount of the interest you are playing by the amount of the tax you are *not* paying on that income.
Quote from: The Lens on September 15, 2011, 08:36:27 PM
Thank you. Many have stated that MU's rise in quality of avg. student and rise in fundraising was due to incredible efforts of MU. While MU certainly steered the ship correctly, market forces were definitely at work too.
Many, many private schools (elementary / secondary / college) saw huge building booms and more qualified students, not just MU. It will be interesting to see what the next 10 years looks like.
Yea, MU has experienced some awesome growth the past 10-15 years.
I hope they have a good plan for if/when enrollment and donation numbers come back down significantly.
Make hay while the sun shines and have a good plan for the rough patches, I suppose.
Although, I think the whole college paradigm might shift, so I don't think MU is alone.
Call me a bleeding heart here, but any sort of cost-benefit analysis involving tuition v. debt load is flawed, especially at a place like Marquette where students learn so much more than merely the subject material at hand in their own major.
Just because I don't make as much money out of college with my degree doesn't mean that it wasn't worthwhile. In fact, college professors in the humanities go to college for about...10 years(?), and make very little comparatively. There are reasons - very valid reasons - that people can go to school for a LONG time and pay a LOT of money without the expectation of proportional increase in earning potential. I thought this point was obvious, but I haven't yet seen it mentioned much on this thread.
College is a place of learning as well as a place to develop technical and professional competencies. To say that one's "benefit" from their degree is strictly limited to their earning potential is short-sighted. To say that the Arts & Sciences students are funding the Business/Engineering students is, in many ways, a misunderstanding of the purpose of the university experience. If people want to make lots of money and spend very little money to learn how to do that, than a trade school would be the most ideal venue for that.
NOW - if we are going to discuss whether or not students are going to college for the right reasons, well, that is a different question.
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 12:57:21 PM
Call me a bleeding heart here,
Honest question...did you have any college loan debt (that was used on college, and not beer) when you left school?
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 12:57:21 PM
especially at a place like Marquette where students learn so much more than merely the subject material at hand in their own major.
I don't mean to sound like a smart alek, but could you tell me what this material consists of? And is it worth the extra $20,0000-$25,000 more in tuition each year versus UW or one of the other public schools? I suspect there are ways to learn this material at a lesser cost than an extra $20,000 in tuition every year for four years.
Just to still up for turk a little here...
I work at a public university. Not a flagship school, but a decent school. If I could characterize one difference between our alumni (at-large) and Marquette alumni is that they view their education as a transactional experience. They paid money...we gave them an education.
Many MU alumni talk about school as more of a life experience. So yeah, it was more money. But at the end of the day, I wouldn't be who I am not without Marquette.
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 12:57:21 PM
Call me a bleeding heart here, but any sort of cost-benefit analysis involving tuition v. debt load is flawed, especially at a place like Marquette where students learn so much more than merely the subject material at hand in their own major.
Just because I don't make as much money out of college with my degree doesn't mean that it wasn't worthwhile. In fact, college professors in the humanities go to college for about...10 years(?), and make very little comparatively. There are reasons - very valid reasons - that people can go to school for a LONG time and pay a LOT of money without the expectation of proportional increase in earning potential. I thought this point was obvious, but I haven't yet seen it mentioned much on this thread.
College is a place of learning as well as a place to develop technical and professional competencies. To say that one's "benefit" from their degree is strictly limited to their earning potential is short-sighted. To say that the Arts & Sciences students are funding the Business/Engineering students is, in many ways, a misunderstanding of the purpose of the university experience. If people want to make lots of money and spend very little money to learn how to do that, than a trade school would be the most ideal venue for that.
NOW - if we are going to discuss whether or not students are going to college for the right reasons, well, that is a different question.
Begone with your valid, well-written, and clear posts. This is the intertubes.
IGNORE!
Quote from: reinko on September 16, 2011, 03:14:18 PM
Begone with your valid, well-written, and clear posts. This is the intertubes.
IGNORE!
(http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/internet-rage-250x300.jpg)
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 12:57:21 PM
Call me a bleeding heart here, but any sort of cost-benefit analysis involving tuition v. debt load is flawed, especially at a place like Marquette where students learn so much more than merely the subject material at hand in their own major.
Just because I don't make as much money out of college with my degree doesn't mean that it wasn't worthwhile. In fact, college professors in the humanities go to college for about...10 years(?), and make very little comparatively. There are reasons - very valid reasons - that people can go to school for a LONG time and pay a LOT of money without the expectation of proportional increase in earning potential. I thought this point was obvious, but I haven't yet seen it mentioned much on this thread.
College is a place of learning as well as a place to develop technical and professional competencies. To say that one's "benefit" from their degree is strictly limited to their earning potential is short-sighted. To say that the Arts & Sciences students are funding the Business/Engineering students is, in many ways, a misunderstanding of the purpose of the university experience. If people want to make lots of money and spend very little money to learn how to do that, than a trade school would be the most ideal venue for that.
NOW - if we are going to discuss whether or not students are going to college for the right reasons, well, that is a different question.
I get it. Like I said, MU was an important part of me growing up. Drop me in Madison at 18 years old, and I probably would have failed out of school. I didn't have the maturity I needed to go to a place like that. MU provided a little more structure (that I needed).
I really enjoyed my experience and I'm a proud alum.
I guess some of this "value" stuff has come up for me because if I want to send my kids to MU, It will probably be 100K+ per year.
Seriously, if you were to buy a house today, you wouldn't even blink at a $120,000 mortgage loan. The way the real estate market is today, you can get a good buy, but the future value, at least for the next 5 years, is questionable at best and low return further out.
So, a $120,000 student loan, which will pay back over the next 40+ years at a much higher rate, isn't worth it? I will even go as far to say the stock market in the glory days wouldn't return as much. The debt load may seem daunting today, and the job market is horrible, especially with a glut of supply of newly graduated students like yourselves who have no differentiating experience. Under 25's own the digital future as no one else knows what to do in the social space. The growth rate is ridiculous and it can be a separator. My advice is to jump in here even if low paying today.
Find your niche and get any experience to separate yourself with experience. If necessary, get a second job in a cash business like bartending which can put (tax free) cash in your pocket to get you over the hump if need be in the near term. I graduated to a 9.7% unemployment rate, 17%interest rates and an economy switching from manufacturing to service. Things will get better, and the MU education will do you well as you were taught to think.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#44556093
This was just on NBC Nightly News (hope link works).
Quote from: rocky_warrior on September 16, 2011, 02:37:13 PM
Honest question...did you have any college loan debt (that was used on college, and not beer) when you left school?
I am currently paying back over $100,000 in student loan debt from my bachelor's and master's degrees, both from Marquette.
Honest question, what is your angle?
Quote from: warrior07 on September 16, 2011, 02:45:33 PM
I don't mean to sound like a smart alek, but could you tell me what this material consists of? And is it worth the extra $20,0000-$25,000 more in tuition each year versus UW or one of the other public schools? I suspect there are ways to learn this material at a lesser cost than an extra $20,000 in tuition every year for four years.
I'm sure that people have all kinds of different experiences at Marquette and get many different "intangibles" from their education, but for myself, I can't say that I could check out a book in a library that would simply
tell me the things that I learned at MU. It could take me pages to write it all down, but I would say that it could be summed up with "Cura Personalis." Don't mean to sound cliche with that, but what I mean is that college at Marquette just seemed to be a more transformative experience for me than the experiences of many of my friends "doing their time" and going through the motions at state schools.
If you don't recognize this as an alum then, well...I really don't what to tell you. Why did you go to Marquette? I mean, I know that sounds like more of a "smart alek" thing to say than what you said, but I'm honestly asking (not confronting). Why did you pay "the extra $20,0000-$25,000 more in tuition each year versus UW" if you thought you could get all that at UW or UWM or State U?
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 11:19:54 PM
I am currently paying back over $100,000 in student loan debt from my bachelor's and master's degrees, both from Marquette.
Honest question, what is your angle?
Well, then, I applaud you for backing up the words you preach. My angle? Only that I always knew I got a great education from Marquette, but the $26k of debt I left with in 1997 left me wondering if it was all worth it (I know, doesn't sound like much now - of course gold was also $300/oz then...). It took a few years for me to appreciate the Marquette "experience" rather than the overpriced "education". Your opinion sounded like many I hear from those that left with no debt.
I understand those that question the cost, as well as those that say it's all worth it. It honestly all comes down to the amount of "risk" you're willing to take. A personal decision to be sure.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on September 17, 2011, 12:14:23 AM
Well, then, I applaud you for backing up the words you preach. My angle? Only that I always knew I got a great education from Marquette, but the $26k of debt I left with in 1997 left me wondering if it was all worth it (I know, doesn't sound like much now - of course gold was also $300/oz then...). It took a few years for me to appreciate the Marquette "experience" rather than the overpriced "education". Your opinion sounded like many I hear from those that left with no debt.
I understand those that question the cost, as well as those that say it's all worth it. It honestly all comes down to the amount of "risk" you're willing to take. A personal decision to be sure.
I definitely see where you were coming from. I think that it's not a fixed system, either. It's more of a scale, probably. There are many schools that have excellent student experiences, but I wouldn't say that
any amount of money is worth it. I agree with you Rocky, it's a personal decision. One that unfortunately has to be made in large part when you're 18 years old and don't have a clue what a loan payment will be like.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on September 15, 2011, 06:58:05 AM
Drop the political schtik, it sort of ruins the rest of your point.
I agree, drop it. Then again, he's right.
Quote from: turk17 on September 16, 2011, 11:19:54 PM
I am currently paying back over $100,000 in student loan debt from my bachelor's and master's degrees, both from Marquette.
Honest question, what is your angle?
When I graduated in 2004, I had 17k in debt.
You have rich parents, or don't know how to fill out paperwork.