<p>Jersey? You got a problem with the way we talk??? I’ll give you a problem…</p>
<p>I’m in the middle of season 5 of the Sopranos. netflix.
I love how you people tawk. Bada Bing.</p>
<p>Hee hee - good to see a little humor on this thread.</p>
<p>I think AnotherJerseyMom is upset because she herself and her spouse have struggled really, really hard to give her children a good shot at the brass ring of elite college admissions and now they are hearing about kids with lower scores, lower grades from “disadvantaged” backgrounds step ahead of their kids in line. I do understand her feelings on this, coming from a background that was certainly not advantaged. My grandfather, a copper miner, was taught to read by my dad – just to give you as sense of things. What I think ANJM is not understanding is that “development” kids are actually not at all taking up a lot of the coveted spaces at these schools without the requisite scores/grades. I would hazard a guess that legacies and celebrities and their kids account much more for that bottom 25% on the charts. (Hope I don’t get flamed for that statement.) I’m willing to give Harvard and others the benefit of the doubt that they do a careful and discerning job of identifying disadvantaged kids who truly have the goods and can become good scholars (or already are). After four years on scholarship in a private hs with little to no “diversity” my senior is very much ready for a more diverse set of classmates. It’s a delicate dance. These top schools are to be commended for trying to achieve fairness and broad representation. An impossible task probably but even when the agendas does not favor my own children I have to admire and support the effort.</p>
<p>AnotherNewJerseyMom - Try to relax. Your child is brilliant and will light up the sky with his accomplishments. And you are brilliant, too. Just take the glory and relax. That’s what I’m trying to do right now. I know it’s hard. Sounds like we’ll both spend a ton on tuition but really aren’t we lucky??</p>
<p>You see, Marite, some of us come around if you give us time. And my kids attended public schools with 40% reduced or free school lunch for nine years. Please believe me when I say I’ve seen quite a lot out there. All the kids – every single last one of them – knows about Harvard and can access a computer. Really.</p>
<p>For whatever worth what I meant to say “after all under new proposed FA policy, the high intelegent kid from low-income family get the ivy education free. the high intelegent kid from middle- uper-middle income family still have to pay 10% of their income”. Why not read the whole post aside extract couple of words from a sentance?</p>
<p>No, marite, I won’t trade the place with those families, I don’t envy them either. We worked long and hard just climbed out from there a few years ago. So that our kids don’t have to go through the hard choice routine that we faced before. We put ourselves through college(very low rank public) without any FA (We diddn’t know we were eligibale to apply. We just chose what we thought we could afford at time without any debt). Having been 100% self sufficient all our lifes. So now we can afford to pay the ‘due’ for our kids if he need it.</p>
<p>All my saying is in a limited resource society, people should have fair chance to access the high demanded resources once they paid their due, be it intelegency, money, legacy, etc. … which is not the case at previouse H’s FA policy. It is clearly stated by dean of admittion at H that $120k~$180k family kids never applied because they thought they can’t afford, what I interprete is these middle- and uper middle class kids were shutout by H’s old FA package.</p>
<p>Now question for you, if you think middle class kids having unfair advantage in SAT score etc. Then how many head points do you think should give low-income kids, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, etc. to make things fair? The disadvantaged yet intelegent kids in this link, clearly don’t need help on this regard.</p>
<p>[Talent</a> scouts — The Harvard University Gazette](<a href=“http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/12.06/99-admissions.html]Talent”>http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/12.06/99-admissions.html)</p>
<p>Thanks, shortstick for your explaination, I diddn’t get ‘sic’ meaning before (guess need using google more).</p>
<p>I rest my case.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, the only problem is that the “explanation” was far from being valid as it implied a knowledge of the intention of the posters using a particular term. It requires a healthy dose of idle speculation to decree that the use of the term “sic” represents a cruel attempt to “mock another poster.” </p>
<p>For the record, this is what google would show: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fwiw, one who is truly interested in fostering a more pleasant sharing of ideas should not be this quick to judge and deliberately miscontrue the intent of others, especially for the sole purpose of satisfying an outside agenda.</p>
<p>mammal, I’m not upset all with what you said that low-income kids come before my kids. </p>
<p>I send my kid to public school all his life (addmitted a good one). The school district is quite diversity. From low-income to high-income. From blue collar working class kids to university professor’s kids. All kids live in the same school district have the same opportunity. </p>
<p>What I believe is free competetion. The best comes to the top. If my kid’s intelegent is not on par with top kids, then so be it. I wouldn’t even want him to be there. That’s the reason we never pushed or helicoptered him. What I believe is people should be taught to be self sufficient so the whole society will advance.</p>
<p>
I’m with on this. A low-income student is not an automatically hook in college addmission. They still need their ‘intelegent’ ticket to get in. While legacy and and celebrity are hooks (imo, URM also a hook, but this is another can of worm I’m not going to open). … I posted somewhere earlier that I see Harvard’s joint actions (new FA package, dropping EA/ED) is on purpose to ‘weed out weak’ applicants. Really statistics show most early applicants are "legacies, celebrities, atheltes, etc. Now dropping EA/ED, they could view the whole applicants pool in one sweep, it would make it much easier to say to the less legancies or less celebrities “Sorry, your kid’s stats is too low compare to others.”…they must have decades, decades long tradition or history to take in these legacies/celebrities kids. Old habbit is hard to break. But now, at addmittion commitee, case can be EASIELY made against these kids that their stats are too low to meet Harvard standards given the larger qualifying applicants, if someone advocated…of course this is my conjunct speculation, but I hope it will happen in reality.</p>
<p>With all that said, I’m trying to be devil’s advocater here, I don’t think Harvard’s undergraduate education is that money worth. (especially in my kid’s case). But their graduate program are top notched world class. In general money worth order among HYP. I would rank 1) Princeton (they have guid professor for each kid at senior year. It is menditory to write junior and senior research papers. This is not required today by any top school, as far as I heard). 2) Yale (Over 90% of their under classes are taught by full professors. In some departments their faulcty/student ration is 7:1, I heard from their science toure). 3) Harvard (bigest name, but some most important under class was taught by graduate students. One of my friends cousine who was a granduate student there used to give lectual on core courses for some under sience majore).</p>
<p>
Smilly. Yes, really. This is what my hubbie kept telling me. Not to spend too much time here. </p>
<p>off to prepare new years eve dinner.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I worked my way through my undergraduate education. I didn’t borrow money then, because I didn’t think it was wise to rack up debt at that age. (I might rethink that today.) My parents believed in encouraging my independence, so most years they didn’t fill out the FAFSA forms for me. (One year when they did, the determination was that our family was JUST too prosperous for me to receive any grants, but my parents, still encouraging my independence, didn’t pay the calculated EFC.) I’ll let someone else judge the rank of my public university, but anyway I gave list price the major emphasis when shopping for colleges. Later I did the same again when I married and worked my wife through school (with her help from working too). </p>
<p>So today what I say to parents is, yeah, let’s shop around, and see what offers our children get. Various colleges are pursuing various pricing strategies. A bright, diligent student had best apply widely and make sure to apply to colleges with more than one kind of financial aid/scholarship policy if money is a concern. These is, in the worst case, still the choice of joining the armed forces (which the smartest guy from my school district did, even though his parents were professionals, because they too believed in encouraging independence) or otherwise working and saving money for a while before starting undergraduate studies. For a learner who gets above a certain age, the parents’ income no longer counts for financial aid eligibility under certain kinds of financial aid plans. On my part, I’ll try to make it possible for my children to start college as young as I did, complete their degrees in fewer years than I did, and attend “better” colleges than I did. It’s up to them to decide which colleges to apply to, which to attend if admitted to more than one, and what career to pursue after graduation.</p>
<p>mammall:</p>
<p>The information about the discrepancy between AP and non-AP students’ access to computers comes straight from a teacher. It’s not my own. Do low-income students have access to computers? Probably, but not as conveniently as those who have computers at home. And certainly not while they are working 20 hours a week as many do in our high school. For them, knowledge of computers is a bit like knowledge of Harvard. They know they exist; but how to get access to them is a whole another ballgame.</p>
<p>Heck, College Confidential provides plenty of evidence that even children of professionals can have trouble finding information about college policies online.</p>
<p>I lived in a poverty-stricken area for many years and know kids who don’t even have phone service. Back in the day my husband filled out a free application he got from a school he’d never heard of. That’s how he ended up attending a school at the top of many kids’ wish lists here. Until you’ve actually lived in an area like we did for so long I think it is hard to realize how much some kids overcome in reaching the levels they do. I know I had absolutely no idea. Thank goodness for holistic admissions.</p>
<p>xiggi, nice to see you in this thread. Know you are an intelegent young man, read your ‘best SAT game plan’ in another thread, have to say agree with you complete there. What is your side agenda?</p>
<p>
Then what do you feel about those parents pay $45k~$50k after tax money out of pocket? That would be families with income > $120k under old FA policy; family with income > $180k (even slightly) under new FA policy. And there are property tax, insurrance, utilities, etc. and household maintainance cost. </p>
<p>From the same linked article posted by tockadult.
So now loans are removed from family income < $60k’s FA package, all you expected to do is work-study job, which college guranteed for you. Back in our days, we have to go out side campus find the job ourselves.</p>
<p>From the same linked article:
</p>
<p>Yet, there always will be people who were not born with silver spoon but expect everything handed to them with silver plate.</p>
<p>Happy new year to those at west coast. 15 min to go.</p>
<p>Interesting sentence embedded in this article. Yale’s president says the “historic” announcement Yale will make later this month will affect families earning up to $200K. This may mean that they are outdoing Harvard or that families making $200K but with multiple kids in college or other extenuating circumstances will get bigger breaks. Can’t wait to see what Yale has up its sleeve.</p>
<p>[Bloomberg.com:</a> News](<a href=“http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aUFbjKLbOc7A]Bloomberg.com:”>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aUFbjKLbOc7A)</p>
<p>Holy moly… I hope this is true.</p>
<p>By the way, the Harvard plan doesn’t cutoff at 180k as some have assumed.</p>
<p>Now this make sense. Thanks.
Is this applying to only one kid in college? Usually if you have multiple kids in college, HYP will extend their FA beyond the normal line. But one kid?</p>
<p>four years too late for us. only one quarter of full freight tuition left…</p>
<p>anotherNJmom–No one will know what it means until President Levin makes the big announcement. If the 200K rule applies to people with one child in college, I’m curious what the formula will be. If the changes involve simply being more generous to people making 200K with special circumstances, then the changes may be underwhelming. As with the Harvard plan, the devil will be in the details.</p>
<p>It will be fascinating to see how these changes play out 10, 20 years down the line.</p>
<p>For all we know, Harvard, could have beean running this program for the last 1,2, or 3 years as a test before formal announcement.</p>
<p>The New York Times on Yale’s announcement of today: </p>
<p>[Yale</a> to Increase Endowment Spending - New York Times](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/education/07cnd-yale.html?ex=1200373200&en=de22c443d8b98034&ei=5070&emc=eta1]Yale”>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/education/07cnd-yale.html?ex=1200373200&en=de22c443d8b98034&ei=5070&emc=eta1) </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
Throw Princeton out the race?</p>
<p>
Yes. Indeed. Even by then I don’t have any kid. Just like to see finantial will not be a factor to restrict brightest kids applying and/or attending nation’s top colleges.</p>