<p>I've seen some people claiming that 100% BF is the reason why they'll be able to go to UF.</p>
<p>Should we count on the Bright Futures program to be there?</p>
<p>Due to our economic situation and the recent budget cuts, I emailed Florida Department of Education to ask if the Bright Futures program may get cut. They did not say there is a guarantee that the Bright Futures program will not get cut. All they said was that education is very important to Charlie Crist.</p>
<p>Here is a transcript:</p>
<p>-</p>
<p>Dear Sir or Madam:</p>
<p>Thank you for your e-mail. The educational needs and aspirations of Florida’s students are particularly important to Governor Crist. All areas of education face yearly legislative review the Florida Department of Education works closely with the legislature to minimize the effects of all financial aid budget changes that would affect Florida Bright Futures students. </p>
<p>i thought about the same thing, when i saw students with the 100% academic scholarship, and yes uf has raise tuition and budget cuts are even worse. But at the same time, UF did not admit everyone who had the 100% prepaid, but who knows, the majority most likely did, I believe it may be the same from last year, and the stats probably increase a little bit now.</p>
<p>The Bright Futures Program cost the state $436 million last year. Keep in mind the original cost back in 1997 was only $70 million a year. Change it or lose it.... The finances just are not there.</p>
<p>Also stop letting people with 970's on the SAT get a 75% free ride. Let's atleast set the standard to the national average, and not the bottom 35th percentile of all test takers. Why are we investing in kids who need remediation? I am sick of these hillbilly higher education policies that are driving the State University System into bankruptcy.</p>
<p>The 970 SAT is probably Florida's average, which is below the national one. Nevertheless, Bright Futures shouldn't exist to reward students for being average. It should exist to reward exceptional achievement.</p>
<p>If I could set the standards myself, I would probably require a 3.4 Weighted and 1100 SAT for the 75%, and a 3.8 Weighted and 1300 SAT for the 100%. Also, the state should consider raising the community service requirement. Currently, it's only 75 hours for the 100% reward, and there is none for the 75%. My private school required 120 hours from every student throughout high school, and it's really not hard at all. I will still have mercy, however. Raise the 100% requirement to 100 hours, and the 75% to 75. (Ha! The numbers match!) In this economy, encouraging students to volunteer with struggling-nonprofits for scholarship money would be a wonderful idea.</p>
<p>Those are just general numbers I came up with without any detailed research though.</p>
<p>they need requirements where both good test takers and bad test takers can obtain it. and everyone cannot volunteer due to family or other situations.. they trying to make it fair and that's probably why the standards are like that. plus they do have national merit for the high achieving students. and maybe bright futures is really for the average? i dont know but it is pretty fair where all students can reach these requiremenets and do not have to worry about loans so much where many people do not like to pay in timely manner.</p>
<p>people should always be able to volunteer, especially what they ask for. You could spend a couple hours a week after school volunteering there and get the required hours in no time. Not to mention the four years plus you have to do it</p>
<p>I don't know: $436 million a year coming out of the state coffers to support students who need remediation sounds like a terrible investment to me.</p>
<p>This is not a candy store we are talking about here. It's time to change the requirements and for the state to start getting serious about who we are investing in.</p>
<p>Also remember President Obama promised to create a scholarship of $4,000 a year to needy students, and University of Florida has the Florida Opportunity Scholars Program to pay for first-generation college students.</p>
<p>Also did you all hear about all the Florida students who were eligible for millions in Pell Grants, and they did not even bother to fill out the necessary paperwork (this happend all over the state).</p>
<p>I have no sympathy for lazy students people who can't even try for their own funding.</p>
<p>Maybe some tweaking of the requirements is in order. Someone has said that some kids just aren't good test-takers. As a good test-taker myself, and a parent of good test-takers, I know that this skill (in addition to actual knowledge of the subject being tested) has been a tremendous advantage in academic life.</p>
<p>Maybe for the 75% they could create a table that requires higher grades for kids with lower test scores, and and higher test scores for kids with lower grades. Remember that the 75% opens the doors of higher education to a lot of kids who would not have that option otherwise, and I think that's a good thing, and in the long run a bargain for tax-payers. I think the 100% level should stay very high in both the score and grade requirements.</p>
<p>"Also did you all hear about all the Florida students who were eligible for millions in Pell Grants, and they did not even bother to fill out the necessary paperwork (this happend all over the state).</p>
<p>I have no sympathy for lazy students people who can't even try for their own funding."</p>
<p>SSobick-
I understand that you come from a conservative point of view, but calling all kids who didn't get Pell paperwork done "lazy" is a bit too much. I haven't had to fill out that paperwork myself, but I have had a taste of bureaucracy. I'm a middle-class, college educated individual, have done my own taxes forever, and yet dread the stupid FAFSA every year. And I KNOW all the answers.</p>
<p>Some of these "lazy" kids have parents in prison, or absent, or are living with a grandparent with limited information AND technology skills. Not everyone has the internet. Not everyone can pull out the file with all the required info to fill out these forms. Some of these kids need some help with this.</p>
<p>As a conservative, and a tax-paying Floridian, I think we should do everything we can to open the doors of post-secondary education to our most at-risk citizens. From a purely dollars and cents perspective (ignoring my opinion that I think it's just morally right) we'll get that money back in a lifetime of taxes on higher earnings. </p>
<p>There's an expression I have heard that I think fits here - some folks are born on third base, but think they hit a triple.</p>
<p>To stretch the analogy (to the breaking point- sorry), I have three third-base born kids. I have worked with a lot of kids who were born outside the ballpark to parents who have never seen a baseball bat. If we want runs scored by everyone, those kids are going to need some help.</p>
<p>Bright Futures needs, more than anything else, a means test. There are plenty of students here in Gainesville who drive sports cars and live in fancy apartment complexes while, if the stats are correct, are on a full ride to UF. I lived next door to a family that took annual trips to Europe and Mexico, bought their kids cars at 16, and then pressed them to go to a state school on BF. Meanwhile, there is a hiring freeze at UF and many departments have seen brain drain to schools that can offer competitive salaries to high level professors.</p>
<p>Bottom line: Bright Futures should go to kids who are scholars and in need.</p>
<p>Several economists, I believe at UNF, are arguing Bright Futures should be revamped to make it need-based, not merit-based. The argument is quite sound, as far as it goes.</p>
<p>The economists argue that the cost of BF is borne mainly by the poor (who disproportionately buy the lottery tickets that fund BF) for the benefit of the "rich" (who disproportionately score higher on the SAT). Thus, they argue, money is taken from the poor to give to the "rich."</p>
<p>Instead, they argue, lottery money should be directed back to the poor who pay the "tax" that funds BF in the form of lottery tickets. Need-based BF would accomplish what these economists view as a higher social good, more needy students attending college.</p>
<p>This argument apparently has some credence among certain legislators. In any event, economic reality may force changes to BF regardless of these arguments.</p>
<p>BTW, my own view of the lottery is that is a tax (and a voluntary one at that) on people who are very bad at math. So what if it disproportionately benefits those who are good at math.</p>
<p>so there is a seperate application for the pell grant besides fasfa? because a representative told one of my friends this, but gc said she do not believe it, she said fasfa covers pretty much everything that comes from the government.</p>
<p>From the Naples Daily News article posted by Ssobick</p>
<p>"University of North Florida economics professors Mary Borg and Harriet A. Stranahan explored who funds Bright Futures and who reaps its awards in a study they conducted in 2000.</p>
<p>"Ultimately, they concluded that the program was 'tantamount to an income redistribution program from non-white, low-income, uneducated households to white, rich, well-educated households.'</p>
<p>"The reason for this, Borg said, is because the lottery is a regressive form of revenue, since its flat rates to play take a bigger chunk of income away from those with lower incomes than those with higher incomes.</p>
<p>"Additionally, her research showed that minorities, people with lower incomes and the lowest educated, tended to spend the most on the lottery, in effect funding Bright Futures.</p>
<p>"This wouldn’t be a problem, however, if those people were the ones whose futures were getting brighter as a result of the program, but Borg and Stranahan’s research also concluded that those same people are the ones who are least likely to receive Bright Futures.</p>
<p>“'Minorities with lower incomes and lower-educated parents tend to have lower test scores due to their having fewer advantages at home,' Borg said.</p>
<p>"Without high enough SAT and ACT scores, students cannot receive the scholarship.</p>
<p>all schools do not require volunteering service, i am aware some programs do like IB, but some schools have the AICE program and there is no requirement. And at the same time everyone still may not be able to volunteer even though it is hard to believe with just contributing 2hrs after school, you'll be suprised at all the obstacles many students face and that is why colleges/universities have such programs for these type of students. its sad but it is reality.</p>
<p>Who cares what some Tier 4 professor at UNF thinks. She can spew that class warfare rhetoric at the wall for all that I care.</p>
<p>We should have the scholarship be merit-based so the the best & brightest do not leave the state (regardless of the economic background). It's an investment, not a social program.</p>
<p>well some leave b/c it is their dream to leave. and some leave because they can pay the extra money oos but so far many people love bright futures and the best and brightest even are happy with it b/c it is not something so hard where they have to crash over to get. but why are you upset about the standards for bright futures again?? was it b/c the economic crisis and budget cuts at the universities?</p>
<p>Whatever school these professors attend, they ALL earned a Ph.D! Now you're associating a professor's intelligence with the school where they teach? There are Ivy League educated professors teaching throughout the state university system everywhere in Florida. Do you seriously believe their merit is tied to the school they teach at?</p>
<p>A lobbyist for a private schools group told me some legislators are indeed listening to these UNF profs, an opportunity to make BF more "fair" being presented by the economic downturn.</p>
<p>Look I will ask you point blank: do you want the state to invest in Florida's best & brightest, or those who need remediation?</p>
<p>Because at a cost of $436 million and CLIMBING we can't afford to do both. Lot's of changes are in store come this upcoming legislative session. Those who fight for a merit-based scholarship should be ready, willing, and able to fight to keep our portion of the pie.</p>