college recommendations anywhere in the East 2.7 GPA 1670SAT

College Search & Selection
21

<p>If you interview well and write a good essay (or have some honors classes not weighted into your GPA), strong ECs, and your HS is highly regarded,you might take a shot at St Joes, Moravian or Susquehanna in PA. If not, you might still have a shot at Elizabethtown; Lycoming; Lebanon Valley; Desales; Kings; Bloomsburg; York; Millersville: West Chester and East Stroudsburg in PA–all solid schools.</p>

<p>NJ --Caldwell; Fairleigh; Rider; Montmouth; Montclair; Kean; Centenary. I think Ramapo and Rowan are reaches.</p>

22

<p>Sacred Heart and Salve Regina are possible and LaSalle, Siena and HArtweick are good schools. But spaces are being taken every day, so move fast</p>

23

<p>If you’re upset that sports programs are costing schools too much money, then you should be against Title IX - which forced schools to fund expensive women’s sports that few people want to watch and are complete money drains. = mom</p>

<p>Well, all sports are money drains. In fact,it would surprise most people to know that even schools with high attendance at football and basketball games lose money with regularity on sports. </p>

<p>The problem is a matter of degree. And its a matter of relevance to the cost of attending college, which is why I went on my rant. In the days of much lower tuition at private colleges and very low tuition and room and board at state schools, the sports problem wasnt as significant. Now, as tuition is going through the roof and becoming truly unattainable by most families, its not just an eyesore for accountants, its an obscenity to those of us in the middle class forced to pay these outrageous fees. </p>

<p>I am pro sports programs to a degree. But what are we to do as we see tuition and room and board rising and scholarships/financial aid doled out very very unevenly with preferences that seem discriminatory? </p>

<p>In a perfect world, it seems to me, all financial aid and all scholarships would be need based, and it would be evenly distributed and race/gender “blind” (well, the absence of preferences). Or some other methodology that was more objective and fair, rather than subjective, secretive and preferential. We do not live in a perfect world so we have to deal with the problem of cost, not unlike airplane tickets where the guy next to you in 21A might pay 99.00 for his ticket, you paid 298.00 and the business manager who bought a last minute ticket paid 849.00…all going to the same destination.</p>

<p>I dont know many people who have 200k stuffed in an education savings account for one kid, let alone 2 or 3. The cost of going to a state flagship is about 15k on a good day, with tuition and room/board and fees. We do all make choices and have to live with the consequences. But our educational system is becoming elitist and which favors athletes and the very wealthy, while the middle class gets squeezed. Not going to college is not an option, as you well know. Who wants their kid at a community college, particularly only because of cost concerns? Not me. </p>

<p>For those families lucky enough to have a Title IX student who was qualified to compete at the inter-collegiate level, I offer my congratulations. But most women’s sports coaches arent making much money. But multi million dollar contracts for male coaches in football and basketball are very common in Division 1-A. </p>

<p>Do you have a better answer to this vexing and disturbing trend/problem?</p>

24

<p>I’m against Title IX, because to be honest many people could care less on women’s sports. The only sport that comes to mind which is quite popular in many DI-A schools is volleyball. For everything else like women’s soccer, women’s basketball, and softball; it’s not that popular. For example, when you watch women’s basketball games on TV, is the venue sold-out or near sold-out status? No. For men’s basketball games, are they sold-out or near sold-out status? For most cases, it usually is. It really is a waste of money, no offense. At my current school, students want to start a football team but it’s impossible due to Title IX and a low amount of student support. Title IX crosses this possibility first compared to the student support.</p>

25

<p>*Well, all sports are money drains. *</p>

<p>Not all sports are money drains at all schools. Some schools make a lot of money (net) with football and basketball.</p>

<p>Women sports are huge money drains, and some men’s sports are, too.</p>

<p>*Well, all sports are money drains. In fact,it would surprise most people to know that even schools with high attendance at football and basketball games lose money with regularity on sports.
*</p>

<p>The MONEY is in TELEVISED games, not ticket sales.</p>

<p>There’s also the big money that donors and alumni give because they want their big sports school to do well both academically and athletically.</p>

26

<p>

</p>

<p>Wrong. Texas made $70 million in profit from its football program alone last year. Ohio State, Florida, and Michigan were all above $30 million in profit as well. UNC makes over $10 million per year on its basketball team, and even its mediocre football team generates an $8 million profit each year.</p>

27

<p>I didnt say ALL schools lost money. I said even schools with high attendance at games may lose money. Yes, I know television is where the money is. DOH! I read a recent article about this fact and was surprised to know that UVa and UNC lost money on sports. Only a handful of top named athletic schools make money on sports and most leagues (perhaps all of them) have revenue sharing from television and bowl games. The real issue I was raising had to do with the disparity on how scholarships and financial aid are handed out. I am the first person to say that nobody has an entitlement to any money, but only that if they hand it out (in whatever form) they should hand it out evenly. I favor some level of racial and economic diversity in college admissions, but increasingly we are seeing the white middle class being squeezed to death with fewer and fewer discretionary dollars available to them. When someone with 10% Hispanic blood can get a full ride with a mediocre SAT score and a white kid with a STELLAR SAT score (1350) can’t get any scholarship money and is left to navigate the treacherous waters of FAFSA its simply wrong. That is racial reverse discrimination, in my books, and in violation of the Bakke vs. California Supreme Court decision. Unfortunately the courts have not yet extended the reach of that decision to financial aid/scholarships and it currently works only for raw admissions data. </p>

<p>Again, if tuition and room and board were what they were 30 years ago, we wouldn’t be discussing this issue as we are. Schools charge what they do because they can. And there is NO APPARENT accountability on how they spend it, including the tens of millions of dollars they spend on athletic teams and coaches salaries. </p>

<p>That is my rant. If you don’t agree, fine. We just differ on that point.</p>

28

<p>ghost quote: *I didnt say ALL schools lost money. *</p>

<p>Well, you kind of did. But, you may have just been generalizing.</p>

<p>ghost quote: *Well, all sports are money drains. *</p>

<p>The real issue I was raising had to do with the disparity on how scholarships and financial aid are handed out. I am the first person to say that nobody has an entitlement to any money, but only that if they hand it out (in whatever form) they should hand it out evenly. I favor some level of racial and economic diversity in college admissions, but increasingly we are seeing the white middle class being squeezed to death with fewer and fewer discretionary dollars available to them. **When someone with 10% Hispanic blood can get a full ride with a mediocre SAT score and a white kid with a STELLAR SAT score (1350) can’t get any scholarship money **and is left to navigate the treacherous waters of FAFSA its simply wrong.</p>

<p>I absolutely AGREE with that. At our parish there are 3 kids with a small amount of Cuban blood (and they don’t look the least bit Hispanic, nor do they have a Hispanic last name) yet they got free rides to Vandy. That is just ridiculous. The point of these special considerations is to correct the injustices that a person might get due to his/her “appearance” (of being a URM). Obviously, someone who belongs to a family that has no appearance of being a URM does not experience such discriminations.</p>

<p>My adopted niece is 1/4 black; she looks just like her Italian siblings (not adopted). She has an Italian last name. My brother jokes that she’ll get a free ride somewhere, even tho she has never experienced any discrimination at all. </p>

<p>On the other hand, one of my other brothers’ children are half-Asian. Those nieces and nephews may experience some discrimination, yet they will get no special status (they joke that they get raised eyebrows when people first meet them, because they, too, have Italian last names. lol). </p>

<p>I think URM special consideration should be “means tested.” I live in a very upscale neighborhood that is 1/3 to 1/4 black. The families are very affluent (every adutl is either a high tech person or a high ranking military officer - I have 2 army generals on my street). Should these kids be given free rides over a child from a poor family (black, white, asian, etc)? I don’t think so. Special status should only go to low-income kids - regardless of color.</p>

<p>I also agree that the middle/upper middle class kids get shafted. Everyday on CC we get kids whose families are in that $60k-100k range who can’t afford the schools many of the schools on their lists. They hope for “aid,” but then are shocked to get FA packages that are loaded with loans and/or gaps.</p>

<p>However, the biggest problem is the ranking system which people seem to treat like it’s everything. The ranking system encourages colleges to hire “Enrollment managers” to get the best smart and diverse group of incoming freshmen in hopes of moving up in the rankings.</p>

29

<p>

</p>

<p>Key word is sports. Most schools make plenty of money with their basketball and football teams, only to see less popular sports required under Title IX turn profits into deficits. Football and basketball aren’t the problem; those two sports generate plenty of revenue for most schools, hence the high salaries for their coaches. </p>

<p>Agree with the remainder of your post, though.</p>

30

<p>Also, Hartford, Mt. Saint. Marys (MD), Lynchburg (VA), Canisius (NY), Springfield (MA) and Xavier (OH). Best of luck!</p>