JJsqueeze
Dad, Husband....legend
this is good info, I was basing most of my opinion on my SLO alumni status (Go Mustangs!) and my personal experience growing up in the area and knowing a bunch of folks who went to both schools etc. The 4 year graduation rate is pretty useless IMO though, LMU families have far more resources than both levels of state schools so the kids can more typically just take a full load of classes for 4 years. In addition to the impacted nature of state class schedules, a lot of people have to take a lighter load so they can work etc. They also have a lot more JC transfers etc. One of the big thing I looked at and will look at when my DDs time comes is the value proposition. I attended in the 90s and I think I paid like $700 a quarter in tuition fees ( I don't even know if it was called tuition). I know this was an order of magnitude lower than a typical private school but the education was on par/better than all but the top tier private schools in ca. As a California resident there are two private school that I think are worth it when you have such good state schools, that would be Stanford and Cal Tech. Otherwise the state system, despite it's faults, remains a remarkable value. UCLA, CAL, Irivine, Davis (DDs want to be vets right now), UCSF medical, Cal Poly Engineering...I really wonder why any student would leave California to go to school quite honestly. I can't think of a field of study that does not have a world class option (or several) at a state school in California. I only hope it stays within reach for another 10 years for my kids. Last time I checked UC was like $10-12K a year, compared with $40K for LMU. That is insane to me....UCLA/CAL outclass LMU by FAR in every possible way and are 1/4 the cost. If a kid can't get in there then a CSU is a great option when you stack them up against the LMUs/Pepperdines of the world.
Last edited: