Fewer colleges giving out National Merit Scholarships

Parents Forum
1

<p>From today's Boston Globe:</p>

<p>BostonGlobe.com</a> Log In</p>

<p>
[quote]
New York University has pulled out of the National Merit scholarships, becoming at least the ninth school to stop funding one of the largest US merit-based aid programs, because it doesn’t want to reward students based on a standardized test.</p>

<p>NYU’s withdrawal is another blow to National Merit, already ignored by many elite colleges and a subject of a critical report by a Harvard College-chaired commission. Schools are debating how to allocate scarce financial-aid dollars as tuition costs rise and the economy remains sluggish.</p>

<p>While high schools trumpet National Merit winners, relying heavily on a standardized test is a flawed way to evaluate students, said Shawn Abbott, assistant vice president of admissions at NYU.</p>

<p>“We simply do not feel that enrolling a larger number of National Merit finalists is a necessary way for us to attract the most academically qualified freshman class,’’ Abbott said in an interview.</p>

<p>Harvard, Yale University, and the six other schools in the Ivy League don’t fund National Merit scholarships because they award only need-based aid.</p>

<p>The six campuses of the University of California that previously participated in National Merit scholarships no longer fund the program. The University of Texas at Austin and Wake Forest University have also withdrawn, saying they don’t want to reward aid based on a standardized test.</p>

<p>Many colleges including Wake Forest in Winston-Salem, N.C., have criticized standardized tests, saying they favor the affluent, hurt minorities, and don’t predict college success.</p>

<p>William Fitzsimmons, the admissions dean at Harvard, chaired a National Association for College Admission Counseling commission that in 2008 criticized the National Merit program in a report, saying it was “misusing’’ the PSAT and should end the practice of using minimum test scores for merit aid eligibility.</p>

<p>“National Merit has never been transparent about, for example, the ethnic diversity of the people who receive National Merit scholarships, nor do we get any information about whether or not this very large amount of money is used by, for example, large numbers of people who have great financial need,’’ Fitzsimmons said.

[/quote]
</p>

2

<p>the NMF news was also posted on the Financial Aid/National Merit thread.
I happen to love SlitheyTove’s comment on that thread . With his permission I’m copying it here:</p>

<p>"Gotta love the chutzpah of someone affiliated with a private institution getting all grumpy and bothered when another private institution dares to choose how to spend their own money. And really, the admissions dean at Harvard is complaining about another organization’s transparency? ROTFLOL. "</p>

3

<p>I get it that the world doesn’t revolve around me and my kid.</p>

<p>However, the National Merit Scholarships are one of the few national sources that can provide merit money for families like ours: smart kids whose parents are barely over the line to qualify for need-based aid. Son qualified for a Robert Byrd Scholarship too, and then it got cut out of the federal budget, because apparently lots of people thought these kids “didn’t really need the money.” Both scholarships are (were) fairly small amounts, but I guess even that is too much to reward kids who are smart and hard-working, but not impoverished.</p>

<p>Thanks for a brief moment to vent.</p>

4

<p>Skyhook,
There are still GREAT U’s that provide lots of merit $$ to NMF’s!! Your son should apply to USC- if accepted there he will get an automatic 1/2 tuition scholarship AND in addition, USC has as an incredibly generous FA program- many students have both merit and FA $ awarded to them. DS [ NMF] applied to USC before their Dec 1 deadline for scholarship consideration, and was awarded a full tuition scholarship. He is now at Cal Tech starting his Phd, on a full fellowship. No tuition $$ for either UG or Grad school!!</p>

5

<p>I agree with menloparkmom that there are still many good universities offer large NMF scholarships. There are many good choices out there for NMF’s to choose.</p>

6

<p>I’m sorry to see NMF loose any luster. It is a blessing for 1) the smart kid who tests well no matter what his/her GPA and 2) the kid who will do some work to prepare for the psat. </p>

<p>We need, as a nation, to reward more than just the stellar athletes.</p>

7

<p>There are also the National Achievement Scholars (African American) and National Hispanic Scholars–the program recognizes students from diverse backgrounds.</p>

8

<p>Flawed it may be, standardized testing identifies deserving students in a cost effective way.</p>

9

<p>

Gee, I wonder why National Merit isn’t transparent about that. I think that the head of admissions at Harvard might have a little insight into that, even without statistics.</p>

10

<p>I guess I get tired of all the explaining and dissing of “merit.”
While I agree that the instrument used to measure merit has to be selected very carefully, nothing is perfect.
And I am tremendously worried about a society that does not award much for pure achievement. It disturbs me that we are sending the message that if one has achieved a lot before college, well, you are assumed to be privileged.
So, what would be best used to measure academic potential and achievement?</p>

<p>BTW, I do wonder if the reason for pulling out by these colleges is really to do with the fact that they are cutting back on all aid.</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>How about a holistic review of 1.5 million test takers? I am sure Harvard will be more than happy to help with the best way to proceed. :)</p>

12

<p>Gee, Fitzsimmons, maybe there SHOULD be a few things out there that do NOT measure anything but achievement…
Just “good ol’ fashioned results” is worth something in some cases, to balance out all the engineered stuff.</p>

13

<p>NYU is already known for giving lousy aid across the board. This is just like adding more pepper to their already bad FA seasoning. JMO.</p>

14

<p>p.s. NMS is “engineered”, anyway: it is not based on a NATIONAL score. The cut-offs are by state to be fairer, because different states have different socio-economic profiles, as I understand it.</p>

15

<p>Exactly jym. This is a pure marketing/pricing decision by NYU. They probably looked at their applicant pool and decided that a couple of thousand for a NM scholarship did nothing to attract the kinda kids that they want (whatever that may be). Inherently it makes sense. NYU is mostly full pay kids, which means that they come from wealthy families. A small ~$2k discount is not gonna be enough to increase yield to these applicants. Thus, they dropped the program to use the $ in other ways.</p>

<p>The UCal system dropped sponsorship because their data indicated that it “advantaged the advantaged”.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Whole-heartedly agree, but one has to question whether a 2.5 hour test on one Saturday morning = the best definition of merit. A one-shot deal, with no make-ups for illness. A one-shot deal after Friday night football. One more correct bubble could mean the difference between thousands of dollars in tuition reimission? One more correct bubble could mean the same depending on your state of residence? Should residents of NY & NJ and Connecticut really be held to different standards? Are one state’s students really more meritorious than those across the river/border?</p>

16

<p>bluebayou-
This is a rhetorical post, not at all directed at you, but a continuation of the musing.</p>

<p>What we are left with is a sense that there nothing can be “fair”.
That there are many with challenges and disadvantages.
Of course, I agree with this.</p>

<p>However, since this is not a level playing field, who is making sure that things are not “unfair” to those who do start with a little more?
Surely, these individuals deserve a chance to be considered for a variety of options as well??</p>

<p>What message are we giving that the bar s always being adjusted as per the perceived differences in opportunities?
In most and in its originally intended ways, this is a compassionate message. However, it can foster other values that are not so healthy in our society.
There is a sense that we have to keep checking just how the cards are stacked, because it is now assumed that they are stacked naturally and then re-stacked to compensate. Its gets to be a sort of game. </p>

<p>Being compassionate and fair - excellent values.
Working hard, seeking excellence, being creative - also excellent values.
How do we serve these two sets of values?
Are we serving one more than the other these days?</p>

17

<p>“And I am tremendously worried about a society that does not award much for pure achievement. It disturbs me that we are sending the message that if one has achieved a lot before college, well, you are assumed to be privileged.”</p>

<p>I thought the reward for stellar achievement is getting into one of the top schools in the country and the benefits that accrue from that education.</p>

18

<p>I don’t really care what private institutions do with their money, but the IMO the PSAT is a horrible test. At least they could use the full SAT. The PSAT is supposed to be practice for the SAT but it has now become too important.</p>

<p>My son scores a 240 on the PSAT. He has been involved in CTY testing since 5th grade. He goes to a great High school. He is a fantastic standardized test taker. Of course he did well.</p>

<p>Not sure this alone should give him a scholarship.</p>

19

<p>I am saying that that very process is “engineered” at several levels, to be fair to those who start with less.</p>

<p>And there are not enough places at the most “prestigious” schools for all that might do well there, as judged holistically, which is a process that, among other things, looks at the individuals in the context of their environments. </p>

<p>The ability to pay for such an education is a limiting factor in this equation, emilybee:</p>

<p>It important that ALL the tuition money go to those who have less? Or is it appropriate to award money just based on performance?</p>

<p>One argument for allowing some to earn aid just based on performance would be to say that FAFSA looks at criteria that are “shoulds” - some just do not send and save as per their critieria. Another is that there are many on the “borderline”- the middle class just is not able to afford these tuitions, in most cases. And those are problems related to the goals of the programs.</p>

<p>And I get back to the values and messages borne by these policies.</p>

20

<p>bluebayou - No, but does it matter that much? Sometimes, we have to draw a line somewhere. I agree on borderline cases it is random. That does not warrant throwing the whole thing out. Hopefully, if you got caught on the wrong side this time, you end up on the right side in the next line-drawing.</p>