In addition, the problem goes beyond tuition. Lots of parents are noting that, even if the tuition still ends up being a little more at a private university, the public schools are also slashing student services and supports. How much is it worth to have deep tutorial programs? Counselors who actually have time and energy to talk? Or go from a 30:1 student/teacher ratio to a 15:1 student teacher ratio?

Peddling? Paddling? Pedaling? Bikes? Boats? Oars? Pedals? Paddles?

Here in Eugene the University of Oregon gets less than 5% of its budget from the state. What about UW? Public schools are getting squeezed bad and the quality of education, at least here, has gone down dramatically along with ever increasing student financial burden. Shitstorm.

That said, for all the people who think university isn't for everyone, or the point of college is to get a job, please support funding for community colleges, which fucking rock but in a different role than universities.

Our son graduates this next spring after 13 years of great Seattle Public Schools. We realized early on that we could save $10,000+ PER YEAR by sending him to a private college with a big endowment. The decision was made to skip applying to UW.

Attendance @ UW (tuition / room & board / books etc) is about $23,000 year. No financial aid available for our income level. (about 65k/yr)

He has just been accepted @ an ivy league school - our portion of the $58,000 year cost will be about $10,000 per year. (And they GUARANTEE he will get a dorm room)

SERIOUSLY. We are NOT funding our schools in this state. NOW we are turning our public colleges into SEMI-PRIVATE institutions.

TUITION is just part of the funding... THESE ARE SCHOOLS that Washingtonians are PAYING for and many of our kids cannot afford to attend them.

FUND K-8 and COMMUNITY COLLEGES and UNIVERSITIES. FUND scholarships for low to middle income students. Washington is a great state not currently seeing the long range implications of this flight of our students.

How much should it cost for a "hard-working American" to put him/herself through a reputable school (total for tuition, fees, R&B, books, etc.))? Here's what legislators should enact:

Force all public students to work 20 hours per week (at $8.50/hour) during every week of instruction: 35weeks x $170/week = $6000

plus...

Force the student to work 40 hours per week (at $8.50/hour) during all of his/her vacation stints: 15weeks x $340 = $5000

And don't let mommy or daddy pay for it...force students to work for their education. Charge $11,000 per year, for everything. Officials will claim that it costs more than that to educate a student in a public setting, but that is pure bullshit. No public student is getting more than $11,000 worth of an education each year, since most of what a student does, he/she does independently. At today's large research universities, students are actually subsidizing the schools.

Sure, junior colleges and second-tier schools such as the Cal States and the SUNY campuses are giving away their services for next to nothing, but they SHOULD be. As Aardvark says, they play different roles (and should be heavily subsidized).

@5, and those student jobs are...where, exactly?

Back in the 70s, my parents could put themselves through school working at minimum-wage jobs. Now a student couldn't earn that $23,000 cost working even full time. And even if they could, full-time work and school are tough to juggle if you want to have any semblance of a well-balanced life and get the most out of your education.

@5 Today's students would love to pay their way through school but it is impossible for most. There are not enough jobs, the cost of education is much higher, and academic expectations have increased dramatically, putting strain on the ability to work a full-time job in addition to college. The 90% tax rates on the wealthy back in the 1950s-60s allowed baby boomers to enjoy cheap public education before Reagan and Bush came along to slash their taxes right when they were in the prime of their careers and capable of repaying their debt to society.

@6&7: Make the total cost about $11,000 and force students to live on/near campus and work the amount of time I suggested. Where can they work? Several things come to mind: civil works projects that are created specifically for the purpose; within the university (where many already find employment); every K-12 public school in the state; in the private sector (as long as it is determined that the job is serious and real); within local/regional government offices; civic beautification created specifically for the purpose. The point is that all student wages would go towards schooling and living costs.

My proposal is the most egalitarian, does away with much of the financial aid nightmare, demands public service and is reasonable. In California, it would encompass the 160,000 or so undergraduates in the UC system.

Think about it: got a rich family? Nobody cares...work your ass off. Poor? Nobody gives a shit...work your ass off. You didn't get financial aid, because your family makes just enough to not qualify, but not enough to help you? Fuck that...work your ass off.

And don't give me the "school is very demanding BS." I worked 20-25 hours a week while in session (40 during breaks), wasn't given squat for financial aid (because I fit right in the last category I listed) and did 4-6 hours of homework every night while at UCLA.

The Ivies, such as Haaaahvaaahd, do offer free tuition to student's who make less than $65,000 a year but those token students make up less than 9% of the student body. The rest are legacy students like El Presidente George Dubbya Bush II who is rumored to never have actually attended class but still earned the "gentleman's C". 91% of the grades given out at Harvard are A's btw. I'm sure those legacy students really, really worked hard to earn them too ;)

This study shows that it actually costs a little over $6300 to educate each undergraduate student at UCLA.

http://changinguniversities.blogspot.com…

All undergraduate expenses make up only 3.9% of the total university expenditures, yet the school derives about 35% of its revenue from undergrads.

It makes perfect sense for @4 to chose to send their child to an Ivy...the benefits of smaller class size, more personalization, higher grade inflation, great reputation and greater networking opportunities are there with the added fact that they will be paying what is essentially the actual cost of the education!

@9: likewise, the average grade at Stanford is an A-. When I was at UCLA, it was a C+.