I just posted a thorough Review of Syracuse University

Parents Forum
21

<p>I've read throught his thread and didn't join in but I finally just feel compelled. I hardly know where to begin though.</p>

<p>First, diversity of ANY kind....be it race or economic, to me, ENHANCES the educational environment at a college. Both my kids valued this in their schools. Where we live, we have socio-economic diversity but no racial diversity. As we drove into Manhattan a week ago with our youngest D to drop her off at NYU, passing city streets and parks, she remarked, "oh diversity, what a concept" meaning, how VERY different than where she grew up and it will be refreshing. She also thought it would be refreshing to meet those of her religion at college since she was in a minority in that respect in our community. My other D, at Brown, loves the diverse student body. I noticed as we dropped her off a few days ago and we were walking around, how kids she knew from last year came up to greet her and hug and these kids were diverse in terms of race and nationality, quite cool. </p>

<p>Second, Taxguy, I truly inferred, as others did, that you linked Syracuse's outreach to give need based aid with seeking diversity racially as well. You may not have meant it but lots of what you wrote implied it. Do you really think that all those who need financial aid are minorities? Plenty of Caucasians do. You kinda implied that those who need financial aid are low income or needy and perhaps not as up to par as the fully paid applicants. You wrote: </p>

<p>"As I said in my review, diversity to Syracuse University is its holy grail. They will go to great lengths and spend huge sums to achieve this result over that of other goals. Laudably they have also achieved a high graduation rate. However, was this achieved due to quality mentoring or due to watering down the courses so that more pass? Perhaps, it is a combination of factors." </p>

<p>Are you saying that those who received financial aid were let in to achieve diversity but might not have been otherwisse qualified to do the work?? I can't imagine this! You are implying that they may have succeeded at Syracuse due to some mentoring or watering down of courses so they could pass. To my knowledge need based aid is simply a way to grant an education to those who might not be able to foot the entire bill but who are qualified merit wise to be admitted. Let me give you a personal example....my sixteen year old was admitted to Syracuse this past April for the BFA in Musical Theater (which by the way is a highly regarded program....and in your Syracuse report, you implied that certain programs at Syracuse were tops but that the other academic areas were so so and let me just add that 400 kids auditioned for the BFA in MT at Syracuse for 20 slots...quite selective). My kids applied for need based aid at all their schools. My kids are NOT low income. They do not come from educationally deprived backgrounds....Dad is a particular kind of doctor and I have a graduate degree from Harvard. We qualify for aid. At Syracuse, my D was invited to the Honors College (she is not attending). She also was offered a Founders Scholarship for $12,000 (can't tell you exactly what she had to do to receive this as it was a pleasant surprise to open the envelope). She also got an additional $3000 grant from Syracuse due to having a sibling in college (take note, you said you will have three in college at the same time and unless you are well to do, you might qualify for aid with so many tuitions at once). By the way, I do not think Syracuse is ultra expensive at 38K as both my D's colleges cost quite a bit more. So, anyway, my D obviously was qualified in terms of merit (got into very selective program there) and into Honors College and got a scholarship.....I don't think she fits the stereotype in your remarks. Also, I do not think those paying full freight subsidized her scholarship. I believe schools have endowments and other funds for these purposes because they do not want to build student bodies with JUST those who can pay full freight. I doubt if my D attended, that she would need "mentoring" or watered down coursework to make it through Syracuse. She was very qualified to attend (overly so academically), yet still is one of the so called "subsidized" ones by your criteria. You also wrote:</p>

<p>"I was against paying as much as 25% for any subsidy for diversity. This is true whether for economic, racial, religious or tuti fruity."</p>

<p>I don't think my D's place in the class at Syracuse added to the diversity of the campus but she did receive aid. I hope that explains that MANY Caucasian kids receive aid from schools like Syracuse and that does not mean they are lesser qualified or an attempt to achieve diversity in the class. Lots of kids get aid who are not low income and who are not students of color. However, I also applaud schools giving financial assistance to those from those categories as well. Yes, a student should be otherwise qualified to attend. I think in most instances, those getting need based aid ARE qualified to attend but simply cannot afford full freight. </p>

<p>Third, in another thread you started about class rank, you wrote: </p>

<p>"If they attends a horrible high school but end up in the top 10%-20%, they might be good or might be the "cream of the crap." "</p>

<p>I'm gonna admit right off the bat that I am offended by that statement and that I wholly disagree. You would probably classify our rural public high school (600 students) as "horrible" because it is not like your competitive suburban one that you describe. However, while our student body as an entire whole differs from that at your high school, certainly we have a good many very bright and qualified students that can rival any kid at your school or some elite prep school. We don't have as many as you do but certainly kids like that exist everywhere. I have a kid who was val at our school a year ago. I do not think of her as "cream of the crap". While there are plenty of kids in the class who are not academically on par, there are still plenty who are. Do you mean to say that someone in the top ten in rank at our high school is not as good as someone ranked in the 20th percentile at your school? I venture to say that they are in the same ballpark. And actually colleges will look at students in their school environment when interpretting rank. Plenty of kids at your competitive high school, likely ranked in the 15th percentile, can still get into a top school. Here you'd have to be ranked very high in order to do so, if a top college will even look at you. But the top kids at our school could easily fit in with those at your school as they are achievers. If they weren't, then they would not do well at college. I have a kid at an Ivy getting straight A's so I guess she was just as qualified as someone from your selective high school even if she was from "crap". Our val this year is actually going to the art program at Syracuse this fall, where your D is an applicant. Rank is interpretted by colleges within context. They look at how you have achieved in your setting. A student here in our high school, would have to be in the top seven or so kids in the class to get into a very selective college and then in your high school, they likely can be ranked lower than that and still get into a top school. So, that is how THAT works. Just because someone goes to a "crap" high school, it does not make the good students there any lesser in terms of qualifications. Bright and achieving students exist EVERYWHERE. You may have more of them in your community but we have our share as well. We chose to live here, you chose to live there. That is the only difference that I see. My kid could have gone to some elite prep school out of state but we never wanted to do that. But she is still who she is, whether she is from a crap school or not. She is the same person had she gone to Exeter. And guess what? She is getting a lot of money from Brown this year in scholarship because we have two in college. I hardly think she is a "lesser" candidate or student and that she was not sought after in terms of diversity. She is like many middle to upper middle class students anywhere. </p>

<p>Nothing you wrote about Syracuse differs too much from many colleges. Most today offer need based aid. That is not an attempt so much at diversity as making education available to all kids. There is ALSO an aim by selective schools to attract minorities but that is not necessarily one and the same. The minority students my D knows at Brown are just as up to par as the white students. I'm glad she is getting to know kids from various walks of life. Nobody is watering down any of the coursework at Brown for those on financial aid. </p>

<p>Well, I just had to get this out, even if you were "done" with the discussion.
Susan</p>

22

<p>Sooviet, where to begin?</p>

<p>As I said in several posts, I consider diversity in education a positive. I have said this in several posts, so I don't understand why people are still puzzling over my statement.</p>

<p>I am not going to rehash what I said, which is there to be read.</p>

<p>I also didn't say that graduates from less selective high schools are crap. You are omitting words and twisting the statement. What I said was that they " can be very good or they can be the cream of the crap." This is quite correct, and I still stand by it in the context of class ranking. Someone who is in the top 10% among a very selective high school is probably top notch academically. Someone who is top notch among a high school with low SATs and test scores in general, may not be as good. Notice I said MAY not be, and didn't not say they "aren't as good." </p>

<p>As an example, my son attended a mediocre middle school where he was easily in the top 10% of the school. In fact, he was in the top 5%. We moved to a district that had much higher scores and expectation where he graduated around the 35%-40% mark with a 3.8 weighted average. Had he attended his old high school, he might well have been in the top 10% as well. Thus,not all schools are created equal. My point, in that other thread, is that rankings may not be fair factor for admissions from top schools or magnet schools, which was my only point. Again, I never said that graduates from less selective schools are crap! If in any way that I seemed to imply this ( and I don't think I did), let me make that point clear!</p>

<p>Moreover,according to a recent article about Harvard increasing their diversity of their students, they seemed to note diversity as meaning racial or ethnic. The same article (<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/09/04/the_chosen_few/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/09/04/the_chosen_few/&lt;/a&gt;) noted that most people at Harvard and other IVY league schools, however, are paying full freight for the tuition. They noted as a conclusion found under the picture that although they achieved one kind of diversity(racial), they weren't achieving class (economic) diversity, which the author seemed to find questionable. I too find that result questionable.</p>

<p>Schools, in my humble opinion, need to improve on diversity.However, diversity to me is economic diversity and NOT just racial or ethnic UNLESS it is accompanied by economic need! To give a scholarship because someone is indian, black, white, hispanic,asian or tuti fruity solely because of their race or ethnicity seems ludicrous, and I resent subsidizing this policy.</p>

<p>We know a kid who was 1/8 indian who got a full ride to Ohio University including room and board simply because he was part indian. It had nothing to do with economics because his parents were very well-off! Yes, I do know that kids and the parents, and he didn't have SAT scores that were off the chart either. The school even told him that he was one of the few indian student that they ever had.</p>

<p>I do believe that schools should take it upon themselves to try to improve economic diversity as long as those that are benefited by the program had great talent or ability. </p>

<p>As I also noted, I am willing to pay more to have a somewhat diverse student population because it enhances the education for all. Here I said it again. However,the question becomes how much should be paid,which is the real question? I am willing to pay an extra 5%-10%. That is what it is worth to me. If they use more of the tuition money for diversity then I and others like me are subsidizing more people. Syracuse,based on the facts that I have seen from their pre-college program, subsidized 25% of the kids. To me, that is too much. I certainly acknowledge that others will disagree. If there is more subsidy needed, why should I provide it? Why not let the state schools provide it. That is their mandate! I acknowledge that this in not a popular position here,but I am not running for President anyway.</p>

<p>Someone asked me would I take the money if offered to me for my daughter. Sure, I would. I am NOT blaming people for taking the money. I am blaming Syracuse and private schools like them that handle this situation to an extreme. However, I have done everything in my power, and hopefully instilled this in my kids, to plan for the future as not to be in a position where I will desparately need the school's "need scholarships" to survive.</p>

<p>By the way, since people are inferring things into my posts that I never meant, I am not denigrating anyone who has talent and ability but needs the scholarship to attend any university. Please do not infer that from my posts.</p>

<p>Sorry Sooviet and others. I didn't mean to go on with this thread. :)</p>

23

<p>Taxguy, I understand why somebody paying full freight would be upset if they thought their tuition was inflated to pay for someone else to go to the school. I don't agree with it but I do understand. I am not sure that all financial aid is developed in that manner, I know that many of my grants were gifts from alumni, or taxpayers through subsidized or guaranteed loans.</p>

<p>If you resent this type of leadership, I would suggest you look at their other decisions...you might find it hard to find a great school that doesn't have this policy...there might be a reason for this. Princeton and Harvard have no loans for the students from limited income families and other schools like Wellesley cap their students loans.</p>

<p>Robin Hood, and Zorro are on the top of my imaginary hero list...thought I would let you know that about me.</p>

24

<p>Princeton makes it known that those that get full scholarships, and they seem to be much less that that of Syracuse despite Princeton's larger endowment, are from the endowment. </p>

<p>However, this goes on at a number of schools. Thus, I must grin and bear it.</p>

25

<p>I definitely don't want to turn this into any sort of argument. I will try to respond to your thoughts with some of mine and that simply is all that they are, my thoughts. </p>

<p>You wrote:
"I also didn't say that graduates from less selective high schools are crap. You are omitting words and twisting the statement. What I said was that they " can be very good or they can be the cream of the crap." This is quite correct, and I still stand by it in the context of class ranking. Someone who is in the top 10% among a very selective high school is probably top notch academically. Someone who is top notch among a high school with low SATs and test scores in general, may not be as good. Notice I said MAY not be, and didn't not say they "aren't as good." "</p>

<p>I KNOW you did not say that these graduates were crap, and in fact, I quoted YOUR quote in my post about "cream of the crap". But I STILL disagree with your point. I am fully aware that you have MORE top students at your "selective" suburban high school that we have at my more "horrible" rural high school. Thus, it is my belief, as I wrote, that someone, for example, in the 15th %tile at YOUR school is still an EXCELLENT top notch student who would qualify for a very selective college (and it may go deeper than top 15% at a very competitive high school actually). AT OUR high school, it is my belief, that we merely have LESS students like that as a whole in the student body but we have SOME JUST AS good or JUST as qualified as the kids in the 15th or 20th percentile ranking in a more competitive high school. Therefore, I said that at our high school, we are talking more like the top 5-10%tile ranked kids as being equivalent in qualifications, for example, to perhaps the top 20%tile kids in a more competitive high school. But these kids are just as qualified but there are less of them in the entire school. You are assuming that the best kids in a high school such as our "crap" one, are not on par, or MAY not be on par with kids in your high school. Our entire high school surely is not but the top kids ARE. Do you realize that while they may just be a handful each year but we do get a couple kids into elite colleges? These kids are HIGHLY qualified, not sub par. We have had kids go to Stanford, Harvard, Brown, Dartmouth, Middlebury, Penn, just not as many as from a high school like yours. These kids are as good as the large number at your high school like this. Colleges look at the whole student. Rank is just one factor in the admissions evaluation. They look at the rank in context. At our school, you'd have to be in the top seven or so kids out of 160 graduates to stand a chance at the most selective colleges but at your school, I imagine kids in the 15th%tile might also stand a chance because the highly qualified kids go deeper into the class. Colleges know this. But please know that our very top kids are on par with kids anywhere. Even from my crap high school. I feel certain that my own child would have fared just fine in a competitive high school and is faring great at her Ivy, which was not the only one she got into. I really don't think these colleges considered her subpar because she came from crap high school and so her rank was unfair or some such. Believe me, the top kids at our high school are VERY accomplished. We just have less of this type of kid than your school has. Smart achievers exist everywhere. </p>

<p>I still think you are combining the issue of need based financial aid with building diversity in a class. I don't see them as entirely connected. I think colleges offer need based aid to kids from a variety of backgrounds, including Caucasians who are not low income but merely cannot afford the full tuition (or have more than one kid in college, for instance). </p>

<p>You wrote: "most people at Harvard and other IVY league schools, however, are paying full freight for the tuition." I beg to differ. Just look at the data merely in The Princeton Review's Best 345 Colleges. I only have the 2003 Edition so forgive me if these stats are not up to date....but they do give the percentage of students who receive financial aid at each school. A sampling:
Harvard 48%
Brown 40%
Princeton 40%
Yale 39%
Dartmouth 46%
Cornell 46%
Columbia 45%
Stanford 42%
MIT 51%
Amherst 47%
Williams 39%
Swarthmore 49%</p>

<p>So, I suppose when you say MOST people at these elite schools are paying full freight, that you can say "most" if you mean a majority, but in lots of these cases, we are talking 51-69% paying full freight, so it is not an OVERWHELMING majority. Lots of aid is being given out. That is what need based aid is about. It is NOT the same as affirmative action. Also, elite schools strive for diversity, not just giving financial help, and not necessarily lowering their standards to achieve it. I think most of the lower income and/or students of color, at these institutions are just as qualified. </p>

<p>I also simply do not agree with your assumption that your tuition is subsidizing the students who receive financial aid. LOTS more money beyond your tuition dollars goes to paying costs to maintain a college. There are endowments, scholarship funds, etc. </p>

<p>Your latest post is discussing affirmative action more than anything. I really do not think the majority of financial aid given at elite colleges is to achieve racial diversity. I think they have need based aid for ANY student of any background who is also qualified to attend the college. They do not want to turn away QUALIFIED applicants who cannot afford the full freight. That is the concept behind financial need based aid, not racial diversity. Elite colleges ALSO try to build a diverse class of students (diverse in EVERY way, not just racial diversity) because they value diversity for the educational climate of the school. They achieve that by reaching out to all types of backgrounds. To equate this with scholarships is not where it is at with elite institutions. Many of the minority students pay full freight for example. Another point is that the minority students need to be qualified to do the work. As well, many of the scholarship and financial aid goes to all types of kids, not just low income or minority students. My kids are neither low income, nor minority, but do receive financial aid. </p>

<p>Your example of the student at Ohio must have been a merit aid scholarship to attract that student, because you said the student was well off. At the Ivy League schools, there is NO merit aid to attract a certain kind of student or minority. There is ONLY need based aid. So, that example does not hold true at the most "elite" universities that use financial need to determine aid, not minority status or merit. </p>

<p>Lastly, I am happy for you when you say: "However, I have done everything in my power, and hopefully instilled this in my kids, to plan for the future as not to be in a position where I will desparately need the school's "need scholarships" to survive." This is definitely a good thing and you should feel good about it. But also know that while you have planned well, better than me for sure, you obviously are of means to do this and not all people are in that position. By the same token, while I cannot afford to pay full freight (the yearly bill for two kids right now if not on aid would be close to $100,000/year and there is NO way), we do not "desparately" need the school's scholarship to survive. We told our kids they could go anywhere they wanted and we would worry about the cost. They did not HAVE to go where they got the best aid....one got a free ride and merit awards but did not go to those schools, which were lower on her list....the other got scholarships everywhere but we let her pick where she wanted to go. Simply, we will be paying for it for many years because we value education a LOT. We needed the aid but we did not let the aid dictate where they could go. It has helped make it possible, no question. We still have massive loans. So, just because someone is on aid, it does not mean their parents were desparate, only that they are not in an economic position to pay the entire bill and will take advantage of the help that colleges offer depending on their assessment of what the family should be able to afford. If you can afford to send three kids at one time full freight, I am ecstatic for you. We simply are not in that income bracket. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

26

<p>Susan, There are so many things that I can add,but I felt that this thread has gone way beyond its purpose. Thus, I will say:</p>

<p>Hi Susan and all posters. Have a nice day! :)</p>

27

<p>Taxguy, it is fine with me if you do not wish to discuss it further. I simply wanted to get my thoughts out with regard to posts I read here. </p>

<p>I also just recalled something else related to one of your points. Your posts discuss that you do not wish for your full freight money to be subsidizing other students on aid (or at least not a LARGE quantity of students...some are all right if I understand you). I mentioned in my post that I do not believe your tuition dollars are going to subsidize the students who are paying less. I mentioned endowments and scholarship funds. I just remembered that at Brown, over the summer, my D was asked by Brown to be connected to an alumni giver so that she could thank the alumni for the contributions that make it possible for her to get scholarship grants (this year she got $20,000 in grant, way more than last year cause we have two in college now). So, for one thing, this is showing that the scholarship money did NOT come from another student's tuition but from donations of alumni to the scholarship funds. I thought their connecting receiving students with actual people who make the donations was a great idea because it let those who contribute get a personal sense of who benefitted. So, I thought I would mention that the money for financial aid is not coming out of the pocket of families such as you who pay the full tuition. Those whose incomes demonstrate inability to pay full freight are getting grants from scholarship funds that do not come from your pocket (unless you are a contributer to these scholarship funds). </p>

<p>I also hope you have a good day.
Susan</p>

28

<p>Susan, I am sure what you are saying is True. However, as I noted, Syracuse goes to an extreme. For example, during the summer, they had a whopping 25% on full scholarship. I am pretty sure that most, if not all of this, came from us full tuition payers. I would bet you dollars to donuts that Brown doesn't give 25% of their kids full need based scholarships nor 20%, nor 15%. However, I do know that at least some of this is done at many colleges.</p>

<p>This is supported by the Boston Globe article whose url I have noted in post 22. Here is a quote from that article: "At Princeton, which offered the most generous financial-aid packages in the Ivy League, students from families in the bottom 50 percent of the income distribution made up just 10 percent of the freshman class"</p>

<p>As I noted, Syracuse seems to be an extreme case of offering 25% of admitted summer students full scholarships.</p>

<p>As to my class rank discussion, I came upon a school for my daughter that just hit me the wrong way. Maybe I was facing east instead of north. </p>

<p>Anyway, University of Cincinnati had a requirement for a scholarship program or honors program "either 1320 in SATs or top 10% of high school class or 3.8 unweighted GPA. It rankled me ( is rankled a word?)that they used this set class rank and unweighted GPA ( without regard to course toughness)" in awarding scholarships and in admitting honors kids. I also have seen some similar 'silly' requirements at other schools as well. This is why I started the class rank thread. Again being in the top 10% of a magnet program or a tough public or private high school is much tougher than that of a more average high school. Yet, this distinction didn't seem to be noticed by Cincinnati. Also, I know that not all schools are using Cincinnati's standards; however, there are a fair number that do use similar standards on either class rank or unweighted GPA,without regard to toughness. I do wonder how Univ of Texas handles this with their top 10% rule for automatic admission.</p>

<p>Anyway, your point that some schools take some of the scholarships out of endowments may have merit. However, at least in the summer program at Syracuse, that didn't seem to be the case. Also when I complained to the head of the summer program and asked him why the pre-college program was so expensive, he privately admitted to me that "there are a number of scholarships given out to needy kids." This surely sounds like I was one of those that were subsidizing these that Syracuse wanted me to subsidize0. Maybe he said it to make me feel much better; however, it had the reverse effect on me and on at least two other parents who paid full freight that I am aware of.</p>

<p>I honestly can't say whether there is a 20-25% scholarship rate during the normal school year or whether it does come out of endowments. To be honest, I am not sure that I want to know the answer.However, the endowments at Syracuse has increased 17.2% ( according to Chronicle of Higher Education from 2004-2005). This was normal range of increase when compared to most endowments, and in fact was a bit higher than many; thus, I doubt that too many scholarships were paid using endowments or the rate of increase wouldn't have been that high.</p>

<p>Darn, I can't believe that I typed another post. You sucked me in. LOL :)</p>

29

<p>Since this thread has morphed into a discussion about diversity I might as well add my 2 cents. In general I support affirmative action programs to increase ethnic diversity in college programs for many reasons. I also whole-heartedly support need based aid to open up the doors of colleges to students of all economic levels.</p>

<p>However I do agree with taxguy in one regard as far as AA/diversity is concerned. It should not be merely an excercise to compete in a numbers game, x% of our students are AfAm, %x are Hisp, x% are NatAm, whoopie are we great. For what really is diversity and which students will bring this to a college campus? </p>

<p>AA programs not only offer finaid benefits but also admission advantages which are justified based on the concept that past discrimination has placed minority students at some competetive disadvantage. Given that reasoning, any affirmative action benefits must not only take into account ethnic background but socio-economic background as well. Why in the world should a college give the son or daughter of a Henry Gates or a Alberto Gonzales any competative advantage whatsoever. Unlike the overwhelming majority of all students, their children attend the best high schools, can take advantage of opportunities which only money/power can offer, have probably traveled extensively, etc. They should be able to compete on a level playing field. To say otherwise is to imply that minorities are somehow inferior to their non-minority counterparts, that they cannot compete! And do these students really offer "diversity"? I think a poor caucasian student from Oil City, Pa offers much more diversity.</p>

<p>Save those affirmative action slots to ethnic minorities which with truly diversify the student population, students from BedSty who may have attended their Borough hs or perhaps one of the city's great magnate schools. Offer a slot to a Hispanic whose father is a day laborer in Omaha. Open up those slots for the countless thousands of ethnics who are minorities in their middle class hs. Do this and our colleges will achieve genuine diversity.</p>

30

<p>Sorry, for, er, "sucking you in". It is merely a discussion of viewpoints. Do not feel compelled to respond. It is a choice. I hope it is a friendly discussion. </p>

<p>I can't really say much about the summer program and can't truly equate that with regular college and tuition and such. My daughter goes to a private summer program. They do not publicize ANY scholarship money as being available. But believe me, I KNOW some kids who have gone completely for free or for a reduced tuition. This is a VERY expensive program. Where that money came from, I don't know. Might be the same as your D's summer program. They want to attract talented kids and make room for them. This is different than the financial need based aid money at colleges like I described where the scholarship money came from donations and endowments, not other parents' tuition money. </p>

<p>In regard to your quote above from the news article.....the first time you quoted it, you were talking how a majority of students paid full freight at the Ivies. So, I then explained that a pretty high percentage of students (at least 40%) at Ivies received SOME financial aid. Now, your latest quote about lower income kids making up only ten percent of the freshmen class at Princeton....I agree with and know. This is a different point. In fact, it goes with what I was saying earlier, that financial aid is NOT just for low income students, nor minorities. If 40% of the kids got aid but only 10% represent lower income students, then a whole lot more kids got aid who do not represent low income families or even minorities either. That is why I feel that some of your earlier posts linking aid as recruiting minorities or low income kids who may not be up to speed in terms of qualifications was not accurate. The reason that there are so few low income kids at elite institutions goes beyond the inability to pay. Afterall, schools like Princeton offer to give whatever need based aid that a family's income would necessitate. The issue goes way beyond this. I won't get into all the points here but we all know that opportunities for low income students with parents who themselves lack education does not always get them to the gate of elite institutions of higher learning....it is not just the money but their environments, their schools, their opportunities. </p>

<p>I hear ya on your example of Univ. of Cincinatti. But I don't fully agree with you. IF they were ONLY going by class rank, you'd have an excellent point. Top 10% at my school is not the same "cut" as a school where the top 20% is of this same calibur. You already know what I think about your previous statements that the cream of our crap MAY not be as good as at your school and that I think they are JUST as qualified but we have LESS of them and that type of student goes DEEPER into your student body so that using top 10% at your school would not be as fair for THAT reason. BUT U of Cincinatti is NOT just using rank. They have said OR GPA, for instance. The reason that they use UNWEIGHTED (which is what many colleges use) is because not all schools weight grades. In terms of admissions, schools definitely look at the difficulty of the coursework and so it counts to have taken the most challenging curriculum offered. But an unweighted GPA is a standard used in this sort of thing. This might seem unfair, BUT the university is ALSO offering another criteria....SAT score....so it is at least allowing a student this chance via different criteria and not just one single one. And a 1320 is not THAT high of a threshold. </p>

<p>I am a little familiar with U of Cinci as my D's best friend is about to matriculate there for the BFA in Musical Theater, which is one of the TOP programs in the country and highly selective. She had been invited for the honors scholarship thing. She went to an elite prep school and they do not rank, I'm pretty sure. So, um, kids from such schools are still eligible. I don't even think schools like hers had weighted grades, but not positive. What wasn't so kosher (to me or her parents) at U of Cincy was that you had to come to campus for this scholarship invitation/consideration on a completely DIFFERENT date than the audition date. This was before you knew you were admitted. So, conceivably, a student could visit junior year (ok, this is optional but her family did and it is ideally what a student should do when formulating a college list and I see you have as well), then again in winter of senior year for the audition, then again in senior year for the scholarship consideration event you had to attend if you wanted to be considered and were invited to, then again in summer for orientation. Conceivably that is FOUR trips to campus before you even begin. Um, not sure I could have afforded that. But also to make a separate trip for the scholarship consideration before knowing if you would be accepted is a lot to ask, in my opinion. My D who applied to BFA programs in MT, got scholarships at every school and that did not require a special trip for consideration. Her D was not able to make that trip (afterall, BFA candidates are traveling most weekends to other BFA auditions) and so was not able to get it. Her family is not on financial aid, I don't think. </p>

<p>In any case, if you have too many negative feelings about a certain school, it might give you pause to reconsider having them on the list. Then again, it really is up to your kid which school she chooses (unless you have put any restrictions on that....not sure). Ideally, both she and you will feel good about whichever school she attends. With public school, we can moan about this and that about the school (believe me, we do, lol) but we have to send our kids there (before you tell me this was a choice.....we do not have private schools in the area and we don't want to send our kids to boarding school, nor could afford to), but with college, you can CHOOSE where to go and you might as well go to school where you LIKE most aspects about it. If you don't like the policies, perhaps pick a school where you feel real good about it all. </p>

<p>In any case, I wish your D good luck in the admissions process. She has a diverse (sorry for the pun) list of schools. I am assuming that RISD is her first choice and I hope she gets it. My older D is taking a course at RISD this semester. </p>

<p>Susan</p>

31

<p>How does your D like her course?</p>

32

<p>Classes start at Brown today but they do not start at RISD until Sept. 14 so I don't know the answer! :D</p>

<p>She will be taking Architectural Drawing. She is contemplating a major in Architectural Studies. She did a six week intensive this past summer at Harvard Design School. She'd like to take an architectural design studio at RISD but scheduling was difficult, plus she is on the ski team and in winter that involves two full weekday mornings going to MA for training. She liked the design studio work at Harvard but she also self assessed that a drawing course at RISD would improve her skills in that area so opted for this course for now. I think it is a six hour course on Fridays.</p>

<p>Susan</p>

33

<p>By the way, Taxguy, just wanted to give you some additional information about financial aid at Syracuse.</p>

<p>63% of applicants applied for it, of those 56% were determined to have need. The average financial aid package for Syracuse students was $18,000, not even half the cost of attending. Of that package, average need based grant was $11,200 - that includes both institutional grants from Syracuse and Pell Grant and other government financial grants. The average needbased loan and work study package was $6800, with loans accounting for about $5200 a year. 70% of SU students did borrow at some point to finance their education.</p>

<p>Bottomline: Syracuse doesn't have 25% on full scholarships during the year. In fact, these numbers suggest, based on the cost of $38,000 or so to attend, that very few financial aid recipients get full aid.</p>

<p>So, it's a bit different during the school year than at the summer program your daughter attended. And, by the way, this is hardly "excessive" aid - Syracuse is actually behind many other similar schools in both the number on financial aid and the actual dollar amounts being doled out.</p>

<p>So, I guess if your daughter ends up at Syracuse, you can rest easy. :)</p>

34

<p>Carolyn, :)</p>

35

<p>The opinions regarding Syracuse's motivation to spend big bucks to increase diversity may all be valid, but I believe that other significant perspectives are being overlooked.</p>

<p>For example, Syracuse, a fine university, suffers from its location; more so than other solid schools in depressed locales; Yale (New Haven), U of Chicago, U of Southern California. Upstate New York continues to be economically depressed. Frankly, there's little to draw folks to upstate communities, despite the fact that the cost of living is dramatically lower than metropolitan New York City. In this respect, Syracuse is at a competitive disadvantage with its fellow institutions in New England and Pennsylvania (and even to SUNY campuses, because Syracuse costs more than the well regarded public universities in upstate NY. I wouldn't be surprised if a siginificant element of the diversity project at Syracuse is to attract more students generally who wouldn't apply otherwise. Fine with me.</p>

36

<p>What do you mean by otherwise would not apply? Are you speaking about kids w higher gpas and sats, or students that would not be able to afford a private school, URMs, or all of those, or what other applicants?</p>

37

<p>By otherwise, I mean that the kids who wouldn't ordinarily include Syracuse as their first choice soley because it's not a "hot college town," or because of the general bland reputation of the city, or because of the local weather (one of the rainiest spots on the eastern seaboard). I was comparing Syracuse University to other private colleges in the northeast.</p>