<p>I think that he should work on getting those SATs and grades up.</p>
<p>^I agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then that’s what he will get. Or, you can expect a little higher and let him know that, and tell him he is fully capable of getting better grades and test scores.</p>
<p>Not everyone can, though, PCP. Not everyone can be above average.</p>
<p>PG, I hear you. What I’m trying to say is that more people don’t come close to realizing their potential. In other words, if one tries harder than one’s peers, then one has much better chance of doing better than average, maybe much better. The first step in trying is to expect more of oneself. Since BG cares then BG is in the position to do something about it.</p>
<p>Bflogal. …as usual, I am stalking your posts and responses. PCP; I would describe my sons future the same as Bflogal (but I’m not sure I’m willing/able to pay for a private), and it assumes he will continue to improve at the same rate he has over the last year.(He pulled a 3.52 this last semester! too bad only one of his A’s is likely to be counted by most schools).</p>
<p>To answer Bflo gal’s question, there are hundreds of colleges in the country that will accept a student with those stats (particularly if one is full pay). You can even get some merit aid with those stats. Of course he should try to get the grades up, and take the ACT (some do better on it), as well as take the SAT again. But Bflogal should not think that there are only 50-100 “decent” colleges in the country. Expanding one’s criteria can reveal some wonderful gems. Read Loren Pope’s books, for example.</p>
<p>I recall a conversation about this on the sidelines of a kiddie soccer game about 6 yrs ago…and a mom flatly told me that NOT checking the FinAid box greatly enhances a kid’s app…because a univ is a business.</p>
<p>Was sorry to hear that–but have read enough here at CC to get the feeling there is no real merit system that is blind to need…</p>
<p>Someone has to pay…
I guess we should ask WHY we think someone else should pay for our student.</p>
<p>Why shouldn’t each pay equal shares? Why should I pay more …?</p>
<p>In a kid’s world it would be kind of like telling the kids–you all get As even if only a few actually work for them…boy would the CC crowd be hot!</p>
<p>Public schools have one kind of business plan, privates another…
Being the devils advocate here…WHY do we think someone else should pay for our kids?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First - directing money to the have nots is a revenue loser for the colleges - plain and simple. </p>
<p>Second - merit aid is not about development cases - rather it is about providing value to entice students to enroll and enhance net tuition revenue</p>
<p>With the economy down, the reason why this is counter intuitive is colleges now, more than ever need to focus on controlling (ie reducing) costs and enhancing net tuition revenue. You don’t do that by giving free money to a ton of have nots</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not disagreeing with you. To clarify, I’m did not say the shift is seimic. I wrote “many”. JHU is another one that comes to mind. They retained a merit scholarship that they wish they can shift to needy students. They can’t do it because of the legal terms in the fund.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My money and so I’ll tell you how I want you to spend it. Makes sense to me. I know someone who gave a boatload of money to our prep school and earmarked it for faculty development. That money cannot be used for any other purpose. Again, makes sense to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll bite. I don’t expect anyone else to pay for my kid. But I don’t want hard-working, intelligent kids to be denied a chance at a college education because their parents can’t afford it (or didn’t plan for it). It’s the KIDS that FA is intended to benefit, not the parents. Also, I want my kids to go to college with kids from a wide variety of socio-economic strata. If they only go to college with kids who have few financial hardships, they don’t get their eyes opened to the real world.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Our system ties responsibility to the parents and the student because that’s a way
to get the responsible party to pay for services. Unfortunately parents aren’t always
responsible or fortunate.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Everyone who can plays the system.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Send him to a third-tier public. Those have the widest variety that I’ve seen.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>US Colleges aren’t the real world.</p>
<p>
Depends on what you mean by “should.” It’s possible to feel frustrated by the loss of an expected good without feeling that one was ever really entitled to it. We’ve raised our kids in an environment in which one of game rules, so to speak, was that if a child is academically qualified for an excellent private college, that college will make itself affordable to that child. There’s no reason why they must do that; but they have been doing that, and if they are ceasing to do that, it changes the game in an unfortunate way for those of us who have raised their children on a working-class or lower-middle-class income. But c’est la guerre.</p>
<p>I don’t really see how the question “Why do we think someone else should pay for our kids?” is pertinant.</p>
<p>The only situation where there is some kind of mandated structural support for lower income kids is government grants; Pell, SEOG, state grants, etc. Those are small amounts and will pay --maybe-- for a community college or a public that is commutable from home. This is truly a case of “other people paying for our kids”, but it’s not what people mostly complain about.</p>
<p>What they don’t like is students with high need being supported by institutional funds (usually just the need-based ones) offered by the colleges themselves. If the college feels that it is their mission to provide support to lower-income students, then you can’t blame the parents or the students from seeking that support. It is being freely offered. Now if it’s a problem that it’s offered at all, that is an issue the aggrieved parties need to take up with the colleges, or with private foundations that have made it their mission to help those students with higher need.</p>
<p>So the real question is “Should those schools or foundations be entitled to articulate such a mission? Is that fair?”</p>
<p>They can articulate any mission that they want to and we can go elsewhere if we want to.</p>
<p>And lots of people do.</p>
<p>BCEagle91 - you seem to hit a lot of points “spot on”.</p>
<p>The only thing I would add is that we have a wonderful public college system that we are all paying taxes to support so that young people from families that can’t afford private college can get a quality education. No one is entitled to a private school education (just as no one is entitled to a 4 bedroom house or a Maserati) and people who can afford a private school education shouldn’t have to subsidize those who can’t.</p>
<p>
As as been said previously, it is the college’s choice to subsidize those who can’t afford a private school education. If those who can afford it don’t like this policy, they can choose to send their money elsewhere.</p>
<p>I totally agree with you, BCEagle, at least in this limited scope. Colleges can articulate whatever mission they want, and people can choose accordingly.</p>
<p>Dadinator, private schools can do what they want. If they have a goal to admit, and financially support needier students, than you do not have to “subsidize” those needier students with so much as a penny. You as a private citizen can seek out a school where needier students are not supported by the institution at all (if you can find one), or at the very least where they are supported most minimally.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s unfortunate, but the economic reality is that many smart, deserving kids will simply have to go to colleges their family can afford. It’s not that they won’t go to college. This is the way it has historically been in this Country.</p>
<p>College is a consumer product. The notion that it’s unfair for top students not to have their choice of top colleges bewilders me. It was amazing that in a booming economy the privilege was extended to so many–a true gift. But this is just another of the economic realities of the times we live in. Hard working, intelligent people can’t have all sorts of things they’d like to have.</p>
<p>The colleges also have a responsibility to the students already there to keep the services as close as possible to what they were when they signed on.</p>
<p>The folks in charge of the business of a college are looking at numbers, not diversity right now out of necessity. They need to figure out how to balance the budget without damaging the college. The unfortunate bottom line is that the top schools were being too generous. Their aid policies were created in an economic bubble, the kind we’re not likely to see again for some time.</p>
<p>The good news is that the perception of what are great colleges and where smart kids are likely to go will change. Even the stodgy firm I long worked for began to discuss that many more of the best and brightest will now be found at state schools. And ironically, many were always there, but the perception was that with such free flowing money at the top privates, all the smart kids had access which was never really the case.</p>
<p>I have a friend who is currently working in the admissions office of a private college assessing financial aid need for applicants and current students. He has told me that current students are being evaluated with a much more generous eye than new applicants, the goal being to keep the currently enrolled students, which unfortunately will negatively impact the applicants for the freshman class. This is a direct result of budget constraints at the school. It makes sense that this would be playing out across the country at private (and public) schools everywhere. Need blind or not, there is only so much money to go around.</p>
<p>Also, if a student is top caliber with excellent grades and scores, and needs financial aid and scholarships, there are thousands of schools in this country for said student to look at. By limiting choices to “top 20” or “top 50” schools, students with financial need are narrowing their scope dramatically. Smart families and students are looking beyond the obvious choices to see what some lesser-known schools can offer them. I think rankings sometimes turn normally rational people into status-hungry lunatics . Getting a college education should be the goal, more than being able to say “I graduated from yadayada university.”</p>
<p>Our kids are fortunate that their grandparents planned for their college educations and they don’t need FA. If they did, however, I would be researching across the board for schools where they would get a good education for as little money as possible, and would never, ever go into debt to pay for their educations.</p>