<p>I"ll admit that I also had eyes pop out at the notion that $180K is “barely middle class,” when I read it. To me that is upper class. It may or may not be the norm in your neighborhood but in describing norms or what middle class is, $180K ain’t it. I consider our family to be middle class and we are nowhere near that ballpark income. </p>
<p>Also, when I was reading about bodyguards, it got my interest piqued as I started thinking maybe you live in a dangerous country. Is that why kids have bodyguards? or does it have to do with being children of famous or extreme wealth? You don’t have to answer, truly, but I had no idea about bodyguards. I hope it is not real dangerous where you are, OF.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone demands great accomplishments, near-perfect scores and world-class EC’s from a kid just because his parents are wealthy. But that kid typically doesn’t need to race home after school to care for younger sibs so mom can make it to her shift at Walmart; so I don’t think it’s unreasonable for an adcom to look at the application to see evidence that a child of wealthy parents has spent after school time on something other than tweating his friends or watching MTV.</p>
<p>I know several wealthy families whose kids “phone it in” in HS. They do the bare minimum to graduate; they don’t read books unless they’ve been assigned, their leisure activities revolve around “the club” or someone’s pool; they live from vacation to vacation. Why shouldn’t an Adcom expect a kid of privilege to demonstrate some level of initiative in HS which suggests that this kid will actually contribute to university life? So for these kids to try and come off as middle class in their applications is sort of obnoxious. </p>
<p>There’s a double standard if you expect a kid from an underprivileged background to have stats in the stratosphere, meaningful EC’s, and evidence of leadership and initiative, if you also don’t require the same from a kid whose definition of privation was the week at a spa in Costa Rica with no internet connection or cable tv.</p>
<p>I do not believe that it what happens at all with adcoms. Instead, the child’s background has relevance in other ways. For instance, a child from wealth may have had opportunities for expensive ECs, extensive travel, internships through connections, SAT tutors, etc. So, that is a basic understanding when looking at activities, experiences and what not. A child from a more poverished background may have had a job afterschool and on weekends and been in less ECs, hasn’t traveled beyond their locality, had no SAT tutors (also parents who didn’t go to college), etc. So, applicants are looked at in context, but not so much to do with their GRADES. It is more the other stuff.</p>
<p>Soovievt is correct that admissions officers likely are looking to assess opportunities relative to income/wealth, which is exactly why obscuring a title to generally describe responsibilities to counter those perceptions is a good strategy and in no way “unethical” or suggesting a lack of “integrity” as suggested by some.</p>
<p>Why a child should facilitate the diminution of his or her achievements through characterization of his or her parents’ job description and the assumptions an admissions officer may apply to that characterization is beyond me. What I do should have no bearing on an assessment of my child.</p>
<p>I am a corporate attorney, but one (significant) aspect of my responsibilities is managing a team of people. I am coded in the HR system as a director of a group. Manager is a perfectly appropriate disclosure of my job responsibilities and what my daughter will identify on her common app. That said, there is probably enough indicators of family income identified in other activities, so I doubt the muted self-identification will be of much effect.</p>
<p>I would not over think or get too concerned about any of this. Really. I’ll take my own kids. They have two parents who have graduate degrees. My husband has “Dr.” in front of his name. I have a grad degree from Harvard. But we are just middle class and in fact my kids were FA applicants and received need based aid. Obviously education is valued in our family. And obviously the kids did not have a poor life as they did many ECs (some that cost money) and lessons and went away to summer programs. They grew up in a rural area and attended a no-name public school. </p>
<p>I don’t think any of this matters a real lot in admissions. There are no points marked off if parent is rich (we are not rich, but just making a point) and I think this kind of stuff just gives a CONTEXT to interpreting the student’s entire file from academics to ECs to summers to setting and personal background. As a college counselor myself, I ask my students for all this information as well. It just simply helps me to understand them in a greater picture. I don’t expect higher grades, etc. from kids who are wealthy. I simply have a greater understanding of certain things such as when a parent has not gone to college or the kid has done a great deal of travel around the world or had summer opportunities or another kid had a job throughout high school and so on. That is about the extent of it.</p>
<p>“Why a child should facilitate the diminution of his or her achievements through characterization of his or her parents’ job description and the assumptions an admissions officer may apply to that characterization is beyond me. What I do should have no bearing on an assessment of my child.”</p>
<p>Very well put. Besides, would the child have to explain things like “although my father is wealthy, and/or an important man, he is also stingy and selfish and has never really been concerned with my educational development” if it were indeed the case?</p>
<p>Well, knowing dad’s real occupation might make the admissions officer understand that if a kid thinks $180,000 is “barely middle class,” it isn’t entirely his own fault.</p>
<p>I was offered my dream job not too long ago, but I couldn’t take it because it didn’t pay high enough for me to be able to move to where the job is located, I would have had to live unrealistically far away for my transportation options. This meant that I simply did not have the option of moving there to take the job. I can’t really take it seriously when people say they make 180k and call it barely middle class because of where they live… if you were really middle class you would be in the same boat as me and actually could not live there at all. It is not deprivation if you choose to live someplace so expensive for the average american, even if you “have” to live there because of your job-- the rest of us have to consider the location of job offers and whether or not we can afford to live there, and if we can’t we just can’t work that job. The fact that you were able to afford to take the job but only barely does not somehow magically change the guidelines of class status just because you do make substantially more than the average american and choose to live someplace where that does not translate to much. The real middle class doesn’t live where you do.</p>
<p>$180K is not “barely” middle-class, even in the metro-NYC. But your $180k will go much farther in most other parts of the conuntry than in the tri-state area.</p>
<p>Stanford uses 180k as the cut off for FA I believe. Up to that income, each family is expected to contribute only 10% of family income for COA. </p>
<p>Sooziet- I believe you live in a rural area and your housing cost is probably quite reasonable. You are fortunate that your kids were eligible for FA. </p>
<p>When I worked in NY, I was able to see a lot of people’s salaries, even secretaries were paid close to 6 figures. Most of them didn’t have a lavish life style because they knew if they wanted their kids to go to a good colleges, they had to be full pay. Unlike some other lower cost of living places in the US, they had to pay a premium in order to work around NYC, and not be eligible for any FA because of their income.</p>
<p>Every time anyone has posted about having more or spending more on CC, it gets immediate negative reactions from a lot of people. Based on the reaction here, I think it even makes more sense for applicants to be low key.</p>
<p>Be low key? Sure. Go out of your way (the OP uses the word “hide” in his title) to obfuscate? That’s what gets people’s attention.</p>
<p>There’s a difference between writing, “Dad is bank manager” vs. “parent works in financial services”. If you’re the child of the CEO of Goldman Sachs, I think describing your dad as a bank manager, when that description typically describes the person who manages an actual branch of a retail bank, is indeed “hiding” something. Even if what the CEO of Goldman actually does is- well, manage (tens of thousands of people in this case) and Goldman could actually be described as a bank.</p>
<p>You don’t have to write that your mom is head of neurosurgery at a world renowned teaching hospital. You can simply write, “physician”. But it is a little obnoxious to choose to write “Mom is a health care worker” even though, technically, your mom is a worker who works in health care.</p>
<p>Got it?</p>
<p>Be as low key as you want. But it is a little comical given how many fingers are already on the scale for the children of wealth and privilege when it comes to college admissions, standardized testing, choice of zip code and where to educate your children, access to EC’s and tutors and travel, etc. that all of a sudden, all these affluent kids are dying to be middle class. Not in any real sense of course- nobody’s giving up the lifestyle or trading in the Jeep to ride the public bus back and forth from tennis lessons. But to “hide” parental occupation? Sure, dad’s a bank manager, mom’s a health care worker.</p>
<p>oldfort, while homes here in my area do not cost what they do in affluent suburbs, they are not so cheap either. I live in a resort area, even though it is rural. There are many second homes here as well. Also, salaries/income here are not what they are in more urban areas. It’s relative. </p>
<p>Still, definitions of middle income are of a factual nature in America and most do not think of $180,000 income as middle class. Perhaps if you live in an affluent area, this is low for YOUR area, but it is still not generally defined as “middle class.”</p>
<p>I’m also not sure why one needs to hide a parent’s job because truthfully, very selective colleges are full of wealthy kids whose parents have high level jobs and incomes. It is obviously not holding these kids back! My D’s colleges were full of kids of that sort. My kids had never gone to school with kids like that until they hit college in fact.</p>
<p>I work for someone who manages thousands of people globally. He lives in UK as an expat with his family. They have 2 cars, I think they are Ford Focus. His wife could have AC or electric windows when they were picking out options. They have a very nice apartment in London and the kids are in international schools. If his kids were to list his job accurately, many people would jump to conclusion they live a privileged life, but in fact the kids are very down to earth. If asked, they probably are not even aware how senior their father is within the company.</p>
<p>oldfort, I truly don’t see any of this as problematic. Adcoms are not looking at parents’ jobs in terms of how much money they earn so much. The point is that they see the level of education the parents had and that parents are employed at professional jobs and the kids have likely had some opportunities that poor kids don’t get. End of story. It doesn’t matter the exact figure of parents’ income when it comes to reviewing the students’ application. It is more of a context of the students’ background and upbringing and what generally was available for a student. The adcoms are not going to care if Dad made $200,000 vs. $400,000 per year. Where the context would differ is a kid whose parents make $50,000 per year and parents may not have gone to college or else do not have graduate degrees or have blue collar jobs, and a kid brought up in a family of professional parents who make over $150,000 year (generality). Very selective colleges accept BOTH of these types of students but simply the adcoms can view the students’ application IN CONTEXT. This is similar to the point of viewing a HS Profile and how adcoms view what courses were taken and class rank and so on in the context of whether it was elite boarding school or unknown public school. Neither are marks against an applicant but simply provide a context for reading an application. In my job as a college counselor, I also gather up this information and it simply allows me a fuller picture of the student and nothing more. It is not “good” or “bad” to be a wealthy applicant in terms of admissions odds (it has other benefits in terms of affording the college of course). I think some think it is a mark against an applicant to come from a wealthy family and it DEFINITELY is not (look at how many wealthy offspring attend top colleges!). It would only be a negative if a student had attitude on the application, such as flaunts it or has a sense of entitlement.</p>
<p>I guess I do disagree. After having raised 2 girls and navigated through some of the toughest corporate environment, I believe people want to be around people who they could relate to and have common interest. I have always advised applicants to come across as someone who would be fun to have lunch with. Adcoms are regular people. As much as they want to be objective, they will like one applicant better than another because of their own experience. Certainly in telling people your parent is the CEO of GS would bring out a lot of green monsters in people, unless your parent is prepared to donate a building (and it would be known that’s the only reason you got into a school) .</p>
<p>The issue is not whose parent makes more money or is more or less influential or who has the snazzier title. But it is disengenous to claim that the kids of your London expat friends have not had advantages- no matter how down to earth they might be- that a first generation college kid whose mom drives a school bus and dad is a security guard at a prison may have.</p>
<p>got it? Why are you choosing to misinterpret my remarks? It is unfortunate that someone is looking for advice on “hiding” anything. But you cannot look at all the privileged kids attending elite schools in the US and claim in any way that Adcom’s discriminate against children of privilege, green monsters notwithstanding. And it’s great that Harvard recognizes that it is a struggle for parents earning 150K per year to pay tuition… but that doesn’t mean that 150K makes you poor or underclass just because you qualify for aid.</p>
<p>Many Adcom’s are alums of their institutions, they have spent years as insiders of these places. You think they can’t have a genuine conversation with a kid whose parent runs a hedge fund?</p>
<p>oldfort, I’m just not getting it that adcoms have these “green monster” biases against applicants from well-to-do backgrounds. How do you account for the huge of numbers of such types of students on elite college campuses? If anything, my D1 being middle class made her ATYPICAL at her Ivy. For example, I recall one weekend when we went to attend her athletic event for her college. She was wearing her high school sweatshirt and I asked her why she wasn’t wearing her college sweatshirt and she remarked, “I went to public school and am proud of it,” as she knew that EVERY teammate on her team had gone to private schools (both day and boarding). Also, every teammate’s family owned a second home (or more). We own one home. D2 went to one of the most expensive universities in the country (NYU) and many do not receive aid there (they do not meet 100% of need) and so many of her classmates were wealthy. My D received a large scholarship and loans. My girls didn’t mind any of this truly, but I’m just saying that a huge number of both my D’s college peers were from well-to-do backgrounds and were not on financial aid. Colleges really do welcome such students with open arms. </p>
<p>PS, one of my D’s teammates comes from a MULTI-million dollar family and her father is part of the family/business of one of the richest men in the world.
^^EDIT>…looked it up…make that billionare.</p>
<p>How often have people said on CC not to disclose mental instability on the college application, even when the person has over come it? On the other hand, if someone had some major physical medical issue, then it is encouraged to disclose it. Why?</p>
<p>College application is the biggest marketing campaign for anyone, and that is why private college counseling is a thriving business.</p>
<p>Adcoms like and need wealthy kids at school, but they just don’t like to have it thrown in their face. </p>
<p>Sooziet - you of all people should know it is all about packaging.</p>