Ability to Pay and other trends in admissions

<p>^^^Keilexandra, you rock.</p>

<p>fogfog, I hear this a lot, and I’m skeptical:

The tricky thing is that everybody in this society is free to define “middle class” as they choose, and most everybody wants to define it to include themselves. We think of ourselves as middle class, lower middle class maybe, but still not really working class and certainly not poor. The online finaid calculators show our EFC to be $12K at our AGI of $75K. How much do you think our EFC would be if we added $45K to that AGI? Answer that question please, and then tell me that the deck is stacked against the more affluent.</p>

<p>hmom - Perhaps I should clarify. I am a Canadian citizen but also a U.S. permanent resident who has lived (and currently live) in the U.S. for half of my life. America will never be a socialist country, much to my dismay, but no reason why its private institutions shouldn’t be commended for trying. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If the school decides that it can no longer continue the endeavor for an educational meritocracy, fine–that is their decision, I may bemoan it but ultimately all I can do is hope for admittance to a school with different institutional priorities. And I have never called need-based financial aid–or financial aid of any type, period–a “right.” Genuine human rights are remarkably few. Most people living in a first-world country have the right to a K-12 education, however amazing or crappy. But neither is a financially-assisted college education a “luxury”–rather, it falls in between, as an extremely important, often life-changing “want” that I believe society has the obligation to help its citizens achieve to the extent that is reasonably possible (cf. common sense).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree, and that’s why there are state schools. I’m very happy the US is not a socialist country, you and I differ there. I come from a large family that couldn’t afford to help much with college. All of my sibs attended state colleges, I was the only one to venture OOS to a private college. I had to work a lot harder than they did summers, it was my choice. All of us have done well.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>For most colleges right now I’d call it their reality as opposed to their decision. Would you feel better if a college in a small town chose to keep their generous aid packages intact while firing enough staff to throw the area into poverty? Should programs be cut that current students chose the college to participate in? These are the choices these schools are facing. What would you have them do?</p>

<p>Colleges that would have to make those kinds of sacrifices to maintain financial aid usually don’t have many “generous aid packages” to begin with.</p>

<p>OTOH, should bathrooms be cleaned less often, or perhaps Middlebury has one Dean of Students instead of one for each Commons (=4, thereabouts?), in order to make less significant cuts to FA? I think that’s a fair trade-off.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Simply untrue. Harvard has been forced to stop a huge building project leaving thousands out of work and an eyesore in a nearby town. The Vanity Fair article on the thread about Harvard’s financial problems would help you understand what the wealthy schools are facing.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/06/harvard.html[/url]”>http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/06/harvard.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>^Oh, you mean Allston. Sorry, my eye skipped over “the area” in your previous post, and I thought you meant throwing the school into poverty. My mistake. </p>

<p>I keep up very well with Harvard’s (and the other elites’) financial woes. The Allston expansion should not have happened in the first place; do you really think that cutting back on financial aid would have preserved it? More pertinently, does Allston > FA in social benefit? That’s a toss-up, and Harvard clearly has chosen the latter.</p>

<p>I agree that Larry Summers was out of control. This impacted Allston and financial aid policies at the top schools. I think that with the huge cash problem all of these schools have right now they are going to have to cut a lot of things. I don’t see it as tragic to take more full pays and reinstate loans for the upper middle class until things recover.</p>

<p>I see it as far more tragic to fire low income workers and compromise academics. We don’t know what these schools have chosen yet.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If you swap “ORM” for “non minority” (which is worse from an admissions/aid standpoint) then the above describes me pretty accurately. And yes, it is squeezing me out. I’m fighting for about 10 minor merit scholarships right now. Minor–meaning $500-$4k, and I’m surprised to hear (read?) myself talking about that much money that way. It’s the only money I have available–no FA, no savings, no income. I’m going to try my hardest to get a good education, but it’s not the academics that are killing me, it’s the money.</p>

<p>I don’t believe that people should expect as a matter of course to get money handed to them on a silver platter. But why wouldn’t they expect it? Education beyond high school is a need, not a want for many people. They got high school handed to them free (and most likely didn’t learn much of any use in it) with the expectation that they could get a college degree as well, which would make the hs diploma worthwhile. </p>

<p>Okay, that’ s the end of my rant about the quality of high school education. But realistically speaking, it would be much smarter to actually go to trade school as many people suggest consistently over lots and lots of these threads and learn carpentry and start a business than to take out loans. At least I could put a roof over my head faster that way. The trouble, of course, is going to start when lots of people start leaving college for other options.</p>

<p>As a former Allston resident, I feel certain that the interruption of Harvard’s expansion plans in the neighborhood, while it may have its short-term economic downside, is not really a source of much grief to most Allstonians. In fact I can pretty much guarantee you that the schadenfreude is flowing very freely in zip code 02134 at the moment.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Personally, I think it far more tragic to continue the cycle of poverty; i.e., end the financial aid programs that do reach the lucky low-income few, so that they don’t have to keep working the low-income jobs that Harvard offers.</p>

<p>^Read the whole thread, the low income appear to be safe at all the top schools.</p>

<p>I did read the whole thread. I wasn’t responding to it. I was responding to you.</p>

<p>Well, then your post makes no sense. The low income will not be impacted by the impending aid changes. But if you think HYPS and company are doing much to change the cycle of poverty in this Country, a quick look at how few low income students actually attend the handful of colleges that tag them and accommodate their need shows its a tiny drop in the bucket.</p>

<p>It’s actually state schools that have the greatest impact on breaking the poverty cycle.</p>

<p>Ok
Well I guess after reading the posts that I am feeling a little more convinced…
…that there will be merit aid for those who deserve it
and fin-aid for those who need it
at the various state and privates…</p>

<p>and that the pot of money is not infinite and there will be disappointments. How each student and family negotiates it remains a personal choice.</p>

<p>To the original question and ability to pay affecting admissions–It must be impacting admissions and I would hazard a guess it will continue to have a stronger impact in the next few admissions cycles</p>

<p>Just throwing this out there…when my siblings and I were in college our parents knew that they most likely wouldn’t get need based FA, and no one even mentioned merit money (we were all good students) so in our family we all started our educations at the local cc. We all finished at least a BS/BA and became successful professionals. Same story for many of our friends/classmates.</p>

<p>Truth here- I did not want to attend cc. I wanted the campus experience and I had the grades and test scores to get into our state flagship. I could have taken out loans and done it, but decided to go to cc, get the most out of it and like it. And I did.</p>

<p>CC might not be for everyone and I realize that we are in a different era now. I was lucky to have a good cc very near my home. But I still don’t understand why so many people turn their noses up at this option.</p>

<p>Community Colleges in our area provide trade and academic education. For whatever reason, the trades are looked down upon by those in academic pursuits. Perhaps it’s the income differences (yes, there are trades that do better than professional salaries but there are many that don’t do near as well too). In California, the route to 4-year degrees via Community College is fairly well-established. In other states, there isn’t that same level of financial support from the state. In California, I have the feeling that the quality of students in Community Colleges is higher than in other states, potentially providing a better peer group experience.</p>

<p>Ultimately you can learn material reading from a book, lecture notes, or watching course videos and doing exercises.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>well said BC Eagle - and I contend there is no such thing as a dream school. Students have 4000 colleges to choose from - 2000 of which they can get a great education from. There is no single dream school for a student. A student can find a great fit and education at a large number of schools if they look hard enough.</p>

<p>As geeps so adeptly pointed out - lots of folks would like a bigger house and better automobile…but they have what they can afford. If someone can’t afford their “dream school” doesn’t mean they can’t get a college education.</p>

<p>hmom5</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>EXCELLENT Post. I am always amazed at the sense of entitlement of some folks. Your last example of the Wharton mom who chooses not to work but wants FA for her child is a typical example I see often.</p>

<p>I’m in NY and our CC where I teach is excellent. Many rich kids party their way out of the dream schools, end up there and talk about how much better a school it is. </p>

<p>We cap classes at 25 ( including the intro classes that usually a big lectures.) </p>

<p>We have strong academic programs and are not a technical school at all.</p>

<p>Our faculty have PhD’s from impressive schools (Ivies included.)</p>

<p>I just worked with a student who ran into difficulties at GW, came home for two semesters and is now at Sarah Lawrence (through my intervention with their admissions department.)</p>

<p>I think the education can be good, but it is a mixed bag in terms of the student population. We have traditional low performing students, high performing students (AP’s in many subjects), students whose parents wouldn’t consider sending them away (very Orthodox Jews for example), minority students, recent immigrants and returning students. It’s an exciting mix to teach and challenging to know where to pitch a class. I think finding a peer group to just “hang out with” is challenging too.</p>

<p>However, the courses are credible and academic. S and D have attended my classes and classes of friends (for fun on days off) and found the equivalent to courses at elite institutions in terms of intellectual depth. Our courses tend to be more interactive because our students often drift off in not engaged. And the kids often talk more than the very careful, excellent students at more traditional institutions.</p>

<p>I am responding to this post to the poster who frequently mentions CA as the state with good CC’s. It’s not the only one. SUNY has a strong system of CC’s and lower tier colleges. The problem is that none of the four Universities has been designated a flagship, so we don’t have that one stellar school. That once intentional in SUNY’s design, but I do think it shortchanges NYers a bit.</p>

<p>Downstate and Upstate are such different animals that we have a strange culture to deal with. The schools are mostly Upstate, but a majority of the students are downstate. Growing up on LI neither of my kids relished the grimness of industrial upstate NY, but since Stony Brook is five minutes away and they spend a lot of time there in hs (music and science projects) they didn’t feel like it was different from HS.</p>

<p>It’s not a question of entitled. If they found schools willing to accommodate, good for them. When the marketplace changes so will strategies.</p>

<p>One of the things I teach at my CC is how much the attitude of the Puritans still effects our American ethos. I think it’s obvious from the posts on this thread.</p>

<p>And what about the rich folk who are entitled to tax money for tuition for their kids? That happens a lot. How could they feel about a sliding scale at publics? They would rebel. Socialism of a different sort.</p>

<p>For the record, I worked two jobs throughout my kids’ college years to pay for tuition. And I worked to save it all when they were little, but disastrous business decisions and a change in the business climate after 9/11 forced that money to be used as a bail out for my H’s business.</p>

<p>My kids did apply to state schools as financial safeties, but both did qualify for tippy top need-blind schools and received generous FA packages. Did I feel entitled? No, but I did feel grateful because I <em>had</em> raised them to strive for school that uniquely met their needs, and each was able to achieve that. </p>

<p>I still fail to see where is the foul? Especially since I am devoting my life to teaching kids, some of whom would have no other way to get an education.</p>