<p>Being honest about my finances, I will not be able to swing BS without some FA -- perhaps 25-40%. I know there is a whole process around FA, and it is far from certain that I will get any, but if I do I think I will feel quite guilty accepting it. To me it seems like I am trying to buy something I cannot afford. I would like to have a Ferrari, but I cannot afford one and, instead, suffice with an Acura (a fine car). I would not expect anyone to subsidize me in buying a Ferrari. Isn't BS basically the same thing? How do I get over feeling shame over the notion that I am expecting to get help buying something I cannot afford? Help me feel good about this please, because right now I am feeling like a moocher or a charity case seeking to benefit from a school that believes in social engineering the composition of its' classes. Does anyone else feel like this?</p>
<p>You got it all wrong. Sure, the families who receive FA from the school should be grateful, but do keep in mind that this is not charity. It is what the school wants too. Don’t you think they could fill their classes with full pay students only if they wanted to? Why? Study what diversity means to boarding schools and colleges, which have been discussed so many times and are all over CC.</p>
<p>Cheer up! They won’t hand you FA unless you bring something to the table that the school wants and needs like a musician, or a mathlete. This is a fair trade. Even FP students are subsidized by school endowments. Now relax and fill out that application, will ya. :D</p>
<p>
The elite boarding schools derive much of their reputation & cache from the quality & diversity of their student body-- one cannot simply buy a place in. Here is a family that tried to buy its way into Harvard for the sons, but failed. One of the sons went to BS, but not to one of the most-coveted names.
<a href=“http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/10/09/chinese-family-lawsuit-former-harvard-professor-promised-admissions-help-took-million/7tfbug9YlmW5LR4EqumIFN/story.html”>http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/10/09/chinese-family-lawsuit-former-harvard-professor-promised-admissions-help-took-million/7tfbug9YlmW5LR4EqumIFN/story.html</a></p>
<p>Ferrari, on the hand, derives its reputation & cache from styling, engineering & being DELIBERATELY EXPENSIVE. It does not derive its reputation from the “quality” of its customers. Ferraris are available for purchase by ANYONE with money (no GPA, SSAT, nor moral or ethical requirements). I’ve witnessed first hand, a correlation between the number of Ferrari’s on the street and how corrupt a country is.</p>
<p>When affluent families earning 250k a year are eligible for FA, there is no need to feel like a charity case. At the elite schools were tuition covers only half the schools’ operating costs (the balance is made up by donor gifts & earnings from endowment) ALL THE KIDS ARE BEING SUBSIDIZED-- even the fullpay ones.</p>
<p>At my S’s school, everyone knows who the uber wealthy kids are. But generally, no one knows who is receiving FA. No need to feel shame.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe there are a few exceptional cases, but for a typical middle/upper middle class family earning 250k/year, I’m having a hard time imagining how much FA they would qualify for.</p>
<p>OP, in case if you do and drive Acura, don’t get your hopes up too high.</p>
<p>I think you would be surprised at how many families qualify for significant aid. Let’s say you gross 250,000 and pay $75,000 in taxes. That leaves $175,000. Subtract 50,000 for tuition and that leaves $125,000 for everything else: mortgage, insurance, any tuition and expenses for other children. If you are on either coast, that isn’t going to cover the cost of living. A family with one child with that income likely won’t qualify for aid, but add any additional kids and it’s a different scenario.</p>
<p>Having attended a HADES school back in the early 1970’s, I wonder about some of the views that seem axiomatic on this board. One is that FA is necessary for diversity of the student body. When I attended, I did not know of anyone who was not full pay (maybe there was someone, but the numbers were tiny). Yet we had students from all of the US and from all over the world (not really Asia, except for a guy from Japan). Back then, getting in was mainly a factor of high SSAT scores and having the Dean of your grade school call the AD and say you were a good candidate that would fit in well. The school seemed to do fine. Today, there seems to be a great effort to bring in folks who need FA to attend. While I am not saying this is necessary wrong, I am not sure how it makes for a better school. To me this seems to be more about liberal-minded AD’s/faculties looking to “level the playing field.” Is that a fair thing to do? I gues it depends on one’s perspective.</p>
<p>They will give you FA and help you buy Ferarri because they think you are one of the very few who could drive one. So no need to feel guilty.</p>
<p>TrinitySeven-
Many scholarship funds at prep schools are endowed by grateful alumni who, like you, needed financial aid to attend the school. Just pledge to yourself to pay it forward some day.</p>
<p>FA is not necessary for geographic diversity but it is for socioeconomic diversity. There are parents who very much want their children to go to school with kids who do not have Deans from their private middle school making calls on their behalf or private consultants and test prep interview prep wardrobe prep prep prep prep… These parents, while affluent now, may not have grown up with the kind of privilege that they are able to give their own children so they very much want them to understand that some kids have to work a little harder and shine a little brighter to get the same things. Maybe these adults who donate to scholarship funds do so because they don’t want the privileged kids making recommendations that are unattainable for middle class kids, “Oh, why don’t you just spend the summer doing archeological research in Santorini? It’s so beautiful.” “Because I’ve got to work this summer to pay for my textbooks for next year, you asshat.”</p>
<p>Social engineering? A little bit.</p>
<p>Devolution you said: Today, there seems to be a great effort to bring in folks who need FA to attend. While I am not saying this is necessary wrong, I am not sure how it makes for a better school.</p>
<p>I can tell you what our private school’s admissions team has told us. Besides being a community that is inclusive of all people (race, same sex families, etc) they want their school to reflect the city, the nation…all people. Because of the generous endowments, they are able seek out families who would be a great fit for the school and offer them a spot with FA. They want socioeconomic diversity. They feel that kids learn a lot from their peers and their peers should reflect ALL backgrounds (not only ethnic but socioeconomic). They feel that having a school community that is reflective of all economic levels really prepares their students for the real world and also teaches appreciation and respect for all. I’m all for this way of thinking. I wouldn’t want my children in a school community with only the “1%”.</p>
<p>@devolution
</p>
<p>Back in the 1970’s, your boarding school was likely to have been more socioeconomically diverse, even with mostly full-pay students, than a school with only full-pay students would be today.</p>
<p>A quick search this morning brought up a few interesting links. I couldn’t find an online description of boarding school tuition for the early 1970’s, so we’ll have to make do with 1982 instead. (If you know, or can find, the figures for the 1970s, please share. However, as tuition has been increasing at more than the rate of inflation for years, I don’t think tuition will be higher in 1970 than 1982.)</p>
<p>At any rate, the New York Times from 1982: <a href=“HIGH COSTS LEADING PREP SCHOOLS TO GIVE MORE STUDENT LOANS - The New York Times”>HIGH COSTS LEADING PREP SCHOOLS TO GIVE MORE STUDENT LOANS - The New York Times. Ok, it is to weep,
</p>
<p>$8,000 in 1982 is the equivalent of $19,365.47 in 2013. If tuition, room and board were $19,365.47 today, we wouldn’t be talking of such extensive financial aid programs, because many more families would be potential full-pay families. Today, I believe the best figure to use is $50,000. That’s more than twice as expensive.</p>
<p>The trouble is, except for the highest quintile, incomes have remained flat. Please look at the first slide at:<a href=“http://kltprc.info/pubs/presentations/2008conference/Crouch_2008conference_handouts.pdf[/url]”>http://kltprc.info/pubs/presentations/2008conference/Crouch_2008conference_handouts.pdf</a> </p>
<p>In 1982, the second quintile in after-tax income earned the equivalent of about $57,000 in 2005 dollars ($28,164.36 in 1982 dollars.) Thus, $8,000 would have been about 28% of the family after-tax income.</p>
<p>In 2005, the second quintile made about $70,000 (in 2005 dollars.) Assuming that income has remained stable to 2013, $50,000 tuition, room and board represents 71% of the family after-tax income.</p>
<p>In the 1970s, many more families could afford tuition, room and board. Today, far fewer families can afford it. The families with the highest incomes are likely to live in states and cities with a very high cost of living. </p>
<p>Note that in 1982, the coordinator of music and drama programs for public schools in Concord, Massachusetts, was able to send two children as day students to Thayer, borrowing $1,800 over three years to make it possible. A similar family, today, would not be able to send even one child to private school without significant financial aid.</p>
<p>^^ All that makes sense except the fact that for the most part the majority of full pay kids are not in the second quintile anymore, they are in the highest.</p>
<p>The socioeconomic diversity that some schools talk about is mainly on paper. The majority of full pay students come from a very rarified level, economically speaking. This is not the 1%, its the .01%. In a city like NY, or a suburb like Greenwich, etc, an income of 250K does not make you affluent. With that income, you can not pay for private school, day or boarding. </p>
<p>The fact is that in the ‘70’s and through the 80’s schools were socioeconomically not as diverse, but kids had parents that had very diverse professions. There were lawyers, bankers, doctors, restaurant owners, journalists, etc. They were all full pay because those salaries were fairly equal and schools were affordable that way. The FA kids were primarily kids of immigrant parents and/or racial diversity. Nowadays many of those professions cant afford private schools. Primarily because of the gap between salaries of certain professions and the rest. Schools are able to fill their seats with bankers’ kids only.<br>
In terms of lipservice of kids should learn among kids of different backgrounds etc – look at composition of the boards and look at the composition of parents associations. At parent events, look at where the majority of full pay parents sit, the parties they hold and where they take the kids. Yes there will always be individual stories of kids being invited on fabulous vacations and integrating with the entire student body. However for the most part there is a separation and its not going away.
In terms of the original post - do not feel guilty taking a scholarship. If your kid wants to go to a BS and has something to offer that BS, you should be proud to have such a chance. That is if you truly need it, and not if this is a case of “my second home will need a mortgage”.</p>
<p>^^Tuition at Thayer this year is $38,600. In 1982 it was just over $5,000.</p>
<p>I agree with MHMM. I live in NJ and $250K would not be enough money to send a kid to private school. Having said that, there are many, many wealthy people in NJ that make more than $500K a year. Add these to all the wealthy folks in NYC, CT, Main Line, Boston, etc., and it is really suprising that there is any shortage of full pay kids at private schools. The truth is, most of these wealthy people would rather spend their money on things other than private school – maybe out of ignorance, selfishness, or because they simply want their kids to be in a public school as an active choice). Whatever. Most wealthy people do not send their kids to private school. </p>
<p>I also agree with an above poster that the goal of “socioeconomic diversity” is really more about subtracting the advantage of wealth as a social/moral objective by liberal minded-folk, rather than there being any real value in mixing wealthy and poorer kids together at achool.</p>
<p>Oldmacdonald, where do you get the notion that there’s a shortage of full pay kids at private schools? FA isn’t done out of necessity by the schools because they wouldn’t otherwise be able to find enough qualified full pay candidates. FA is a values choice by the schools, because they want socioeconomic diversity. I think you have a pretty warped view of “wealthy people” if you think that they don’t send their kids to private schools out of ignorance or selfishness. Many “wealthy people” (indeed, perhaps the majority of them) live in communities with truly excellent public schools, so they may perfectly reasonably – and not ignorantly or selfishly – decide to send their kids to public school. And indeed, for really, truly wealthy people, private school tuition is a drop in the bucket, so I can’t imagine that they’re deciding not to send their kids to private school because they’d rather spend their money on something else. They can afford the Porsche in the garage and the kid in private school.</p>
<p>I think what Oldmacdonald was referring to is that much has been written on this board about many schools not having enough FP Americans, so they are taking a lot of foreign/asian students. I know in my town, most the affluent people (which is, in fact, most of the households in the town) send their kids to public schools because, I suspect, they themselves went to public schools and it really never crosses their mind to consider private schools and if it did, they think the public schools are good enough. S/he also questioned the value of socioeconomic diversity and whether it actually contributes anything meaningful to the educational expereince – in his/her view it is just “social engineering” by liberals. Based on my expereinces at our kids’ private grade school, I suspect many FP families would share this view.</p>
<p>Maybe, just maybe, the schools are eager to find FA applicants because the FP pool can’t sustain the academic standards required to justify the $50,000 tuition. The SAT scores need to be at a certain level. The matriculation lists must be strong. The “right” colleges won’t accept very many students with subpar grades and SAT scores (even if the last name matches one on a campus building). </p>
<p>Money can buy a lot, but it can’t buy a faster mental processing speed or a better working memory. High achieving is not the same as profoundly gifted. Breeding by zip code or country club affiliation doesn’t guarantee the latter. Living an opulent lifestyle doesn’t always mean living a rich life. Money can’t buy a thirst for learning. Money can’t buy a sparkling personality or fuel a passion that isn’t there. Money can’t buy a hunger for knowledge. </p>
<p>Perhaps someone can do a study comparing student course schedules to home zip codes and we can see if I might be on to something.</p>
<p>It is a well-known fact that BSs recruit Asians to boost the average SAT scores so that the schools look good to future applicants. In fact it can be tailored so well that you can calculate the number of asian students needed to reach the school’s desired average SAT score (prestige indicator and a magnet to draw future applicants) without using calculus. Sorry most of the kids with last names on school buildings can’t do it alone.</p>
<p>No pops, that’s not the case at the top schools at all. I remember reading an article about the predictive strength if the SSAT for academic success at Ind. Schools and Mr Gary from Exeter commented that while the math section had the strongest correlation of the three SSAT sections, financial need was the strongest predictor. The less need, the higher GPA.</p>
<p>I also know several profoundly gifted children who were wait listed due to the need for FA. At the schools with most known for their academic rigor, there are very few purely academic admits. The smartest kids in country who want to go to BS apply to those schools. They don’t have to use their FA resources for that.</p>