Chicago - No Barriers

<p>There simply are not that many low income students with high stats, particularly test scores. So you let the test scores go, and look at grades, but then you look at difficulty of courses, and it s a problem. Not for admitting them, but keeping them in there. It’s a huge problem even with extra support. A lot of schools have summer prep programs for such students and academic support, and it still doesn’t work out. Not doing kids any favors doing that.</p>

<p>Yes, Somuch2learn, we beat the bushes to get the kids, and most of them did’n’t last. Waste of resources. So money for fin aid we ended up giving to people who truly did not need it, some who had been paying out of pocket.</p>

<p>So maybe the support needs to start earlier than the summer before college. I don’t have answers, but I do know that solutions are needed. Did the board approach just public high schools, or also private ones? The students themselves can’t do much about the rigor of their classes and they may not even know that their test scores aren’t competitive as they’re likely in the highest range of those attending their school. Access to community college classes during high school and test prep within the school could address some of these issues. With funding for those programs and mentoring from local college students, the top students would be better prepared for college. I do believe that the top students do have the ability to succeed and what they need is more support financial and otherwise. </p>

<p>This spring take a look at the scholarship programs geared to lower income students and read the stories of those who didn’t make it and couldn’t get admitted to the colleges which provide great financial aid. There’s thousands of them. I haven’t heard anyone say that the reason applicants, all of the applicant, don’t get admitted to Harvard is because they aren’t qualified. It’s known that it’s because they can only admit a limited number. These scholarship programs are highly competitive in much the same way. One of the things which I think further hurts those who don’t receive these scholarships is that notification goes out so late in the spring that it’s likely hard for them to scramble for alternatives. Of course they should have several backup plans, but who would have advised them of the need for that? I didn’t notice the programs promoting that. Mentoring is available on a very limited basis prior to submitting applications or being accepted.</p>

<p>Maybe that financial aid money should have been earmarked for those in the freshman class rather than the seniors and there could have been ongoing support for the students throughout high school.</p>

<p><<<
Personally I think there’s more highly qualified, low income students than there are spaces for them in the top schools.
<<<</p>

<p>Yes, when you only consider custodial (usually mom) parent income. </p>

<p>Unfortunately there’s no shortage in the US of two parent families (households) with very low incomes. </p>

<p>But it is that across-the-board waiver of the non-custodial parent requirement that is going to be a huge draw. Aside from the dollar issue, it is often extremely difficult for the custodial parent to get cooperation from the NCP. My d. almost had to leave Barnard her junior year because her dad hadn’t filed his tax returns for the previous year, much less the current year, and wasn’t giving the financial aid department what they wanted. Every year there was a hassle - one year he balked at paying the $25 fee that College Board demanded of NCP’s to fill out the forms. The NCP’s that don’t have money don’t want to be bothered, and the ones that do are unwilling to share the info. And schools are very reluctant to grant any sort of waivers – there are very big hurdles there. </p>

<p>@calmom yes definitely. UC’s approach will help many who wouldn’t have qualified previously. I’m sure there are so many who are shut out of aid because of NCPs whether it be their refusal to provide info, or to provide support when funds are available. </p>

<p>Please bear in mind that my cynicism about this new endeavor has nothing to do with the boon that it offers to those students and their families who could benefit from it. I agree that the non custodial parent wavier is going to be a big deal thing. THere is no shortage of students who are hampered and outright denied the opportunity to go to a school because a NCP refuses to pay or even just give his financials info. And there isn’t much one can do when any parent refuses to coorperate, but this mitigate the situation where the balking or non compliant parent happens to be NCP. If it’s a custodial parent, an intact family and the parent won’t go along with things, then too bad. But this does loosen thing up for a certain sector of students, and I am glad of that. </p>

<p>Also, I am glad that there are funds and programs for students who are low income. The more the better, however, I believe that at such schools as UCh it 's important that support is given throughout the 4 years with ALL students encouraged to go for help as needed. Yes, most schools now have summer prep programs to help those without the academic preparation get a good start and be up to par, but one summer, intensive though it might be, and it usually isn’t, does not make up for a life time of disadvantages academically. The support needs to be continued throughout the school years. Schools do this for athletes many times, or the coaches personally come up with solutions. But these students are often left to flounder and make up too large of the portion of students who drop out. Instead it’s easier to broaden, stretch the definition of need and make it more available to other categories of students To see how a program like this truly benefits the low income kids, look for the number and % of PELL eligible kids going up. It rarely does that much. </p>

<p>I simply have not seen hoards of highly qualified low income kids not applying to highly selective colleges The ones pointed out to me, would not have gotten into such schools without considerable weight put on holistic factor, especially that they were disadvantaged, and you can come up with those stats easily by just widening that consideration. The sad part is the actual fact of life that there ARE so few low income,disadvantaged kids that meet the bar of consideration placed for everyone. That’s something that needs to be addressed long before college application time.</p>

<p>@cptofthehouse I agree 100% with what you said in paragraphs 1 and 2. I think I’ve posted the stats on some colleges which were the best, and those which were the worst, at graduating Pell Grant students. At the best schools they graduated at the same rate as the student population overall, or even exceeded that rate, and at the worst, their rate of graduating was abysmal. I agree that many colleges could do more to make sure that all students get the support they need to succeed. And I agree that when scholarship programs get more and more applicants, rarely does the number accepted go up, the competition just becomes more fierce. These students aren’t just competing to get into the “school of their dreams” they’re competing to be able to attend college. </p>

<p>In that same same link I gave in a previous post, there’s very interesting information which I hadn’t realized. The threshold for the poverty level for a family (of 4 I think) has now been reduced from $30K to $23K. So families making from 23 to 30K will no longer have an EFC of 0 and the Pell Grants for families earning above this level will be reduced as well. At the same time, the tax credits for college tuition have been increased. As was pointed out in the article, it’s usually not the lowest income families who benefit from this. I think it’s great that more is being done to help out the middle class families, but it shouldn’t come at the expense of the other program.</p>

<p>Do you have any studies I could see which show that there’s so few high achieving lower income students? My opinion is based on what I’ve seen personally and what I see, admittedly from online accounts, regarding the highly selective scholarship programs. I would think that a lot of these students are ones enrolling at community colleges because that was all they could afford. For some students this is a great way to start, and for others it’s simply not the best choice. Two years later they’re still faced with the same financial barriers and even fewer scholarship and financial aid options.</p>

<p>Yes, student preparedness is a problem affecting more than just the lower income students. What would ideally happen is that some colleges from the different tiers would be able to provide financial aid which meets need. As their endowments are much lower than the elites and state funding is often much reduced from what it was, the only thing I can see is help from the federal level. It doesn’t have to be just a “hand out” but could be tied to service as it is for those wanting to teach math and science in high schools. There must be a way to expand these programs to make a college education more affordable. In my opinion these programs should be available to all income levels as long as the student is willing to pay back with their time and service. As we read here so often, there are students from upper income families for whom there is no financial support. These programs would help them as well.</p>

<p>I think this will open the doors for those who might not have otherwise considered this school. It will remain to be seen how this increases their applications…and low income accepted students…or not.</p>

<p>But that isn’t the point. They are giving it a go, and I hope others will follow.</p>

<p>Oh,my. I used to have studies galore. My job as a statistical analyst was to compile stats on all kinds of studies, and one thing that was always a constant in every single case, was the correlation between educational/academic achievement and income. The same with socioeconomics, but even income alone did it clearly. A problem is that these students are often accepted but not given the support they need. They really should be treated as athletes that are accepted who are clearly not prepared for college work, but they are not. A college prep session over the summer is simply not enough. </p>

<p>We are not talking about a school like Harvard. HPY have the luxury of getting the very top of every category. But the pickings start get slimmer as the one goes down the selectivity list, and it gets sparse very quickly. </p>

<p>University of Chicago is one of the most rigorous schools in the country IMO and I always felt that it was underrated in the rankings until recently, and I now feel that the USN&WR rank for it is now too high due to the tough academic atmosphere that makes it a less enjoyable place than some schools, particularly for those not well prepared academically. THough just my opinion, I know the school very well personally, not just going from anecdotes. </p>

<p>Purely my opinion coming up here and many very well informed educators disagree: I thinK we are doing as much and really more in encouraging low income kids to apply and facilitating their entrance into highly selective schools. The money would be better used in getting them graduated, getting a more successful infrastructure in there before beating the bushes trying to get more to apply. </p>

<p>I sadly think that funds that are supposed to go toward getting more low income kids to be able to go to UCh are being diverted to less needy situation because the saturatation point has been long exceeded in that regard-there really aren’t more to encourage to go there successfully So instead, the money is going to areas where the need is not so severe. This is a true bonanza for those NCP’s who were thinking about paying for their kids’ educations and could do it, were going to do it. If their kids get into UCh, they just saved a boat load of money. Thankfully the accept rate to UCh is such that it isn’t going to be a gold rush of sorts. I know folks who would separate, find an official separate residence for those college years for that kind of savings. PROFILE makes it non worthwhile to do so, and FAFSA schools rarely meet need, so not worth the trouble, but for a hundred thousand in savingso or more in 4 years, it’s worth it.</p>

<p>I’ve done a bit of searching to see if there’s any way to find out the GPAs and test scores for lower income students and see if there’s a way to come up with a number of how many could conceivably be competitive for the “meets full need” schools. While I haven’t found that yet, I did find this. <a href=“Your Guide for College Financial Aid - Finaid”>Your Guide for College Financial Aid - Finaid;

<p>The Pell Grant recipients do have lower high school GPAs overall. 21.2% of Pell Grant students had a high school GPA of A- to A, whereas 27.5 % of the non-recipients had this GPA. Interestingly the gap narrowed considerably for the college GPA - 23.2% vs 25.2% respectively. That was on page 5 and on page 7 it shows that the graduation rates for Pell Grant recipients, and non-recipients as well, is highest at the most selective colleges. No surprise there.</p>

<p>And I apologize for taking off on this tangent. I thoroughly agree that it’s great that UC has initiated this program. I also hope that more colleges will follow suit. If they don’t think it’s a good idea now, they may change their opinion when the admission stats show up in the spring.</p>

<p>@cptofthehouse what you brought up in your final paragraph is exactly what I’ve been thinking as well. I would hate to see families purposely separating just for a free ride when the college expenses would already be within their means. I’m sure that with vacation and other properties this wouldn’t be too hard to do on paper. I’m likely naive but I would think this kind of deception would be an embarrassment to these families. </p>

<p>You might want to wait and see what type of questions will be on Chicago’s own supplemental financial aid form before hypothesizing sham separations to save college money. Just because they say they won’t require NCP information doesn’t mean they won’t ask for documentation of date of separation or divorce, or even more questions geared to finding undisclosed financial resources. </p>

<p>I’m sure you can find anecdotal information of some family, somewhere, that separated so that the husband’s income didn’t have to be entered on the financial aid forms – but as a person who has lived through marriage, separation and divorce, and all the stress and strain that comes with it - I think it’s dismissive to hypothesize some huge benefit to parents at a college that currently has a single digit admit rate. It’s a pretty big lifestyle adjustment required for a long-shot scenario </p>

<p>It’s really not fair to negate the difficulties that single parents so often face by coming up with a scenario of well-off parents who look for ways to cheat the system. </p>

<p>Personally, I wouldn’t argue that NCP’s should be left completely off the hook – just that there should be a lot more flexibility when it comes to waiving that information. My daughter was age 7 when her father moved out – that’s not the same as a family who separates when the kid is in 11th grade. </p>

<p>Calmom, Schools which require the CSS profile have every right to seek out info from the NCP. I really think that they should hold hard and fast on that aspect. Although I sympathize with the struggles of single moms raising kids on one income wth zero support from Dad, I feel that the NCP should be legally compelled to complete the needed forms. With the age of majority at 18 (big mistake in my book) I know it’s a leagal dilemma. But just like when a single mom files for food stamps, the state goes after dad for reimbursement, the fed should take the same actions for kids applying for Pell and subsided loans. If NCP isn’t filing taxes, then NCP should have two choices 1) submit a non-filler certification or 2) be prosecuted for tax evasion. </p>

<p>Some states (new Jersey) require child support until age 23 while the offspring is full time college student. Some states (california) will not enforce support after age 18, even if a private agreement is in place between parents. What’s needed is a federal madandate (when federal funding like pell / subsized loans is involved) that the NCP is on the hook for full time college students. </p>

<p>Then maybe the colleges can adopt different policies for kids in New Jersey - it makes no sense in a state like California where the NCP knows damn well that he’s off the hook legally. Why should the NCP cooperate? What possible benefit is there to him? His obligation is -0- whether the kid goes to community college or to Harvard. </p>

<p>Calmom, what I’m saying is that colleges should have efforcable policies which transend state boundries. NCP should NOT be “off the hook”, where pell/subsidised loan receiptiants are concerned. The FED should require FAFSA from both parents. NCP should pay at least the EFC. Also (off topic, I know) setting the age of majority to 18, really complicates the aid situation.<br>
You could always sue your ex in an effort to obtain his finacial reports for CSS profile purposes…</p>

<p>I can guess why UC has moved away from the CSS profile towards incoprorating their own propiertary form and along with the FAFSA. IMO, CSS profile (and college borad in general) is money grubbing monoply… I had a very hardtime enerting all my persoanl info into a form which I know full well will be sold to direct response marketers. </p>

<p>The NCP should not be compelled to pay a single penny unless intact families are legally compelled to pay exactly the same way. Johnny can’t attend the school he wants because his married parents decide they just cannot afford it, but the government will force Jane’s father to pay? The government fines you for college for children who have been taken from you, because your spouse decided she would be happier raising them without you around and walked out on you? Insane.
Treating divorced parents differently from married parents violates the Equal Protection clause.</p>

<p>FCCDad, Since the FAFSA considers parental income, then the parent (custodial) is assumed to be financially contributors to education. That whats called the EFC )expected FAMILY contribution) Why does a NCP get a pass? </p>

<p>Why not have federal policy for students recieving federal aid which requires the NCP to file a FAFSA, as well? NCP doesn’t have to pay, only that his/her economic standing be considered? Of course the NCP can decide not pay (if his/her state allows such nonesence).</p>

<p>“Treating divorced parents differently from married parents violates the Equal Protection clause.” That’s excaty what the current FAFSA protocal does now–treats married and divorced parents differently. If parents aren’t married, then only one parent’s financical situation is considered for the EFC. Whereas, in dual parent households both fincacial situations are considered. </p>

<p>Actually…if parents are not living together, then only the custodial parent is listed on the FAFSA. If the parents are living together, regardless of their marital status, both parents are listed.</p>