The Demographic Cliff and UConn

[Travelman6]

Kids can get any degree they want and can afford. But it is certainly not "defamatory" of me to point out that the universities have been selling degrees that have a negative or very poor ROI.

I see what you are saying and I won't deny UNI, regardless of degree is super expensive. Something drastic needs to be done to fix this. But in the previous post, you flat-out say "useless degree" which is still incorrect and that is my issue. A degree can be as "useless" or "useful" as you make it but it is not solely because of the major, there are many other variables and factors.

Going into debt, regardless of degree can be a huge handicap regardless of major. That is why I have seen Ivy grads struggle, even STEM Ivy grads (I knew one from Harvard), and also why I've seen people with humanities degrees, even from average or not well-known schools succeed. But to look at someone's degree and point blank make the claim "useless" is not okay. Why further handicap a young person with that kind of stigma? They went to school, studied, and worked hard, and it is safe to say the large majority of grads want to be contributing members of society. Plus if they learned something valuable, hard to argue how "useless" that is. I won't **** on some kid because they got an anthropology degree. They put a lot of effort in too. It is more the fault of society that doesn't see value in a wide variety of different disciplines (outside of just STEM) and inability to see how that variety contributes to a high-functioning society.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I see what you are saying and I won't deny UNI, regardless of degree is super expensive. Something drastic needs to be done to fix this. But in the previous post, you flat-out say "useless degree" which is still incorrect and that is my issue. A degree can be as "useless" or "useful" as you make it but it is not solely because of the major, there are many other variables and factors.

Going into debt, regardless of degree can be a huge handicap regardless of major. That is why I have seen Ivy grads struggle, even STEM Ivy grads (I knew one from Harvard), and also why I've seen people with humanities degrees, even from average or not well-known schools succeed. But to look at someone's degree and point blank make the claim "useless" is not okay. Why further handicap a young person with that kind of stigma? They went to school, studied, and worked hard, and it is safe to say the large majority of grads want to be contributing members of society. Plus if they learned something valuable, hard to argue how "useless" that is. I won't **** on some kid because they got an anthropology degree. They put a lot of effort in too. It is more the fault of society that doesn't see value in a wide variety of different disciplines (outside of just STEM) and inability to see how that variety contributes to a high-functioning society.

You are using anecdotal examples, and I am pointing to a systematic problem that the universities are in a large part responsible for. Kids are welcome to study anything they want, no matter what their major. But given the cost, going to school is an economic decision, and there are severe economic consequences for making a bad one. To paraphrase Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting, don't be the person who "dropped $150,000 on a fudging education that you could have gotten for $1.50 in late charges at the public library." No one is stopping a CS major from reading literature. I am just suggesting that spending $80,000 a year on the Classics is a bad economic investment, and will result in a degree that, for many of those graduates, is economically useless.

Colleges put kids in these degrees because they are cheap and therefore very profitable for the school. The colleges have to know they are not preparing many of their graduates for a post-college world, yet they sell these $300,000 degrees anyway.

 

[BigTenFan]

We can clearly put much of the debt blame on Universities, predatory lending and government. However, parents of young people need to be more financially involved in decision making for their kids. The adults are the ones who should be guiding the education process for their children - not society or guidance councilors.

I have seen so many kids get into deep debt because they had to go to their 'dream school' with no understanding of the ramifications of borrowing so much money.
Parents need to be the gatekeeper so their kids get a quality education at a fair price.
If the parents don't do this- they are setting their kids up for years of financial struggle.
There are many ways to get a quality education without a 100k ball and chain wrapped around your ankle.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

UHart is in a death spiral. Mediocre private schools would be the first to go I'd imagine

There will be some merging up, but there is still a market for a nimble, lower tier city school like Hartford that is near employers. Connecticut has 3.5 million people, so there is still a big market for education in the state.

The schools I really question, for different reasons, are ones like Mississippi State and Connecticut College. Why does a state like Mississippi need two major state schools? That is a complete waste of money for the state. I do not get the appeal of schools like Connecticut College at all. The target market for a school like Connecticut College is wealthy kids that didn't get into the Ivies, because it is horrendously expensive, and sells degrees that belong in a museum. Really, schools like Connecticut College are selling exclusivity and the appearance of special access, because unless you or your friends have rich, connected parents, there is not much you can do with a history degree from Connecticut College. The problem with this approach is that rich kids are increasingly going to the better state schools for STEM, or going to private schools that were early to the STEM game, and that trend will just continue.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

We can clearly put much of the debt blame on Universities, predatory lending and government. However, parents of young people need to be more financially involved in decision making for their kids. The adults are the ones who should be guiding the education process for their children - not society or guidance councilors.

I have seen so many kids get into deep debt because they had to go to their 'dream school' with no understanding of the ramifications of borrowing so much money.
Parents need to be the gatekeeper so their kids get a quality education at a fair price.
If the parents don't do this- they are setting their kids up for years of financial struggle.
Their are many ways to get a quality education without a 100k ball and chain wrapped around your ankle.

+1000

I spend a lot of time around tech companies. 20 years ago, many of the programmers didn't have degrees and were either self-taught or had just taken a few classes at a local community college or regional college. I have come across more than one senior CS engineer from CCSU or WestConn. There is still some self-taught, but with colleges going all in on STEM, that will change because there are a lot more kids getting CS degrees. Interestingly, most employers don't care that much about pedigree in the STEM fields. They have computers at Hartford and St. Johns and [pick random city school of your choice], and tech employers will hire smart kids from any school if they know their stuff. I have had a senior tech executive with as good a pedigree as is possible to have tell me that he would have to look up where most of his staff came from because he does not care.

When the history is written on the Higher Education industry of the 20's in 10 or 20 years, the emergence of "vocational degrees" will have been the most important seismic shift that ultimately revolutionized the entire industry. It broke the appeal of the prestige privates, and forced the education system to modernize.

 

[DFW HOYA]

The schools I really question, for different reasons, are ones like Mississippi State and Connecticut College. Why does a state like Mississippi need two major state schools? That is a complete waste of money for the state.

Mississippi State, once known as as Mississippi A&M, was part of the Morrill Act, which expanded study of agricultural and applied sciences nationwide. Every state had one major school funded under this act and in the case of HBCU's, more than one.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Mississippi State, once known as as Mississippi A&M, was part of the Morrill Act, which expanded study of agricultural and applied sciences nationwide. Every state had one major school funded under this act and in the case of HBCU's, more than one.

And people used to get around on horseback. It is 2023, and Mississippi has two very similar universities that are basically duplicative of each other in a state that does not send a ton of kids to college.

 

[Chuck]

So, I'm reading about this cliff everywhere. Some of you seem very educated (or opinionated) on the topic. So, with two kids that will be looking at schools over the next 48 months, here are some things I'm curious about:

• I have a son that is good with math and science, but very talented in (and prefers) writing and other non-STEM topics. Only interested in smaller (not tiny) liberal arts schools (the 3k enrollment D1-type schools (he wouldn't play a sport there)), but understands that he has to consider majors that will lead to jobs. These are schools with billion dollar endowments and less than 30% acceptance rates. Are these the type of schools that people think will struggle? Maybe they'll get a bit easier to get into, but will these schools still survive/thrive?
• What do you guys think will happen with the Big 10 schools? Very strong academic reputations and many (not all) have competitive enrollments. They have strong endowments, but not Ivy-like. But may are in shrinking states that will have budget issues. Are these schools still going thrive because of their tradition, resources, and athletic departments? Is Indiana University (high acceptance rate outside business school) going to struggle, or are they golden?

This one is more of an observance for the son looking at the liberal arts schools. I'd thing there will be a donut hole in the schools' economic demographics. Rich people can afford a $500k education. Middle class and below are getting pretty strong merit aid to make the school competitive (or cheaper) with public universities. But the mass affluent have a tough decision to make. The $500k can be afforded, but it's a legit hit on mom and dad's lifestyle and retirement plans. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those next level schools that give merit aid move up in rankings and reputation. It's something I struggle with.

 

[noeynox]

Ask some of the 20 and 30 somethings who are sitting on $100,000 or $200,000 of debt for degrees in the humanities that have little practical application in the real world. The higher education industry markets the need of a college degree to teenagers, essentially telling children that their dreams are not possible without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for a piece of paper. What the Higher Ed industry knows, as do many of us, is that those degrees are not remotely created equal. Rather than pivot their product to a modern society, many of the liberal arts schools in particular have doubled down on very expensive degrees in the humanities of questionable ROI.

This is "marketing cigarettes to kids" level evil. Actually, it is worse, because a kid that starts smoking can quit smoking. A kid that borrowed $200,000 for a degree in the Classics will have every aspect of their life negatively impacted. They will have a lower standard of living, often have credit problems their whole life which can impact their career, and will even have their choice of mates impacted because love is love, but taking on $200,000 of debt for a degree they didn't get is asking a lot of any future spouse. Getting some of these degrees literally ruin many people's lives.

A big difference between young people today and when Gen X got out of college in the 90's and early 2000's is that when we were in college, everyone just kind of got a degree and then got a job. Employers would be willing to train recent college graduates, and kids with a humanities degree may have a bit more trouble getting that first job, but once they got started, they would still be able to head off into their careers. But back then, there was an endless discussion in the media about how America was turning out too many lawyers.

As a result, starting in the 90's, more and more kids went into STEM majors. I can't find the data right now, but I believe colleges are turning out twice the STEM graduates today compared to 2000. I believe that other type of "trade degrees" like business are up significantly, albeit not at the same growth rate. That is a lot of kids graduating college every year with skills that are immediately applicable in the workplace. This has the effect of making the humanities degrees less valuable, because companies do not need to hire someone with a generic degree when they can hire someone with a STEM or business degree.

The state schools went hard into STEM and business in the 1990's while the prestige privates would actually have Presidents who derisively referred to those majors as "vocational degrees". Weird how most of the Ivies now offer "vocational degrees" too now. Many of the smaller liberal arts colleges will never get there. But the STEM and business degrees presented other challenges. Professors in those fields are expensive compared to a history or English professor, because a CS or engineering professor has a lot of opportunities in the private sector. As a result, a lot of universities have marketed STEM and business majors without the capacity to bring everyone through to a degree. My information is anecdotal, but Maryland is developing a reputation for doing this. Pulling a kid into a program, having the kid spend two years and $100,000 (for an out of state kid), and then telling the kid and his family that either they have to take a lesser degree or transfer, is unethical, or worse.

Kids can get any degree they want and can afford. But it is certainly not "defamatory" of me to point out that the universities have been selling degrees that have a negative or very poor ROI.

Only remotely related to your point, but a few years back i attended one of those being able to afford college webinars with a local guy and one of the examples he had was of a recent graduate from QU who graduated with a teaching degree. 231k debt and a job making 38k a year. (He helps people like that navigate their debt as a service also.) For the life of me i could not wrap my mind around letting my kid go to a school like that for a teaching degree when you can get the same job with a degree out of CCSU. I didn't factor what @johnsilver said though, about the commuter feel. I too would want my kids to get a better experience as i was a commuter student.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

So, I'm reading about this cliff everywhere. Some of you seem very educated (or opinionated) on the topic. So, with two kids that will be looking at schools over the next 48 months, here are some things I'm curious about:

• I have a son that is good with math and science, but very talented in (and prefers) writing and other non-STEM topics. Only interested in smaller (not tiny) liberal arts schools (the 3k enrollment D1-type schools (he wouldn't play a sport there)), but understands that he has to consider majors that will lead to jobs. These are schools with billion dollar endowments and less than 30% acceptance rates. Are these the type of schools that people think will struggle? Maybe they'll get a bit easier to get into, but will these schools still survive/thrive?
• What do you guys think will happen with the Big 10 schools? Very strong academic reputations and many (not all) have competitive enrollments. They have strong endowments, but not Ivy-like. But may are in shrinking states that will have budget issues. Are these schools still going thrive because of their tradition, resources, and athletic departments? Is Indiana University (high acceptance rate outside business school) going to struggle, or are they golden?

This one is more of an observance for the son looking at the liberal arts schools. I'd thing there will be a donut hole in the schools' economic demographics. Rich people can afford a $500k education. Middle class and below are getting pretty strong merit aid to make the school competitive (or cheaper) with public universities. But the mass affluent have a tough decision to make. The $500k can be afforded, but it's a legit hit on mom and dad's lifestyle and retirement plans. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those next level schools that give merit aid move up in rankings and reputation. It's something I struggle with.

It sounds like you have a good approach. There is a balance between what the kid likes and what he/she needs to get a job, and there are ways to do both.

A billion dollar endowment will enable a school to make some mistakes, but whether it survives long term or not really comes down to the school itself.

The northern state schools have generally been smarter about their curriculum and student services than many of the prestige privates, at least in my opinion. Some of this is out of necessity, since the Demographic Cliff is already being felt in the Rust Belt and Northeast. There are ways to downsize the overhead while still providing a quality education. I think that WVU is indicative of the fact that many of the southern schools aren't even trying to manage their growth. It is also worth noting that these southern states get a huge percentage of their operating budget from the federal government, which does not seem sustainable long-term.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Only remotely related to your point, but a few years back i attended one of those being able to afford college webinars with a local guy and one of the examples he had was of a recent graduate from QU who graduated with a teaching degree. 231k debt and a job making 38k a year. (He helps people like that navigate their debt as a service also.) For the life of me i could not wrap my mind around letting my kid go to a school like that for a teaching degree when you can get the same job with a degree out of CCSU. I didn't factor what @johnsilver said though, about the commuter feel. I too would want my kids to get a better experience as i was a commuter student.

Teaching is a career but also a lifestyle choice, and you have to have the overhead to match. I get that CCSU is not ideal from a student experience, but it is a good choice for kids that really want to be teachers.

Your example is an obvious bad economic decision. Through family members I know many kids who are nearing 40 and still have major student loans even though they have what most people would consider good jobs. As anyone in their 40's and 50's can tell you, overhead does not shrink until near the end of life.

 

[Punkbo]

Ask some of the 20 and 30 somethings who are sitting on $100,000 or $200,000 of debt for degrees in the humanities that have little practical application in the real world. The higher education industry markets the need of a college degree to teenagers, essentially telling children that their dreams are not possible without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for a piece of paper. What the Higher Ed industry knows, as do many of us, is that those degrees are not remotely created equal. Rather than pivot their product to a modern society, many of the liberal arts schools in particular have doubled down on very expensive degrees in the humanities of questionable ROI.

This is "marketing cigarettes to kids" level evil. Actually, it is worse, because a kid that starts smoking can quit smoking. A kid that borrowed $200,000 for a degree in the Classics will have every aspect of their life negatively impacted. They will have a lower standard of living, often have credit problems their whole life which can impact their career, and will even have their choice of mates impacted because love is love, but taking on $200,000 of debt for a degree they didn't get is asking a lot of any future spouse. Getting some of these degrees literally ruin many people's lives.

A big difference between young people today and when Gen X got out of college in the 90's and early 2000's is that when we were in college, everyone just kind of got a degree and then got a job. Employers would be willing to train recent college graduates, and kids with a humanities degree may have a bit more trouble getting that first job, but once they got started, they would still be able to head off into their careers. But back then, there was an endless discussion in the media about how America was turning out too many lawyers.

As a result, starting in the 90's, more and more kids went into STEM majors. I can't find the data right now, but I believe colleges are turning out twice the STEM graduates today compared to 2000. I believe that other type of "trade degrees" like business are up significantly, albeit not at the same growth rate. That is a lot of kids graduating college every year with skills that are immediately applicable in the workplace. This has the effect of making the humanities degrees less valuable, because companies do not need to hire someone with a generic degree when they can hire someone with a STEM or business degree.

The state schools went hard into STEM and business in the 1990's while the prestige privates would actually have Presidents who derisively referred to those majors as "vocational degrees". Weird how most of the Ivies now offer "vocational degrees" too now. Many of the smaller liberal arts colleges will never get there. But the STEM and business degrees presented other challenges. Professors in those fields are expensive compared to a history or English professor, because a CS or engineering professor has a lot of opportunities in the private sector. As a result, a lot of universities have marketed STEM and business majors without the capacity to bring everyone through to a degree. My information is anecdotal, but Maryland is developing a reputation for doing this. Pulling a kid into a program, having the kid spend two years and $100,000 (for an out of state kid), and then telling the kid and his family that either they have to take a lesser degree or transfer, is unethical, or worse.

Kids can get any degree they want and can afford. But it is certainly not "defamatory" of me to point out that the universities have been selling degrees that have a negative or very poor ROI.

This is a great thread and certainly very timely as the cost of higher education continues to skyrocket. Educating our children is the best use of our resources as parents. Many elite universities have sold the premise that educators are in place to expand the minds of our children with liberal arts degrees and modest specialization. It certainly helps them to generate more revenue through graduate degrees. Others followed this model. It may work for the affluent, but only makes sense for most at about 1/5 of the cost of today’s education. The path taken by many lower and mid-tier private schools is a train wreck. Public schools can probably be saved by dumping more money into the system at the expense of the taxpayer.

 

[noeynox]

Teaching is a career but also a lifestyle choice, and you have to have the overhead to match. I get that CCSU is not ideal from a student experience, but it is a good choice for kids that really want to be teachers.

Your example is an obvious bad economic decision. Through family members I know many kids who are nearing 40 and still have major student loans even though they have what most people would consider good jobs. As anyone in their 40's and 50's can tell you, overhead does not shrink until near the end of life.

One thing i learned in that webinar, not sure how timely it is now, but large publics down south love northeast kids and were offering significant need based and merrit based scholarships (not just to northeast kids per se) but it was an affordable option. The two schools he had in his presentation were Alabama and South Carolina.

 

[JohnFSilver]

I am amused at the humanities debate.

People act like humanities and CLAS is worthless, but I would argue in dynamic economies they are more valuable than ever.

The issue with STEM, long term, is the re-training required. We get a huge push, then something happens in economy that that entire community has to pivot and re-train.

The theory behind value of CLAS grads is versatility, adaptability and responsiveness. They don’t teach you to do a certain skill - I am not a mechanical engineer.

But those degrees, all of them, develop and nourish critical thinking skills and abstract and are meant to be Just in Time reservoir of labor.

Any major worth its salt and market cap is taking talent that it. An build and mold. If you want a versatile employee to fit somewhere in your company , hire a humanities grad.

In a tight labor market, you want the STEM background as specific skills are what is valuable. In the current market? Companies are gonna take smart and versatile candidates who they can fit what their unique is.

Also. Next time an engineer needs to write an email that makes sense, let me know. There are not enough English majors out there.

Lol.

 

[JohnFSilver]

Teaching is a career but also a lifestyle choice, and you have to have the overhead to match. I get that CCSU is not ideal from a student experience, but it is a good choice for kids that really want to be teachers.

Your example is an obvious bad economic decision. Through family members I know many kids who are nearing 40 and still have major student loans even though they have what most people would consider good jobs. As anyone in their 40's and 50's can tell you, overhead does not shrink until near the end of life.

My wife and dad are CCSU grads and dad worked there until he died. Love the school. Grew up within a mile of it.

My daughter wants to do special education, so ccsu, western and southern are live options due to that. She didn’t like western’s campus. I am trying to get her to look at ccsu, but kids want exotic and that is too close.

You make a great point. She has the grades to get into say QPec, Sacred Heart, but is education worth the cost?

I dont think so as a teaching profession. I have told her that. So teachig Is a different conversation because they have strong teaching programs.

I just wish they had more options in state. We are gonna look at URI, Loyola Md. and some schools in the south. Breaking my heart.

 

[DFW HOYA]

And people used to get around on horseback. It is 2023, and Mississippi has two very similar universities that are basically duplicative of each other in a state that does not send a ton of kids to college.

Mississippi also has three state-funded Division I HBCU's, one of which has 1,054 full time undergraduates (Mississippi Valley State) and the other at 2,194 (Alcorn St.). Neither of these schools will be closed nor merged with Jackson State (4,276 as of spring 2021)

 

[billybud]

Costs have exceeded return for some colllege degrees..particularly in the humanities.

Our son lived at home in Tallahassee and commuted to school and did not have a large student loan hanging over his head...he now works for a boutique Florida defense contractor that designs and builds prototypes mainly for DoD....SEAL communication packs, drones, man portable radar, etc. His ROI (actually ours) has been good.

His work friend who has a doctorate in theoretical math, boarded at a much more expensive out of state university and has an enormous loan debt.

 

[billybud]

Florida had a scheme...prepaid tuition...when our son was 4 we began paying a monthly bill for eight years that guaranteed 4 years of tuition paid at whatever the future price...

The Bright Futures State Scholarship program also would pay tuition costs for those with good GPA's.

 

[noeynox]

Florida had a scheme...prepaid tuition...when our son was 4 we began paying a monthly bill for eight years that guaranteed 4 years of tuition paid at whatever the future price...

The Bright Futures State Scholarship program also would pay tuition costs for those with good GPA's.

My friend's daughter was salutatorian down there and went to UF for almost no cost. Had she chosen to go USF which was closer to home she would have pocketed money i believe.

 

[billybud]

Kids did end up pocketing money..

 

[Spsone07]

My significant other daughter is a pretty bright girl at one of the best public school district in the state. Although our salaries are great, we can’t really afford to pay for her tuition in the current climate. We are recommending that she attends community college for 2-3 years, she would then make a decision of where to attend college when she matures and have a better idea what she wants to do.

College is about making bonds and friendships, but I made stronger friends by playing in my local softball beer league.

The problem I see is that we encourage young adults to make a really important decision of attending expensive colleges to kids that aren’t fully responsible. When I was 18, I was happier to leave my family and Connecticut to go to any college that was 2-3 times more expensive than UConn. If I worked and paid my own way for 2–3 years, I probably would’ve attended a cheaper college to eventually end up in my current career.

 

[JohnFSilver]

My significant other daughter is a pretty bright girl at one of the best public school district in the state. Although our salaries are great, we can’t really afford to pay for her tuition in the current climate. We are recommending that she attends community college for 2-3 years, she would then make a decision of where to attend college when she matures and have a better idea what she wants to do.

College is about making bonds and friendships, but I made stronger friends by playing in my local softball beer league.

The problem I see is that we encourage young adults to make a really important decision of attending expensive colleges to kids that aren’t fully responsible. When I was 18, I was happier to leave my family and Connecticut to go to any college that was 2-3 times more expensive than UConn. If I worked and paid my own way for 2–3 years, I probably would’ve attended a cheaper college to eventually end up in my current career.

Problem is the cost for the education isn’t worth it. Room, board food and fees. What are we doing here saddling students with debt and making them financially uncompetitive with rest of world?

We are asking too much if the burden being placed on students and families. I get we are in a populist and anti-education political environment, but last I checked plumbers needed customers.

Who pays for plumbers? Corporate lackeys like who are over educated like me.

I think network is key, as is having a common bond with your students in your area of study. Tbh, I just don’t understand why someone has to pay $100K to get a job to pay higher taxes.

Society benefits from your investment and you have a lower standard of living. If my children aren’t someone who I think can high perform at college, I am. It going to pay. Go to CC and get that associates in advanced manufacturing for free and join the aerospace industry.

 

[Punkbo]

My significant other daughter is a pretty bright girl at one of the best public school district in the state. Although our salaries are great, we can’t really afford to pay for her tuition in the current climate. We are recommending that she attends community college for 2-3 years, she would then make a decision of where to attend college when she matures and have a better idea what she wants to do.

College is about making bonds and friendships, but I made stronger friends by playing in my local softball beer league.

The problem I see is that we encourage young adults to make a really important decision of attending expensive colleges to kids that aren’t fully responsible. When I was 18, I was happier to leave my family and Connecticut to go to any college that was 2-3 times more expensive than UConn. If I worked and paid my own way for 2–3 years, I probably would’ve attended a cheaper college to eventually end up in my current career.

I may be speaking from an ivory tower, but I think you’re underestimating the value of relationships which can be developed at elite universities. I realize that not everyone can afford it, but these relationships can be very rewarding.

 

[superjohn]

Problem is the cost for the education isn’t worth it. Room, board food and fees. What are we doing here saddling students with debt and making them financially uncompetitive with rest of world?

We are asking too much if the burden being placed on students and families. I get we are in a populist and anti-education political environment, but last I checked plumbers needed customers.

Who pays for plumbers? Corporate lackeys like who are over educated like me.

I think network is key, as is having a common bond with your students in your area of study. Tbh, I just don’t understand why someone has to pay $100K to get a job to pay higher taxes.

Society benefits from your investment and you have a lower standard of living. If my children aren’t someone who I think can high perform at college, I am. It going to pay. Go to CC and get that associates in advanced manufacturing for free and join the aerospace industry.

What?

 

[billybud]

Tuition at UConn is about triple that at FSU and U of F....over four years, that adds up....of course sudent aid ameliorates some of that differential.