I won't say it's a bad thing. It isn't. It's a wonderful thing.
But the headline on the Yahoo! news article is ... misleading. It makes it sound like there is NO tuition due, and, in reality, it cuts their $26,000 per year tuition down by about $2,400 per year.
But the only tuition people pay is the expected family contribution. Schools like Harvard use their foundations to pay the rest through financial aid and recoup their investments when the alumni get rich.
Reducing that contribution to zero essentially reduces the cost to near zero.
Student loans to be paid after are a much lower barrier than up-front costs. And from what I understand, the Ivy League is a lot more aggressive about not saddling their students with student loans, because they can afford to.
Actually, Harvard is getting a pretty good deal out of this. It appears as though, if my math is correct, they are paying him the equivalent of $3.89 per hour, less than minimum wage. However, since they are waiving some tuition of him and in return he moves boxes, so they're getting free labor.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 01:35 pm (UTC)Harvard actually announced it over a week ago
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 01:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:02 pm (UTC)But the headline on the Yahoo! news article is ... misleading. It makes it sound like there is NO tuition due, and, in reality, it cuts their $26,000 per year tuition down by about $2,400 per year.
10% isn't much -- but it's definately something.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:05 pm (UTC)And I agree, Yahoo's article title is very misleading.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:24 pm (UTC)Reducing that contribution to zero essentially reduces the cost to near zero.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:39 pm (UTC)My parents paid their EFC, and I had a couple of loans on top of that in order to pay for my tuition.
no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-10 02:26 pm (UTC)