<p>taxguy, I am unfortunately not getting a cent of scholarship from National Merit (I wasn’t a Scholar, just a Finalist… only got a 2170 on my SATs, which is incidentally exactly what my 217 PSAT predicted) or from my school, which only offers need-based aid. In fact, the only scholarship I was offered in relation to National Merit was $5000 from NYU. (I could have applied to USC and gotten a hefty scholarship, but that would have meant going to USC…)</p>
<p>Completely agree with tokenadult about “FairTest”.</p>
<p>dc89, most of the money NMFs get does not come from the NM corporation. The most you could get from them is $2,500, which seems to be given to 2,500 fairly randomly selected NMFs. The rest comes from corporate sponsors, and colleges that choose to give money to NMFs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, it is an easy way. That is why they do it. And it must be successful, or they wouldn’t continue to do it.</p>
<p>I don’t think “most” colleges make a big deal about NMF status. A few of them have been using it as a marketing device; these are mostly second- or third-rank state universities who face a lot of competition even for good in-state students, and their NMF strategy is an attempt to raise their prestige (or, more politely, improve their academic environment) by enticing strong students, both in- and out-of-state, who might otherwise turn up their noses at the colleges, to attend them. I suspect that only a small proportion of NMFs take up those offers, and the ones who do may not be the most academically inclined. (If you accept a full ride to a famous party school, could the party-school reputation have something to do with your decision?)</p>
<p>There is a simple reason why colleges are tempted to use NMF status for that: it is public information, and it is available early enough to make a difference. They could use SATs, or ACTs, but they would have to get their hands on the scores, which would require a release from the student. Getting the student’s attention is a big part of the battle; using NMF status lets the college carpet bomb students with mail without the students applying. Plus, for many students, SATs or ACTs aren’t available until relatively late in the process, whereas NMSF status is known six months before applications are due. Finally, it’s a recognized national standard. “We have 60 National Merit Finalists in our freshman class” is a simpler communication than “We have 85 students in our freshman class with SATs higher than Harvard’s 75th percentile,” or some other such boast.</p>
<p>I don’t believe many colleges (or at least many competitive colleges) use NMF status to the exclusion of other, better measures of desirability. As I said before, one of my kids was a NMF, the other merely Commended. Commended had better high school grades and SATs. Guess which one got more merit scholarship offers, in larger amounts. Unsurprisingly, it was Commended. But they only came from colleges to which he applied. So the University of Oklahoma never knew it might want to pursue him.</p>
<p>Since PSATs correlate pretty well with SATs, and SATs correlate somewhat well with performance in college, I suspect that the population of NMFs, on average, does just fine. Sure, some will be great, and some will get lost, just like any other group of 18-year-olds. But I doubt there’s any other handy-dandy standard, to which colleges have access, which will (a) produce a similar-sized population of kids, (b) produce kids who perform meaningfully better in college, and (c) be readily understandable by the public, potential applicants, faculty, or any of the other constituencies to which PR is directed.</p>
<p>[Finally, and a bit facetiously: The NMSF cut-off varies from state to state. A NMF from Wyoming might not come close to cutting the mustard in New York or California. Is taxguy certain that the loser-NMFs he’s noticed aren’t simply NMFs from loser states?]</p>
<p>The NMS is not just a test- I personally know of students from my HS class who did not make the finalist category, based on grades et al. The test separates those who worked hard to get the grades from those who have both aptitude and achievement. Please stop the sour grapes about how a student would have made the cutoff if they lived in another state- your state provided the opportunities, your child didn’t perform at the top (and the program would lose its national title and mean a lot less if it became an elitist state one)- you could have sacrificed your career/kids’ education/etc to live where the scores are lower, presuming of course that your child would have performed as well given the environment they grew up in…</p>
<p>The college gpa, as pointed out earlier, is not a good indicator. There is a reason they only require a 3.5 gpa (along with other criteria) to get an honors degree at major U’s. I was a NMS and took many, as well as difficult courses, including ones not in my strong area- so I got the B in Honors Lit (a course no longer offered with AP courses being the norm today) instead of the A my HS NMS classmate got- he is an English professor, I was a chemistry major (and I know he did not take the honors calc or chemistry at the same time like I did). I know of college classmates who did well and highly gifted ones who continued to not care as much about grades. I have also seen what happens to recent NMF/S students, even those who don’t work as hard deserve the recognition/funds more than those who didn’t qualify. I have done extensive reading about gifted and talented education (or lack thereof) and the examples of NMS college achievement are in line with expectations based on my knowledge. </p>
<p>If you want the stellar students to be successful you have to give them a lot more than they can get in a nonutopian society. I am currently reading a fascinating book by Susan Pinker (her brother is the other Pinker author) titled The Sexual Paradox (men, women and the real gender gap)- add this well referenced book to your knowledge base.</p>
<p>midmo asks,“taxguy, if National Merit designation is, in fact, so worthless as a predictor of college performance (however you care to define it), why do some schools continue to offer scholarships to finalists? Are the schools being run by idiots”</p>
<p>Moreover Bluebayou notes,"if a college has a mean gpa of say, 3.3, then by definition, 49.99% of students are below that number. Thus, saying that a high scorer should be able to earn a “3.5 in any major is illogical”</p>
<p>Response: First, I don’t think that schools would award a free ride or a big scholarship unless these NMF or NMS kids were among the top applicants there. As for whether college admission folks are idiots,which was asked, Yes, I think that those colleges that pursue the NMF to the degree where they give them free ride are idiots. </p>
<p>Thus, why are they doing it? Someone noted the correct answer in my opinion: They want bragging rights.</p>
<p>I think a lot of students who have chosen to accept some of the large NMF-based scholarships to “second and third tier” schools are being unfairly maligned in this thread. Of my son’s friends, only one chose to accept one of those offers, to the engineering school of one the big southwest publics. He is a very talented student who is dead-sure he wants to be an engineer, and whose family very much appreciated the price-break. He doesn’t seem to mind the party aspect rather common to large publics, but that isn’t why he is there. For his purposes–i.e. get a good engineering degree–the deal works. From the point of view of the school, the deal works–they got a very fine student and a very fine young man.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, taxguy, you need to ask yourself, why does it confer the right to brag? The answer is because within the university and college world, it is recognized that scoring well on standardized tests does indeed say something about the likelihood that a high-scoring student will be an asset to the school.</p>
<p>As the parent of a NMF who, in my opinion, was admitted and offered money at several schools (even if not explicitly stated as money for being a NMF), I am surprised no one has mentioned the possibility that schools offer money in order to get students who can help them raise their rankings. From what I understand, colleges and universities often make business decisions when they manage their enrollment. So, if they take bunch of super high GPA’s, some super high SAT scorers, give x amount of financial aid, and then their rankings rise. The higher the rankings, the more selective the school, the higher demand for the school, right? Offering NMF’s money is not unlike offering athletic scholarships to raise the profile of a sport and, consequently, of the school. The money they are giving is not that big a part of the overall university budget and the percentage of students who receive it is miniscule compared to the general population. Is it “fair?” No. Life is not fair. The only way to stop colleges from offering NMF’s money to attend their schools is for the consumers to stop wanting to attend schools with high average SAT scores.</p>
<p>Midmo, yes, I do think that these high scoring kids are an asset but NOT in the way most folks think of it. I look at it as bragging rights so that schools can hopefully attract other top kids. I don’t think it is because these kids always do as well in college as their scores would have predicted. </p>
<p>However, kids that get a 3.6+ overall GPA are also assets, yet I rarely ever see colleges rewarding them for actual performance vs. the projected performance that is implicit with a NMF. How many schools do you know give great scholarships to kids that get a 3.6, 3.7 or higher…answer…very few. Moreover, even if they do give some money, it is a token gesture of $1,000.</p>
<p>Cases in point:My son got into a grad school with a mediocre GMAT. He scored in the top 5% of his graduate program with a 4.0. He got a measly $1,000 award.</p>
<p>My friend’s daughter got decent SATs but nothing astonishing. She will graduate among the top 3 kids at Maryland. Did she get any money? Nope. </p>
<p>My friend’s son,who is a very smart kid did about 1350-1400 on the SATs,but certainly not a NMF. He graduated with about a 3.9+ in engineering,which is very hard at Maryland. Did he get any money? Guess!</p>
<p>Yet , Maryland gives LOTs of money to the NMFs who didn’t do as well as either she or my friend’s son and keeps giving them scholarships each year. Frankly, I think that the whole system is a bit skewed.</p>
<p>Just for the record, one reason for this thread involved a friend’s son who is a NMF and got a nearly full ride to a school. He tells his family that although he barely gets over a 3.0, he is having a “lot of fun.” He also wasn’t the only kid with this type of scholarship that I know about. Here I see my kids killing themselves for a top notch GPA and getting nothing, while these kids get a free ride to achieve any GPA. I have to just grit my teeth when I hear about this; and yes, I know life isn’t fair.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It looks skewed if you think of NM scholarships as rewards. They are not meant as rewards, but merely as incentives to enroll. They are renewable only because they wouldn’t serve the purpose of inducing prospects to enroll if it were they were one-year awards.</p>
<p>Personally, I would like to see some sort of monetary incentive to perform well once enrolled, but I also think there could be significant problems with that approach. Think grade-grubbing high schoolers choosing classes with their gpa in mind, and magnify the effect a hundred-fold. Again, it comes down to the difficulty of defining what a “successful” student looks like: grades, grades plus research, grades plus research plus service, grades plus all that and some club leadership…? Rewarding gpa alone would definitely reduce all the other activities.</p>
<p>taxguy, in response to post 52, I’m going to pretend you are my 16 yr old daughter for a moment. Repeat after me: Life…isn’t…fair. Life…isn’t…fair…</p>
<p>GPA isn’t all there is to a successful college experience.</p>
<p>We have 3 NMFs in our family (parents and kid). None of us had(have) the greatest college GPA’s. To be honest, we’re not the most hardworking people. (plenty of inspiration, not enough perspiration?) OK. We’re sort of lazy. Or not that motivated by a letter on a report card. I suspect that our next kid (still in HS) who missed NM by one or two questions, will out-perform the rest of us in college due to a superior work-ethic.</p>
<p>So why do some NMFs have “less than stellar performance?” Some colleges grade harder than others. Some NMFs have to work a lot of hours to support themselves; some have family, roommate, relationship, or health issues; some are confused and lacking direction; some are partying too much; some are depressed; some are addicted drugs or to video games; some are lazy slackers; some have random bad luck–just like any other students. You just don’t know. A college professor friend of mine said that he hasn’t been that impressed with the NMFs he’s seen. OTOH I know a couple NMFs (friends’ kids) who are recent college grads both had near 4.0s.</p>
<p>The colleges that offer big scholarships have probably found that NMFs tend to do well and graduate on time at a much higher rate than most of their students. And are probably more likely to go on to graduate and professional schools. (And more likely to have high income jobs, donate $ to the school later?)</p>
<p>Our state U has a low 40something% 6-year
graduation rate–and I think that the national average is around 50% (You can’t just look at elite schools and think that a 90%+ grad rate is the norm). IMO if you get your degree in 4 (or maybe 5) years, with a 3.0 or above, that’s not too shabby. Even if most NMFs achieve that “little,” they will boost the stats of most schools.</p>
<p>atomom, schools such as Univ. of Chicago, WUSTL, Vanderbilt, Rice (?) offer NMF stipends, although relatively small ones. I think they are assuming the students they make the offers to are likely to graduate on time with higher than average grades, research records, etc., and in the normal amount of time. I see no evidence that NMF are, on the whole, only slightly higher-performing than the general student population.</p>
<p>Personal anecdotes do not an argument make. One of the NMF from our schools a few years ago was named a Rhodes Scholar this year. I don’t use his example to say all NMF/NMS are go-getter geniuses. It is no more appropriate to focus on the few non-performers you know to argue that schools that target high-scorers are run by idiots.</p>
<p>BTW, students do have to maintain a minimum GPA (usually 3.0-3.5 depending on the school) to keep those big scholarships. So kids that party too hard will have to pay for that–life is a little bit fair, sometimes!)</p>
<p>Midmo, I didn’t mean to malign anyone in particular. I certainly believe that the NMF scholarship offer can work out exactly as hoped for both colleges and students, and that it probably does in most cases (see the rest of my post above). But I was suggesting – half, but only half in jest – that there may be some adverse selection among NMFs accepting scholarships. A NMF accepting a scholarship to Arizona State is probably meaningfully more likely to party himself to near-death than one who goes to the University of Chicago. That doesn’t mean all of them will – just some of them.</p>
<p>Why does anyone think the colleges CARE how the NMF kids do? Beyond having them graduate on time (so they don’t lower the grad rates), why do they care? They are offered money as an incentive to enroll for whatever reason the university wants them there, be it rankings or whatever. We could all give examples of the kid who gets straight A’s in HS and doesn’t live up to their potential in college just as easily as noting how high testers fail to live up to theirs. I think this thread is asking the question of whether the SAT or the GPA is a better predictor of college success. That question is endlessly debated here on CC. One may also want to define college success: Is it getting a certain GPA? Is it soaking up the information that will later lead to research or a discovery while eeking out a 2.95 or 3.0? Is it getting admitted to a top 20 grad school? My son has a professor who told him he went to seven colleges before finding his path. Some would say during that time that the young professor-to-be was not living up to his potential, but here the prof is teaching at a top university with a degree from same.</p>
<p>I would say that it depends entirely on the university where they choose to attend…and course of study. Some universities inflate grades, honors programs even more so (that is from an honors grade chair at a major university) such that the honors track is much easier than the normal track.
you can’t generalize and lump in students in small colleges with 500 students and others with a population of 40,000. Just because they earned NMS distinction…there is no comparison.</p>