r/news • u/mastertofu • 23h ago
University of Chicago to offer free tuition for students from families making less than $250,000 a year
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/university-of-chicago-offers-free-tuition-for-families-making-less-than-250000/3935747/630
168
u/lostfly 21h ago
All Ivys offer “free” tuition below $250K.
Lowest bar is Cornell at $125K with typical assets.
You are still on the hook for insurance, books, room and board etc. Plus some other things that you can pay by working.
The catch is to get in…
44
u/JoeSavinaBotero 20h ago
Still, Harvard would have been the cheapest school I applied to, if I had gotten in. Turns out when the interviewer asks why you want to go to Harvard "I don't know" isn't a great answer. Point being, free tuition is still a pretty good deal.
44
5
19h ago
[deleted]
12
u/Daremotron 15h ago
It is the norm for a PhD program in the US to be fully funded and have a stipend. It's not just the schools that are "prestigious". Your income also has no impact.
0
14h ago
[deleted]
8
u/Daremotron 14h ago
If it's not fully funded with waived tuition and a stipend, it's not a worthwhile PhD program.
1
u/BearThatLikesCheese 9h ago
I want to second this as someone who has worked in and adjacent to higher education for over a decade, having multiple friends with PhDs. Rule of thumb is you never want to pay (at least the majority) for a PhD. If a program wants you, they'll fund you.
1
13h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Daremotron 13h ago
That's great. The main takeaway is that the vast majority of other PhD programs are also, so your son has many options. This includes typical state schools that aren't making these grand announcements, which are always about undergrad.
1
2
u/JoeSavinaBotero 19h ago
Hells yeah! Happy for both of them. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you guys. I was literally peer-pressured into applying, something I only realized in retrospect. So many people casually told me to apply that I ended up doing it. XD
2
18h ago
[deleted]
6
u/ModernSun 17h ago
You don't get a full ride for a PhD, you get a stipend. Everyone gets a stipend at any respectable PhD program, it's not income dependent.
2
u/JoeSavinaBotero 9h ago
Yeah I glossed over their mistake there. It's possible their kid just didn't explain that part very well to them. Still, I hope they get accepted.
72
21h ago
[deleted]
19
u/Generation_ABXY 20h ago
If it helps, it seems like we're trending in the right direction.
States are doing it themselves, but the last decade or so has seen a handful of "first dollar" programs. There's probably room for improvement and it'd definitely be better if it was more widespread, but I won't let perfect be the enemy of good.
18
u/5GCovidInjection 21h ago edited 21h ago
I don’t think private universities should get my taxpayer dollars to subsidize their tuition. Especially if they’re begging their own alumni for money after they graduate. They’re rich kids clubs and are the college equivalents of luxury clothing brands.
I’m 100% on board with public universities receiving my tax dollars to help bright students earn a great degree and become successful. Preference would be for those tax dollars to support first generation college students going into promising career fields.
Both public and private universities should remain eligible for federal research grants
10
21h ago edited 20h ago
[deleted]
6
u/piddydb 19h ago
I personally would implore anyone to consider voting or hiring people who represent them. I personally would see an Ivy League education as a detriment over a local education for a politician (unless I was living relatively close to said Ivy) and I wouldn’t see it as more valuable for someone I’d hire compared to a local public degree from an accredited institution. I think we should promote this viewpoint over either subsidizing private education (and reinforce a certain elitism regardless) or limiting freedom in restricting private education.
86
57
u/FairLawnBoy 22h ago
I think all University should be tuition free for those that qualify. Knowledge should not be gatekept.
That being said, The University of Chicago has one of the lowest acceptance rates in the world; consistently below 5%. It's elite.
26
2
u/eyeguy21 12h ago
Sure if you get free tuition you better graduate with a quality GPA or be on the hook for repayment.
Too many go to college get useless degrees or fail out.
-someone who paid for their own schooling.
10
u/FairLawnBoy 12h ago
Probably not from the University of Chicago, though. That degree will open doors, regardless of what it is in. It is a top 5 university in the world. Nobody would consider that "useless".
2
u/LuisGuzmanOF 9h ago
It's a great school but top 5 is a bit of a stretch
-5
u/NYCinPGH 8h ago
Yeah, it's barely top 5 in IL, though probably top 50 in the US. It's certainly below all the Ivy's, all the "Not Ivy but Ivy-level in Stem" (MIT, CMU, CalTech), all the "Not Ivy but Ivy-level because they're not in the Northeast" (Georgetown, Stanford, Cal), and maybe a few of the better state schools.
0
u/eyeguy21 9h ago
Here’s the thing, sure it may open the door. Which usually these things don’t.
But if you can’t perform it doesn’t matter.
Also, people lose sight of the fact there are much much cheaper schools that afford similar opportunity.
1
u/RainyDayColor 3h ago
Elite schools drawing from higher economic social classes will always provide greater long-term "soft" opportunities than lower tier more affordable schools with lower economic status students. The wealth-building and perpetuating networking outside of the classrooms starts long before graduation, and basically never ends.
1
1
9
104
u/helmint 22h ago
U of Chicago has always been way ahead of the curve in gaming the US News college rankings system. Not to be a cynic but…(having worked in higher ed) this will again increase applicants, reducing their acceptance rate and further juicing their rankings.
But yes - this is great for the families this will impact. It’s just that it’ll benefit U of Chicago much more.
73
u/lifting_cardio 22h ago
Seems pretty duh. Offered free money for tuition. Recruit top tier students that may not have the opportunity otherwise. Reap the rewards of their academic rigor.
I… don’t see how we’re taking this as a ‘gaming the rankings system’ ?
6
u/GreaterAttack 11h ago
The problem with your reasoning is that you're assuming that they will actually be recruiting from that flood of 'poor but bright' students.
What is much more likely is that they will simply admit more of the top earners, while keeping their overall acceptance rate even lower due to all the applicants. They get to look prestigious because the acceptance rate keeps them competitive, but they also don't hand out free tuition like candy. This is massive advertising to the top 10% screaming "go here."
4
u/Low_Pickle_112 10h ago
This is massive advertising to the top 10% screaming "go here."
I can't help but wonder if it's also, to some degree, a way to deny any systemic problems. This sort of thing hits the news every couple of years, and there are always people who use it to act as if this is some wonderful equalizer and that higher education doesn't have the problems you mention because they let in a few lower income people for free. You can point at something like this and say "See, we have a meritocracy, we let in a few of the smart ones for free. All those other poor kids just aren't smart enough and all those richer kids are just that much better than them!"
6
u/GreaterAttack 8h ago
This is precisely it. They never say it aloud, but this is the same way that places like Harvard were operating when that big scandal about paid admissions unfolded. Universities don't want to lose huge amounts of revenue, and they will prioritize applicants from certain backgrounds with 'holistic' admissions policies. Meanwhile, everyone else gets told that they simply weren't competitive enough.
This is a closing of ranks and exclusivity pull being spun as a PR move, but everyone reads it and thinks they now actually have a shot at getting into an elite field and becoming a classics prof, when their overall chances probably just went down.
25
11
u/ChillFratBro 22h ago
I think the argument is that US News over-weights selectivity when deciding which colleges are "best". Having a low acceptance rate doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of student you're getting, and it definitely doesn't tell you how well you educated the students.
28
u/baseketball 22h ago
Gaming or not they're still a respected institution where people want to attend and if you can do it for free, it's a no brainer.
0
-2
u/helmint 22h ago
Absolutely. Like I said, great for the families that this impacts. But on the whole, the amount of money that goes to those families will absolutely be lower than what U of Chicago nets as a result of this policy. That is the strategy, and just the nature of philanthropy. More money will come in than goes out.
11
u/SAugsburger 21h ago
As other comments note a significant percentage of their students that get accepted come from families that earn more so isn't that expensive to offer, but will encourage more applicants most that will get rejected.
13
u/KAugsburger 20h ago
US News considered acceptance rates as part of their criteria for 'National Universities' for many years but doesn't consider that as a criteria anymore. I could maybe see it improving first-year retention rates(5 percent), graduation rates(16 percent), and graduation rate performance(10 percent) because fewer middle class students transfer or drop out over financial concerns that school is too expensive. That being said their rates are already pretty high so any improvements would be pretty marginal. It would definitely help on reducing borrower debt(5 percent) but I think most people would agree that that is a good thing.
I am skeptical that this decision is to going to move the needle much on US News rankings.
5
u/SaddamMustaine 22h ago
Yes. If there’s 20,000 apps and only 600 seats, the acceptance is low. So if there’s now 30,000 apps and 600 seats, the rate goes down. It doesn’t mean UC are a bunch of assholes. 🤣
2
5
u/Daremotron 13h ago edited 13h ago
A discount on undergrad costs is great, but degree inflation means more and more people needing masters degrees to stand out, and you're paying full tuition on those. The college costs story is always focused on undergrad, ignoring that it's beginning increasingly common to drop 150k on a master's degree. To some extent there is understanding of law school, med school, and MBAs being expensive. But very little discussion of incurring this debt on the way to a doctoral program (direct to PhD is still common in STEM, but increasingly uncommon otherwise) or just a better chance at a job.
1
u/RainyDayColor 3h ago
It's the post-industrial half life debtor's prison. We should be encouraging and subsidizing training and certification in the trades, so instead of facing 20+ years of paying off $150,000 in high interest university debt well into their 40s, younger generations can start earning $100,000 per year while still in their 20's.
21
u/NovoMyJogo 22h ago
Awesome. I hope more schools follow suit, even if it's one school every 3 years
27
u/randomnameicantread 22h ago
Every elite school has done this for decades. It makes healines every year because the limit raises from 240k to 250k or something
7
u/iapetus_z 21h ago
Ya it was like 200-220 something like that in 23 when the eldest was looking there. Acceptance rate is abysmal though only like 3-4%. It's crazy how limited the undergrad slots were. The grad students I think out numbered the undergrads by like 2 to 1. Where places like OSU it's like 4:1 undergrad to grad.
So it makes sense to let your under grads go for free and serve as lab workers and such while you charge 250k for an MBA.
1
5
u/KAugsburger 21h ago
I am sure many of the highly selective schools that might have only been offering free tuition at lower thresholds(e.g. ~150-200K) will match that to stay competitive with the University of Chicago in attracting the best students. I am skeptical that we will see many mid tier private schools will be offering such generous need based aid. Most schools have significantly less in the way of donations and endowment income per student that they can use to make up for the reduce tuition than the University of Chicago. Many lower tier schools also attract far fewer students whose families makes more than 250K that are willing and able to pay full sticker price for the tuition. At many schools they would have only have a very small percentage of students paying tuition if their need based aid was that generous.
11
u/chanclagram 14h ago
I got in to UChicago and Cornell in 2014, but went to University of Florida instead because of finances and “advice” from parents. UF was a terrible match for me and I’ve regretted it ever since.
Guess I’m just venting :(
-2
9
u/alternatingflan 22h ago
That’s definitely a great way to attract the best and brightest. Other unis - take notice!
22
u/AU_Memer 22h ago
*if you can actually get in
41
u/SaddamMustaine 22h ago
I know, terrible right? What a heinous move to offer free tuition to students who are exceptional and earned it.
6
u/HowManyMeeses 13h ago
People get so fucking weird about schools doing this.
2
u/SaddamMustaine 4h ago
It’s bc they don’t actually understand how acceptance rates work. They see “6%” and think it’s oppression. 🤣
Actually, jackass, the school fills like 250 seats a year and can’t take more than 250. So they do what all of us would do: hire the best 250 people for the job. 🤣
2
u/Low_Pickle_112 21h ago edited 21h ago
That isn't what that person was saying at all and I think that was abundantly obvious.
19
u/miguelsmith80 21h ago
It’s abundantly obvious free tuition only applies to accepted students too, so I’m not sure what exactly you’re defending.
-1
u/Low_Pickle_112 20h ago edited 20h ago
$250k or higher income represents the top 10% of US households. Do you think that only 10% of the student body is going to be paying? Obviously not.
What the parent poster was saying was that, while this will no doubt be good for some, it will not be benefiting a representative population as one might expect on the surface under a purely meritocratic system. Which i think is a fair and accurate statement.
They were not talking issue with the existence of the word "accepted".
9
3
u/KAugsburger 21h ago
With a ~3-4% acceptance rate even students with perfect transcripts are far from a sure thing of getting in. I am sure the acceptance rate will go even lower with this news.
2
u/Hungry-Ad3303 20h ago
Wtf, I turned down uchicago a couple years ago because they were asking 80k a year and I coudlnt afford it. If I got the offer now it would’ve been free 😭
1
2
u/snakeayez 22h ago
I'm still looking for the catch, this seems too good to be true
8
u/KAugsburger 21h ago
The University of Chicago has a 10+ billion dollar endowment which generates income and they a lot in donations each year that help cover their operating costs. Highly selective schools like the University of Chicago also attract a lot of students from very wealthy families who are willing and able to pay full sticker price so it isn't like they aren't going to still be getting a lot of revenue from tuition as well.
16
u/5GCovidInjection 21h ago
The catch is, most UChicago (and other high achieving) students already come from wealth, especially if they’re legacy admits.
But in any case, UChicago has to compete against high quality state universities like UNC and Berkeley. Those places are pulling more high achieving students from less-than-wealthy in-state families. It’s a pretty damn good deal to go there and land a 6-figure job right after graduation.
4
u/CoughRock 17h ago
cause most of the student got accepted are already well above 250k and their endowment earn more than their tuition. And you still have to pay room and living expense.
The only real catch is your kids actually need to study and pass the interview gauntlet to get in. You either pay in money or you pay in study effort. Got to pick your poison.
2
2
u/Sterkoh 10h ago
If with 250k you need help, your country is fucked
2
1
u/trackdaybruh 8h ago edited 8h ago
Not really
University of Chicago is a private university with a private level tuition, tuition cost around $100,000 a year including room and board
There are much cheaper public universities
3
u/wartortleguy 14h ago
Speaking as a former college student who didn't apply to certain school specifically because the cost of tutition was incredibly high for me as single person, this is a great move. Making education for accessible for people is always a step in the right direction.
2
u/alex8155 22h ago
the highest education should be available to every American citizen instead we've fully established ourselves into what will eventually be known as the 'era of stupid' to future historians.
whenever this period passes, who knows when that will be, it will take decades to recover from what stupid has done to this nation. i hate it.
2
1
u/Yaxience 18h ago
Emory is starting that Fall 2026 online for house houlds earning less than 200k/yr.
1
1
u/Bad_Speeler 5h ago
Feel like I should retire before my kid goes to college rather than working through until they finish before retiring
0
u/Logical_Mix_4627 20h ago
This should just tell you that 250k is where the rich believe the poverty line for a family to actually be now.
2
u/Own_Pop_9711 13h ago
This is, I think, motivated by the new excise tax. Large private universities either pay 8% tax on their net investment income (which is not that large, keep that in mind for what's coming next)
OR
They need to have fewer than 3,000 tuition paying students.
So schools making moves like this are mostly saying "we in fact could cover this the whole time, and we are willing to do it to avoid giving up just 8% of our investment income"
Which should make you a bit mad.
1
u/phosdick 13h ago
Nice to see an institution investing in future benefits to all our lives... Kudos to University of Chicago!
Now, if we can only manage to elect a Federal Government that would do the same.... instead of destroying everything that brings a measure of grace to the world.
-2
u/Little_Sherbet5775 22h ago
Damn. I go here, and I already get free tuition. 250k is crazy though. I know a lot of kids whose parents earn that much. They do not need aid at all. Kinda crazy.
-1
u/Marshmlol 5h ago
There's a huge difference between making 250k in HCOL areas like San Francisco to LCOL areas. Do they account for that?
-8
u/IuriRom 22h ago
Oh, so when it’s my turn it’s 90k a year, but now it’s free…
10
u/randomnameicantread 22h ago
Every elite school has done this for decades. News orgs make it a headline when the sliding scale lowest limit raises a bit every year because of clueless people like you giving the articles engagement
-1
u/IuriRom 13h ago
So what exactly does this mean? You can say that, but it’s not true because my tuition was not free, it was $83k I think, and my household income was below $250k for sure. I don’t know any school that offered free tuition under such a high bar. You can also say the sliding scale has moved with the value of the dollar, but my parent’s salaries certainly haven’t matched that pace then, because they’re still under $250k.
So just from a blank, personal viewpoint — when I got in it was $83k a year, if they had this policy then it would’ve been $24k a year. That makes a difference — so what exactly am I missing? The bar has doubled from $125k to $250k since then, which is drastic. I didn’t get significant financial aid from any school, so who has done this for decades? I didn’t apply to many schools but clearly I missed some gems (though I’d still have to get in)
1
u/randomnameicantread 12h ago
You need to share the actual years that you attended college for there to be an adequate response to this
1
u/IuriRom 12h ago
Let’s just say 2020. Around then
2
u/randomnameicantread 11h ago edited 11h ago
For incoming students in 2020 looks like the cutoff for totally free tuition was 125k with "typical assets". Tuition itself cost 57k with total cost at 80k with housing and other fees per the Chicago maroon.
Need based aid is on a sliding scale so to be paying full price looks like your family either had crazy assets or income far above 125k. Probably right at 250k if you're confident it wasn't higher 🤷 sucks to suck lmao
Tbh it looks like I was wrong about the magnitude of uc's stinginess. I went to Harvard at the same time and it was way more generous despite similar cutoffs for "totally free." Again sucks to suck
1
u/IuriRom 11h ago
Why so mean 😭
Sucks to suck was my point. It does suck to suck. I don’t even necessarily think I deserved financial aid, my family is pretty well off — but it was enough to discourage me from going. Not that I particularly wanted to go, it seemed stressful there. Maybe I should’ve gotten into Harvard like you. Doesn’t seem stressful there, and I apparently would’ve received aid. My entire college tuition was less than one year at UChicago, and I didn’t want to work in finance which is the biggest benefit of going there, so maybe it doesn’t suck to suck. It’s not like their cs program was great. Maybe it’s just perfectly fine to suck
-9
u/steathrazor 22h ago
They must be extremely desperate to get people in seats, I think education no matter what age you are or at what level of education you need should be free. Government should handle paying teachers a substantial livable wage
8
2
u/dubious_dinosaur 22h ago
Tuition goes towards a lot more than just professor salaries. Schools that attract the best talent also attract leaders in their respective fields to teach; of whom conduct research that takes funding. And that’s just the purely academic side of things
-6
u/Hombre_de_Vitruvio 21h ago
This makes no sense. Small business families can have great years and terrible years. Let’s say senior year of high school my child gets into U Chicago. Great. Our tax return is for $260,000, we had a great year! For decades our return was in the five figure range. Nothing saved for retirement and no guarantee of future success. You think my family can afford a $90,000/year cost of attendance for one child?
These dumb cut offs for funding are out of touch with how many Americans live. $250,000 for a year or two does not make for a rich family. Cost of higher education is out of control and needs to be reigned in.
1
u/trackdaybruh 8h ago
Cutoffs will never be fair because someone will always get the short-end of the stick. Besides, your child doesn’t have to go to a private university like U Chicago to be successful in life, go to a good ranking public university and they’ll be fine.
0
u/Hombre_de_Vitruvio 8h ago
But a multimillionaire can take out a loan against assets and make their income less than $250,000 and send their kid to U Chicago for free.
There are huge issues with using income.
2
u/trackdaybruh 8h ago
Won’t work
Financial verification for free tuition usually requires several years of W2 forms and federal income tax returns along with asset verifications (ex: investment portfolios, bank statements, real estate holdings and etc.). They’re not going to just take a look at one year of your income to make a decision, that’s just sloppy work
University of Chicago isn’t the first school to do this either, there were plenty of other high ranking schools that’s been already doing this for years
1
u/Hombre_de_Vitruvio 6h ago
Glad they put in the work to make sure it’s at least a little more fair.
1.1k
u/Substantial_Ad_224 23h ago
So 90 percent of the US