55% of students receive aid, and of those that receive aid the average expected contribution is ~15K. So technically most students do not pay that amount, although 45% is higher than I was expecting to be honest.
"Average expected contribution" is not precisely defined in the Harvard document you provide, and thus does not commit Harvard to any particular course of action.
Harvard does not cost full-sticker for most people who attend. Most people who go are very rich, sot hey pay a substantial fraction of full-sticker, but if you aren't, you won't.
Yeah I just added the parent expected contribution and the student work contribution to get around 15K, either way it is pretty clear that students on aid (the majority of all students) aren't paying anywhere near 60K.
Also per that NYT article on wealth at colleges ~15% of Harvard frosh come from the top 1%, so that's a decent chunk of the remaining 45% that clearly don't need aid and likely did not even apply for any.
I doubt you will find many people out there that feel they paid too much for Harvard. Certainly there are bigger fish to fry as far as college tuition rip offs.
Tuition is $60k/year or 240 total. If the average grant is 53k, then that means the average cost is 187k.
I went to a school with this weasel language all over their content. My kid was offered $3k/year in financial aid because the school said I should pay 65% of my annual gross to cover tuition.
It’s nice that they have some token poor and working class, but Harvard is for the rich...
“ According to The New York Times, the median family income of a student from Harvard is $168,800, and 67% of students come from the highest-earning 20% of American households. About 15% come from families in the top 1% of American wealth distribution.” [0]
Living with and going to class with classmates from wealthy families is part of the value-add of going to Harvard for all the students.
> I should pay 65% of my annual gross to cover tuition
Harvard's financial aid is very clear cut and no one would be expected to pay 65% of their gross income.
> 67% of students come from the highest-earning 20% of American households
A household income about about $130,000 is enough to be in the top 20%; how well off you are with that income depends on where you live.
Some high-income families (top 5% of households), with an expensive mortgage and other bills, may have difficulty with paying the full amount, or close to it. Good luck finding sympathy for how those rich people chose to spend their money instead of saving for their child's education.
> Good luck finding sympathy for how those rich people chose to spend their money instead of saving for their child's education.
Sounds to me like a rich person saying “works on my machine.”
This is pretty unrealistic for a family making $130k at the time the first kid hits college to tell them they should have saved more. Especially since tuition is growing faster than inflation or average market returns.
For example, if a family was prescient and knew their kid would get into harvard from conception, and they would have 18 years to save that $200k. If they already made $130k and are fortunate to keep a job all 18 years and if their income grew at the average rate, that’s $15k/year or, assuming they live in NY or CA, about 20% of their net income.
That’s if they only have one kid.
Asking middle class families to forego retirement while 15% of students are in the US 1% is callous.
A $130K household would pay no more than 10% of the sticker price, less if they had other kids. A family paying the full rate would probably have triple that income.
> For example, if a family was prescient and knew their kid would get into harvard from conception
They wouldn’t have to know they’d get into Harvard but they’d hope their child would go somewhere and at their income level Harvard would be cheaper than many state schools.
Harvard is not “fairly cheap” and likely has something to do with their students largely coming from wealthy families.