<p>Then so are people on merit scholarships. They earned it, but its still a handout. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which is why * some * colleges meet 100% need, because its not the kid’s fault. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because some people (not me) can’t go to college at all without this “handout” so the fact that others are arguing that there should be no “handouts” at all is disturbing to them. How else are they supposed to go to college? Are you saying they shouldn’t be able to go to college? Be a high-school grad, earn less on average, and have that cycle continue from generation to generation?</p>
<p>There are people who believe that all schools should be populated solely by people who can pay for them without assistance. They bristle mightily at the idea that others feel differently. They may have been part of the “lucky gene” club themselves and hoped their kids wouldn’t have to compete against and , worse yet, mingle with the kids of trailer-trash riff-raff.</p>
<p>Who knows, maybe little Biff or Buffy might even get their :eek: handed to 'em by the hand-out kid from Sub-standard High. What would they say at the Lucky Gene Club? The shame. The horror. Yeew. And Yuck. (FA kids have cooties. ;)) </p>
<p>I think these folks anti-need-based aid folks do need their own colleges. Please. ;)</p>
<p>Instead of calling aid earned through high GPAs and scores “handouts”, how about “rewards”? The negative reaction to "handout’’ is based on its connotation as being something unearned.</p>
<p>^ that would be merit aid…kids who have high scores but can’t afford the college get a hand out(FA) so they are able to attend…Again, I’m not seeing this as a negative.just the way it is.</p>
<p>What is happening, and the schools know it is happening and they are trying to figure out what to do about it, is that the “top tier schools” are now full of legacies, asians and the high ability, low income working class and other minorities. The professional’s kid who is full pay in a family with 150 - 200k really can’t pay 200,000 for college without high debt. So their kids, often high achieving, high scoring kids are getting huge awards to state U. No longer does attending a top school mean you were the top kid. Which makes attending a top tier school significantly less meaningful.</p>
<p>geeps, among the Ivies and similar schools, there is often no “merit aid”, just need based aid, on the theory that they want the 1000 (or whatever) best applicants, regardless of need. I have no problem viewing need aid to Harvard as a reward for earning admission, rather than charity. I also suspect schools have found that such kids often more than repay the aid through donations, making it more of an investment than a handout.</p>
<p>debrockman, judging from the statistics of incoming classes, I do not see how attending a top tier school has become “less meaningful.” Do you have any data about dwindling numbers of applicants or lower GPA/SATs to back that up?</p>
<p>Also, do you have any data which supports your view that legacies are more numerous than in prior years or receiving more consideration? Note that because so many Ivy, 7 Sister and other top schools were not coed until the 1970s or later, prior to then, a lot of would be legacies (daughters of Yalies; sons of Vassar grads, etc) would have been ineligible for admission. Accrodingly, an increase in legacy admits since that time (if that has occured) might be expected now that those schools are coed.</p>
<p>Not that long ago, when the talented smart kid from the wrong side of rich attended (insert top school) we all said that they attended “on a scholarship”. To differentiate further, scholarships became divided between need-based and merit (or academic, athletic, talent) scholarships. Now we have a group that wants to move us to “hand-out” for need-based scholarships. Heck, let’s just be done with it and call it “welfare”. </p>
<p>I’d be happy to do that just to watch the anti-need folks’ heads spin around like Linda Blair’s did in the Exorcist. Welfare. Welfare. Welfare. ;)</p>
<p>And just for grins: </p>
<p>The equitable system they want- </p>
<p>Family A. No college grads ever. Migrant workers and house-maids for generations. No assets. Limited income. Best college choice for their smart kid? Pay as you go community college, transfer to Directional State. </p>
<p>Family B. Great-Granddad owned land where oil was found. Subsequent generations have all been funny-story-telling-drunks and morally suspect-coke fiends. Nobody has worked a day in recent memory. Best college choice for their smart kid? The sky is the limit, kid. Go wherever you want.</p>
<p>ok, let me do it for you. For someone to make 200,000 he or she most likely would live around some high cost area, like Boston, NYC, Chicago, San Fran… Monthly income would be around $8000 afte tax. Housing = 3500 (not a fancy house), car and insurance=500, utilities = 600, food = 1200 (for 4 people), train/bus=500 (2 people). That’s 6300 total, so there is 1700 left over. Assuming this family doesn’t buy any clothes, vacation, no one ever gets sick, car never breaks down, it would take them 10 years to save 200,000. That’s only for one child.</p>
<p>Note to 'mudge:
Please don’t type “yuck” and “FA” so close to each other. Sometimes reading these posts too quickly causes letters to seem juxtaposed. Or better yet, save such things for your responses to some of the arrogant blowhards on the thread . </p>
<p>Thats it: yuck, FA , blowhard. I feel like I should wash my hands…</p>
<p>^^Thank you. People on these boards get so angry at me when I complain that I have a 52K EFC and come from a family that makes about 150K each year who obviously can’t afford 200K tuition. Even though my family makes a lot of money, it’s still really hard to pay for an expensive college. We save every way we can. I don’t think I’ve gotten new clothes in at least a year. I will probably end up at the State U (not that I’m ungrateful, it’s just the situation).</p>
<p>^^not to be the thread police, but that post isn’t topical…take it to a PM or other thread please (really, I’m not trying to be mean, I just would like to stay on topic)</p>
<p>Au contraire, rocket. Was just leading to a discussion on the costs of undergrad and grad/professional school. Newer posters did not follow the saga of mudge’s dd’s decision to choose the school she did and the scholarship she did, and in part saved $$ for professional school. I realize the newer posters have a lot of catching up to do on this issue, but it is very relevant to this discussion. </p>
<p>(It also lightens up the intensity of tone of the conversation a bit- at least for now)</p>
(really, I’m not trying to be mean, I just would like to stay on topic)</p>