University of Chicago to offer free tuition for students from families making less than $250,000 a year

$250k is roughly the cut off for top 10% of household incomes. 44% of U of C students are from top 10%, so this will cover about half of their students. Maybe if it encourages more poorer people to apply that will shift a bit higher.

90% aren’t getting accepted to university of Chicago. Its a very very small amount

yeah but like 5% of admits to uchicago

The portion of the 90 percent that are actually smart enough to get into UC, yes

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.

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.

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

A lot of states had tuition-free state universities at one time. California for one--guess which governor murdered it in the 1960s for 100% political reasons.

It's also been incredibly pricy. My gf went there 15 years ago and it was \~75k/year after all was said and done. She did not get a job in her field after all that despite them claiming 95% of grads do. Hell of a bill.

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.

They can't afford it, they don't have large enough endowments.

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’ ?

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.

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.

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](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/ranking-criteria-and-weights). 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](https://csl.uchicago.edu/retention-and-graduation-rates/) 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.

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. 🤣

Thanks, I knew there had to be a reason.

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.

Every elite school has done this for decades. It makes healines every year because the limit raises from 240k to 250k or something

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.

Eh, FWIW, it’s still in the AAU.

I know, terrible right? What a heinous move to offer free tuition to students who are exceptional and earned it.

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.

Damn I thought it was for the students who didn't go there

Can you transfer?

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.

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.

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.

the catch is private tutors that rich kids had and received better grades so poor kids can't compete

There is no reason education should cost money in the first place. The priorities of government are all messed up.

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

I wonder if they play the The Price is Right lose music if it is.

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.

There is difference between poverty and being able to pay 70k

It was already in place, except at 230k for 100% free (250k had to pay a little, and so on on a sliding scale).

23 for me

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

Harvard made this same policy several years ago ($200k households and under). It’s a strategy for elite universities who are really only competing against each other.

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

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.