The
Best Value Colleges, 2019 Edition: 200 Schools with Exceptional ROI for Your
Tuition Investment. By Robert Franek
with Danielle Correa, David Soto, Stephen Koch, and the Staff of The Princeton
Review. Princeton Review/Penguin Random House. $22.99.
Value is a slippery concept, more so when
considered in the context of ROI (return on investment). After all, whenever
someone buys a stock, anticipating that it will go up because the shares will
in the future be worth more, someone else is selling that stock, anticipating
that there is little, if any, upside potential. Each individual evaluates
return on investment differently: the buyer expects ROI in the future
sufficient to justify the risks inherent in any investment, while the seller
believes the ROI already obtained is sufficient and a sale therefore makes
sense.
Increasingly, attendance at college is
seen as primarily an economic decision: a college degree today, like a
high-school degree in the not-so-distant past, is a requirement for the sorts
of jobs to which a great many people aspire. Therefore, the notions of value
and ROI have now taken on even more importance than they used to have, and the
annual Princeton Review discussion of The Best Value Colleges now has a more-distinct financial foundation.
One thing these annual guides show consistently is that when it comes to
higher education, it is best to be very rich or at least moderately poor. That
is not the intended lesson of this
well-researched, plainly written book, which explores factors including
academics, cost and financial aid, and which creates seven “value” lists
sorting the 137 private and 63 public colleges it profiles. But reading only a
little bit between the lines of these nearly 500 pages makes it clear that
colleges get to be among the best in part because of the generosity of their
financial-aid packages – “need-blind admissions,” designed to bring in the best
students without regard to their wealth (although often with regard to other factors, ranging from alumni connections to
skin color).
It is true that the ability of children from families of modest means,
or even out-and-out poverty, to get a top-quality college education is a major
accomplishment for many of these schools and a major strength of the
higher-education system in the United States. And on the other side of the
wealth spectrum, families with considerable money can simply pay what it costs
for their children to attend the schools – a $60,000-a-year “retail” cost may
seem modest to them, especially in light of all the doors that a
top-of-the-line college education can open. But left out of this rosy scenario
is what happens to families that scrimp and save diligently for 18 years after
a child is born, managing to scrape together enough money to pay for the
child’s college education at a modestly priced school, but not enough to afford
one of the absolute top-tier ones. These families are the forgotten middle,
because they cannot pay retail prices for top schools but do not qualify –
because of income, assets or both – for the extremely generous subsidies that
the highest-ranking schools offer to people who have done a poor job, or none at
all, of saving for college. As in some of the nation’s most-expensive cities,
the very rich can afford the cost of living, and the poor are well subsidized
so they too can live there, but the vast and struggling middle group gets no
help and little attention, much less sympathy.
Nor will that group find much to celebrate in the 2019 edition of The Best Value Colleges. What all
readers, at any income level, will find, however, is a well-thought-out data
scrubbing and analysis that produces a list called “Top 50 Best Value Colleges”
– on an overall basis, that is – plus six other lists, each containing 25
schools, that focus on specific perceived strengths. Four of those additional lists
are straightforward, looking at colleges with the best alumni network, best
entry to internships, best career placement, and best financial aid. The other
two are more interesting. One gives the best 25 colleges “for students with no
demonstrated need,” which means for ones who do not qualify for financial aid.
This list interacts intriguingly with the 50-college master list: No. 1,
Georgia Institute of Technology, is No. 18 on the main list; No. 2, Harvey Mudd
College, is No. 6 on the main list; No. 4, Stanford University, is No. 2 on the
main list; and so on. What this means is that schools’ rankings that include
financial-aid elements may be higher or lower than their rankings when those
elements are removed. Families trying to navigate the college-decision morass –
a tough job in any year – may find this look at the data particularly
interesting.
The sixth “sub-list” of colleges is an oddity, because it is very highly
subjective – even more so than is implied by the word “value.” This is a list
of the 25 “best schools for making an impact,” and if “value” is an imprecise
word, “impact” is even more so. Indeed, unlike the data-centric determinism of
most of the material in The Best Value
Colleges, this list is extremely personal, the schools having been
“selected based on student ratings and responses to our survey questions
covering community service opportunities at their school, student government,
sustainability efforts, and on-campus student engagement.” Focusing intensely
on the schools on this list may produce some distinctly odd thinking unless a
high-school student already knows that he/she intends to go into nonprofit
work, community activism, antipoverty programs, nongovernmental organizations
seeking to aid the underprivileged worldwide, or similar areas. Students who
actually grow and mature during college may be in for distinct disappointment
if they choose an “impact” school and find, once arriving there, that the
typically straitened political correctness of many of the listed colleges is
intellectually (and perhaps morally) stifling. For example, the list is headed
by Wesleyan University, once a top academic college (as part of the “Little
Three,” with Amherst and Williams), but now referred to by some alumni – and
not always with pride – as “social justice university.” Families would do well
to use the “impact” list with considerable care.
Of course, care is called for in all considerations and decisions
involving college, and even the best-intentioned book on the topic – The Best Value Colleges is nothing if
not well-intentioned – can provide only so much help. There is a tremendous
amount of information on colleges available now, both in print and in
voluminous online postings, including the ones created by the schools
themselves. The lists in The Best Value
Colleges, and the individual profiles of the schools on those lists, are
valuable, but they are scarcely the last word in terms of decision-making. The
first five schools on the master list of “best value colleges,” for example,
are California Institute of Technology, Stanford, Princeton, MIT, and Williams.
All are excellent. But so are No. 10 (University of Virginia), No. 14
(Columbia), No. 26 (Duke), No. 32 (Haverford), No. 47 (University of Florida),
and No. 50 (Johns Hopkins) – and so are many schools not on this list. So much of what families will get out of The Best Value Colleges depends on what
they bring to it: Wesleyan University heads the odd “impact” list, for
instance, but does not appear on the master list at all, while Williams is in
the top five in that list and Amherst is No. 17. The only sensible thing for
families to do with The Best Value
Colleges, 2019 Edition, is carefully to consider the methodology of The
Princeton Review (which is not, by the way, affiliated with Princeton
University), decide to what extent the book’s approach is in line with the
family’s concerns and values, and then use the various lists and individual
descriptions of colleges to focus on a small number of schools that will
hopefully meet the soon-to-be-college-student’s goals and needs (financial and
otherwise). The book is a start, and only a start. And families would do well
to remember that there are many hundreds of colleges that are not profiled here
at all – but that may nevertheless be the best value for them. It all comes
down to just how “value” is defined, and that is something each family will
need to determine on its own.
No comments:
Post a Comment