←back to thread

Undergraduates with family income below $200k will be tuition-free at MIT

(news.mit.edu)
589 points gnabgib | 10 comments | 20 Nov 24 16:59 UTC | HN request time: 2.187s | source | bottom
Show context
TheJoeMan ◴[20 Nov 24 19:26 UTC] No.42197249[source]▶
This is a great step in the right direction. I can't speak directly for MIT, but there are issues with how these programs don't apply to parents with small family businesses. My parents had a small business, with my father taking home a salary of $XX,XXX. Duke University used the business assets to determine the EFC (expected family contribution) of literally 90% of the salary. Essentially saying to sell off the family business for the college fund, which was a non-starter.

Small businesses are allegedly the backbone of America, and I feel these tuition support programs overlook this segment of the middle-class.

replies(19): >>42197538 #>>42197658 #>>42198000 #>>42198518 #>>42198630 #>>42198802 #>>42199002 #>>42199120 #>>42199126 #>>42199269 #>>42199949 #>>42200245 #>>42200451 #>>42200630 #>>42200685 #>>42200902 #>>42201562 #>>42202117 #>>42202554 #
nuancebydefault ◴[20 Nov 24 20:53 UTC] No.42198000[source]▶
Why are such things in the US so complicated? Where I live, studying is much much cheaper for most professions,for everyone!

That's the only fair way. Also, a set of well educated people pays itself back later in the form of mostly income and added value taxes, which provides money to keep studying for cheap for the next generation.

replies(11): >>42198358 #>>42198435 #>>42198464 #>>42198475 #>>42198686 #>>42198813 #>>42198990 #>>42199020 #>>42199099 #>>42201953 #>>42202607 #
s1artibartfast ◴[20 Nov 24 21:36 UTC] No.42198358[source]▶
Because education is largely an afterthought, and universities primarily compete on entertainment and prestige.

High cost and exclusivity is the entire point.

A university open to all with a fraction of the price would be a poorly ranked one in every competitive measure.

replies(3): >>42198495 #>>42198713 #>>42198919 #
nuancebydefault ◴[20 Nov 24 22:18 UTC] No.42198713[source]▶
Still, I do not get it. Why would this competition / exclusivity rule be so much less prevalent in large parts of Europe?

I don't want to say Europe is without problems, but I think this kind of legislation, together with social security in general, is a clear example of how it can be handled more efficient and fair for most people.

replies(1): >>42198989 #
1. s1artibartfast ◴[20 Nov 24 22:53 UTC] No.42198989[source]▶
Good question. I wonder if labor competition in Europe is less reliant on University names and reputation? IT could also have to do with cultural difference is what students look for in a university.

My understanding is that most universities in Europe look more like US bare bones commuter schools, opposed to an all inclusive recreational experience.

The top ranked university in Europe is Oxford, which educates more than twice as many students as MIT with half the budget. I doubt this is because Oxford is cutting corners on educational curriculum.

replies(3): >>42199901 #>>42200033 #>>42200113 #
2. nextos ◴[21 Nov 24 00:53 UTC] No.42199901[source]▶
Oxford doesn't pay staff well unless you are in the top of the pyramid, i.e. a professor. Paradoxically those tend to contribute less to education. Senior postdocs and fellows do a significant amount of teaching but their salaries are incredibly low. You need to make lots of life compromises to be able to sustain yourself at one of those. For example, fellows teaching at different colleges often get stipends and salaries in the range of £30-35,000 per year. Keep in mind that those fellowships require a PhD and a stellar CV.

Most other British and EU universities suffer from the same issues. For more information, see this article at The Guardian, which generated lots of debate: https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/no.... In a nutshell the article states that "[...] I no longer believe that early-career positions at Oxbridge universities are viable for individuals without independent financial means." Also "[...] the median non-professorial academic salary at Oxbridge is £45,000."

3. shiroiushi ◴[21 Nov 24 01:19 UTC] No.42200033[source]▶
>The top ranked university in Europe is Oxford, which educates more than twice as many students as MIT with half the budget. I doubt this is because Oxford is cutting corners on educational curriculum.

Maybe, maybe not. It could just be from cost-of-living differences: salaries for many jobs (particularly highly-educated ones) pay a fraction outside the US what they do inside the US. How much are Oxford professors and staff getting paid compared to the ones at MIT (which is Boston, which is a very high cost-of-living city for the US)?

replies(2): >>42201006 #>>42201122 #
4. seanmcdirmid ◴[21 Nov 24 01:31 UTC] No.42200113[source]▶
MIT is a huge outlier in terms of R&D and the population it selects students from, it would be more fair to compare Oxford to Harvard. Oxford...really is about as far from commuter schools than you can get, for example having to wear robes to the dining hall...that is straight out of Harry Potter (and indeed, where they filmed the dining scene at one of the colleges).
replies(1): >>42201099 #
5. throwaway2037 ◴[21 Nov 24 04:08 UTC] No.42201006[source]▶
I found this on Google:

    > According to ZipRecruiter, the average salary for a professor at MIT is $114,792 per year, with a range of $94,500 to $179,500.
And:

    > A professor's salary at the University of Oxford can range from around £89,429 to £122,261 per year, with an average of £104,347
The average at Oxford is much higher than MIT. Note: GBP to USD is currently 1.27
replies(1): >>42201044 #
6. shiroiushi ◴[21 Nov 24 04:15 UTC] No.42201044{3}[source]▶
According to the sister comment to mine, Oxford pays only professors well, and everyone else quite poorly. There's a lot more to a university's staff than just the professors.
replies(1): >>42202581 #
7. throwaway2037 ◴[21 Nov 24 04:23 UTC] No.42201099[source]▶

    > MIT is a huge outlier in terms of R&D
I think most R&D at MIT is paid for by gov't science research grants.
8. s1artibartfast ◴[21 Nov 24 04:28 UTC] No.42201122[source]▶
Im not sure what you mean by maybe not. If oxford is cutting corners, it still has the top rank in Europe, so I suppose they are the correct corners to cut.

Perhaps high professor and admin salaries in the US are a problem with US education.

replies(1): >>42201173 #
9. shiroiushi ◴[21 Nov 24 04:38 UTC] No.42201173{3}[source]▶
>Perhaps high professor and admin salaries in the US are a problem with US education.

This is exactly my point. And not just professor and admin salaries, the salaries and costs for everything.

It's not about "cutting corners", it's that if you compare the cost of something in the US to something in another country, the US usually is much more expensive; this doesn't mean the other country is cutting corners, it means the US is just too damn expensive.

10. arethuza ◴[21 Nov 24 09:39 UTC] No.42202581{4}[source]▶
"Professors" at a UK university are the most senior academic staff - mind you there does seem to be a move in some universities to move to US style job title where all academics are a professor of some kind.

When I worked in UK academia the hierarchy for permanent academic posts was something like: lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, professor.