Do Colleges Actually Prefer to Admit Wealthy Students?

<p>Also it is so popular to refer to access to tutoring. But the funny thing is that high-achieving students rarely use it. At from my experience tutors ae more common for B students (and down). Similar with prep courses (plus their usefullness for strong students is very questionable). So it is really strange to discuss punishing kids for something they have not used.</p>

<p>^In this area, there are a lot of students being tutored. In fact, when my daughter had problem with a certain subject, the teacher looked surprised that she did not have a tutor to ask questions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
She didn't say elite college were lowering the bar for socio-economic admits. (Whether they are or not, I don't know, but it wasn't exactly what Hernandez said.) She said they are looking hard for high achieving kids from poorer backgrounds. She didn't suggest the kids they're looking for are lower achieving kids.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I read her book. She said colleges would rather admit a poor kid with a 2100 than a rich kid with a 2300 because the rich one had access to resources such as tutoring. I believe she had an example where they looked at an affluent girl with a Harvard grad parent (or something like that) who had 600s on her SAT, and judged her mediocre, whereas a child from down South and poor parents with the same scores would be looked at in a different light.</p>

<p>I was saying I don't think that should happen, as long as they can also guarantee that preference the other way around, that is, favoring a rich kid with the same SAT and the same EC involvement because he could pay more, wouldn't happen either.</p>

<p>Where Hernandez is dead wrong, though (and the data clearly indicate it), is that they are NOT looking hard for them (because there are plenty out there). If they turn up in the application pile, that's a different matter.</p>

<p>It's plain that colleges have not been recruiting low-income students very actively at all until recently. It's still unclear how well college admission offices will respond THIS YEAR to otherwise similar applicants, some of whom are low-income and some of whom are high-income. In recent years, at most colleges, the high-income students still got the nod from the admission committees.</p>

<p>Admission is one thing, retention is another. Tokenadult, do you have a references for retention of students from the lower socioeconomical classes? I ask that because our area is full of lower income students. A few apply to and are admitted to the more elite school but don't last there for a variety of reasons. Lack of preparedness is not the most common reason. More often it is a case of not feeling like they are fitting in with the majority of students attending a particular institution (ethnically, financially, etc).</p>

<p>after looking at the college board profiles, most of the top 10-15 elite colleges have retention rates in the high 90's(95,98,96...)</p>

<p>I think staying in a degree program until graduation is addressed in the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation report. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.jackkentcooke.org/jkcf_web/Documents/_JKC_Achievementrap_edit%20(2)%20for%20website%20-%202-21-08.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jackkentcooke.org/jkcf_web/Documents/_JKC_Achievementrap_edit%20(2)%20for%20website%20-%202-21-08.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Is picking a low-income student who took advantage of everything offered to her/him that attends a less competitive high school with a 2100 SAT, over a rich one from a competitive private with a 2200 really lowering standards?</p>

<p>Because the rich student did better on the SAT, admitting the low-income student over the wealthier one would count as lowering standards in my opinion.</p>

<p>Whether the rich student took additional prep classes or not doesn't invalidate the fact that he knows more than the low-income student and can therefore contribute more (intellectually) to the school.</p>

<p>I would argue that the rich student in the hypothetical case proposed knows LESS than the poor student--he is certainly less resourceful in maximizing the effect of the opportunities available to him. Colleges claim that they care about which applicants can best make use of the opportunities that college education provides.</p>

<p>So it looks as if those of us who are really screwed are the ones who are rich yet didn't get any tutoring/special help/SAT prep courses/have brilliant parents with 149124 degrees. Wonderful.</p>

<p>But I think that colleges actually prefer the wealthy applicants in a number of cases. Wealthier students means more money for the university.</p>

<p>No, the people who would be "really screwed" are the people who just aren't that intelligent to begin with.</p>

<p>
[quote]
No, the people who would be "really screwed" are the people who just aren't that intelligent to begin with.

[/quote]
.<br>
Touche.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Is picking a low-income student who took advantage of everything offered to her/him that attends a less competitive high school with a 2100 SAT, over a rich one from a competitive private with a 2200 really lowering standards?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How about admitting the poor kid with the 2200?</p>

<p>I read the article about legacies as well as Daniel Golden's book "The Price of Admission." The authors are deluding themselves if they think legacy gets automatic admits. It all comes down to MONEY and POWER.
I know kids with top credentials WITH LEGACY who did NOT get admitted to the Ivies. Their parents were not high donors or famous. Clearly, those kids were passed over for an even better student w/o legacy.</p>

<p>Everyone makes an issue about legacy and passing legislation to eliminate it. The universities will admit kids that serve their purpose-- whether it will increase their endowment, improve their athletic teams or make them appear "fair" by having a relatively diverse class. I know too many qualified legacy kids who were not admitted. Journalists often write to serve their own purpose too.</p>

<p>Tokenadult:
"Can a student with limited means look as good in the college admission process as a well-off student?"</p>

<p>Of course not. I assume the question and the links are aimed at admissions officers, not parents or students, right?</p>

<p>In which case, I can add only this as a parent: The hard part for students (or their advising parents) who have faced challenges is to put together an application that illustrates those challenges without sounding as if they're labeling themselves victims. The kids with the most resilience and ability to complete the four years just want to belong, fit in and compete at the same level as others. Labeling themselves as different in applications is very difficult emotionally and perhaps not conducive in some ways to feeling part of a future class.</p>

<p>Then the hard part for the admissions offices: reading between the lines of those apps. to find those characteristics of resilience, toughness and personal "fire in the belly" despite limited resources. And then choosing a class that has peers to support a wide range of students.</p>

<p>Good luck to all.</p>

<p>"QuestBridge is a non-profit program that links bright, motivated low-income students with educational and scholarship opportunities at some of the nation's best colleges. QuestBridge is the provider of the College Prep Scholarship and National College Match Program."</p>

<p>Purplexed,</p>

<p>Well said and beautifully written!</p>

<p>My son was accepted early action to Stanford, and I've often wondered what the admissions people saw in his app that made him stand out....it was definitely his "resilience" and that he came across as such a hard-working individual.</p>

<p>As an international counselor, students many times ask me if there is a possibility for scholarships. I tell them "normally, the 5 percent international students are the cash cows for the schools you're interested in. They pay for around 20% of the students there." I always suggest that they be totally honest about their family income, even if it's waaayyy over what the university requires. The only chances for scholarships are at lesser-known schools that are willing to pay for a top international, or for extremely high achieving internationals when the school knows their you're safety. If they want you, they'll entice you with a scholarship. This happened to a student of mine with UF, but he rejected the scholarship and went on to Princeton instead, paying full tuition. UF knew this guy was going places. That's why they made the offer. So, does money matter? At least with internationals ...I totally believe it makes a huge difference. If you're going to take the spot of an American, you better be a great contributor ... in money too. That's why most internationals at top schools tend to be jetsetters.</p>