Good post, no doubt higher ed inflation is a serious national issue. However, I would question whether all private schools is the proper peer group for comparison.
When looking at what I perceive to be Furman's direct competition and/or peers, i.e. Southern SLACs, the tuition spreads aren't that dramatic:
W&L - $68,045
Richmond - $67,840
Davidson - $64,160
Furman - $61,034
Rhodes - $58,272
Sewanee - $57,916
Wofford - $56,005
Centre - $54,890
This isn't taking into account the average net price, as all of these schools discount to some extent.
Schools are advised to set high tuition prices, creating the perception and appearance of value and to then make prospects feel special by offering them a significant discount in the form of an "academic scholarship"...that playbook is working for some schools better than others.
Thanks for the insight. You're certainly right that Furman's tuition today isn't significantly different from that of many of our peer institutions.
That said, I still think the comparison to other private schools is relevant, if only because it shows that all the schools you're referring to have raised their prices more quickly than other colleges and universities.
And you're also right that very few students pay full tuition. As we have reported previously, today, the average discount rate at Furman is over 60%, meaning the university receives far less per student than the sticker price suggests.
Finally, I think that the idea of setting tuition prices high to give the impression of prestige and then providing significant discounts to make students feel special is EXACTLY what Furman has been trying to do.
Unfortunately, the administration is consistently overestimating the number of students who actually want to enroll. Last year, only 13.2% of accepted applicants wound up enrolling, leaving us with a freshman class of only 571 students.
Unless we change course and figure out a way to attract more students, the university will continue to struggle financially.
When looking nationally, a 40-college sample of Furman’s top ranked peers shows 36 of those peers with higher tuition than Furman. Creighton Lynes’ comments explain a lot about how private college tuition works in the marketplace.
It is truly extraordinary how the entire higher education industry -- and especially small/elite liberal arts schools -- has become a significant price bubble. Furman is undoubtedly not alone in this.
But these data about Furman are not really meaningful without also looking at Furman's discount rate and how it has changed over time. Currently, new students pay less than half of this "sticker price" on average, and that discount rate has also increased across the years plotted. The most useful graph would show what students actually pay to attend Furman, in inflation-adjusted dollars.
But yes, it's still too expensive. Like all similar schools, Furman spends too much on non-academic amenities and that have nothing to do with education, but which it feels (in some cases correctly) are required to attract students in an increasingly competative market.
Good post, no doubt higher ed inflation is a serious national issue. However, I would question whether all private schools is the proper peer group for comparison.
When looking at what I perceive to be Furman's direct competition and/or peers, i.e. Southern SLACs, the tuition spreads aren't that dramatic:
W&L - $68,045
Richmond - $67,840
Davidson - $64,160
Furman - $61,034
Rhodes - $58,272
Sewanee - $57,916
Wofford - $56,005
Centre - $54,890
This isn't taking into account the average net price, as all of these schools discount to some extent.
Consultants have been telling schools to raise their tuition, see https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/01/business/college-tuition-price-consultants.html
Schools are advised to set high tuition prices, creating the perception and appearance of value and to then make prospects feel special by offering them a significant discount in the form of an "academic scholarship"...that playbook is working for some schools better than others.
Thanks for the insight. You're certainly right that Furman's tuition today isn't significantly different from that of many of our peer institutions.
That said, I still think the comparison to other private schools is relevant, if only because it shows that all the schools you're referring to have raised their prices more quickly than other colleges and universities.
And you're also right that very few students pay full tuition. As we have reported previously, today, the average discount rate at Furman is over 60%, meaning the university receives far less per student than the sticker price suggests.
Finally, I think that the idea of setting tuition prices high to give the impression of prestige and then providing significant discounts to make students feel special is EXACTLY what Furman has been trying to do.
Unfortunately, the administration is consistently overestimating the number of students who actually want to enroll. Last year, only 13.2% of accepted applicants wound up enrolling, leaving us with a freshman class of only 571 students.
Unless we change course and figure out a way to attract more students, the university will continue to struggle financially.
When looking nationally, a 40-college sample of Furman’s top ranked peers shows 36 of those peers with higher tuition than Furman. Creighton Lynes’ comments explain a lot about how private college tuition works in the marketplace.
It is truly extraordinary how the entire higher education industry -- and especially small/elite liberal arts schools -- has become a significant price bubble. Furman is undoubtedly not alone in this.
Yes, college is too expensive.
But these data about Furman are not really meaningful without also looking at Furman's discount rate and how it has changed over time. Currently, new students pay less than half of this "sticker price" on average, and that discount rate has also increased across the years plotted. The most useful graph would show what students actually pay to attend Furman, in inflation-adjusted dollars.
But yes, it's still too expensive. Like all similar schools, Furman spends too much on non-academic amenities and that have nothing to do with education, but which it feels (in some cases correctly) are required to attract students in an increasingly competative market.