<p>Hey Cur - missed you for quite a while. At the very least I was hoping the 2 girls would have a chance to meet on the court. But it seems that is not to be, although I understand that may happen with Condors daughter. Good luck and I am sure that you and your daughter are in for a great four years.</p>
<p>Once again your insight has been profound.</p>
<p>curmudgeon, that was quite a rebuttal ... please don't slink away quite yet. The FA people I've known seemed smarter than that, but I don't doubt FAFSA and/or Profile EFCs are often warped. Still, how does merit aid fix the problem? Princeton (to use your example) is strictly need-based and not likely to change -- why should they when they're already getting top applicants? What I'm hearing is frustration that the self-employed "dentist" is getting a raw deal. What I'm not hearing is how merit awards make FA any more fair. Pollyanna? Nah, I don't think so -- a "polyanna," if I read the allusion correctly, would be blind to the greed, corruption, and shameless commercialization of the admissions industry (e.g., College Board testing, private admissions consultants, manipulation of USN&WR ratings, etc.). There is a movement afoot to reform admissions, and eliminating merit aid in an attempt to level the field is one goal (no, I'm not holding my breath, but I like to envision that world). Weenie said that parents shopping for merit won't consider the larger picture. I think we'll all lose out if we don't.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Aaah. It's kind of like the story of the guy on the beach after the starfish all washed ashore. The guy was throwing them back in the water. One at a time. The enormity of the task overwhelmed a passer-by and caused him to ask "Don't you see the futility in what you do? You can't possibly make a difference. There are so many starfish." The fella responded as he threw another starfish back into the sea -"Well, I made a difference to that one." </p>
<p>If I could be so bold as to speak for Weenie, Weenie's point is that merit aid fixed the inequity problem for her starfish. As a parent, that is our first obligation. What she is doing now is pointing a way to the water and off the beach for other parents of starfish. That is what ST2 and I are doing , too. </p>
<p>Celloguy, there are lots of kids who can't consider top need-only schools for economic reasons . To some of us -that is the larger picture. Although mine could and did "consider" them, the finances made very little sense at the need only top schools. There is plenty out there to reform in college admissions and FA- you can pick your starfish. We can pick ours. </p>
<p>You consider merit aid as benefiting the least needy, those who are defined as having no need (or in our case less need than we have). You feel this merit aid is benefiting those least deserving of aid. Well - when that kid so defined by the powers that be is your kid, and you know they've been pee'd on by the admissions/FA system in place at the top schools -let's just say your perspective may change. I'm glad this miserable need based system worked for your kids, but does that mean everything's fine and dandy with need based for all families? Some of us might find that view a little myopic (like we are sometimes considered). Merit aid may not fix a broke need based system for everybody, but it "fixes" it for some high achieving kids and for that I am forever grateful.</p>
<p>You can sign me, "parent of a starfish". ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, almost forgot, sorry..... but the topmost need only schools aren't getting very many middle class kids, are they? Some few HYP admitted kids are stolen by the merit schools ( like mine), and most of the others feel they can't afford it and opt to attend state schools and other lower cost alternatives. Just ask mini for the numbers on middle class kids at top schools. ;)</p>
<p>Curmudgeon,</p>
<p>Nice summary of the financial/merit aid issues.</p>
<p>I have always been an advocate of merit aid after 100% of financial need of all students have been met. The trouble has always been, what does 100% of financial need mean? Your example illustrates the real issue, there is a significant bias against "self employment". </p>
<p>With 2 now in college (second leaves next month) I have been quite surprised by the differences in FA outcomes between schools. At the end of the day we are fairly happy with the outcome but that could be because we educated ourselves by taking advantage of the information available (like CC).</p>
<p>Good luck to your daughter at school next year and beyond.</p>
<p>and celloguy, as long as we're dreaming- what about this pipe-dream? An elite college admissions system that wasn't based on accidents of birth, but strictly on the innate and fairly measured quality of the student, and where costs for these students ( or ability or willingness of parents to pay) was not a consideration of attendance. Now that's a dream we might can all get behind. ...Nah, probably not. No room for gaming or unfair advantage and where's the fun in that? LOL.</p>
<p>weenie, cur, et al-it looks like celloguy has hijacked us and we are helpless to come up with the goods to escape his philosophical grasp. Cello uses a lot of loaded words like gaming, bribing and manipulating. Good stuff, eh?</p>
<p>But while colleges have an obligation to society at large they also have an obligation to their community-ie their students, faculty and alumni. What created the most prestigious college and universities, those whose enormous endowments allow them to attract full-price applicants by the bucket full while offering full need based aid to all others. Well it was because of their class exclusivity and, dare I say it, discrimination many years in the past. Less than a century ago nary a Jew, black or Asian were walking their bucolic quadrangles. Not many Catholics either might I add. And that not so proud past has given them such brand recognition that it hardly matters what "product" they offer in the classroom. I am not suggesting for one minute that it is a second class academic experience but the biggest and baddest brand name out there is well known to be the worst among its peers in terms of student satisfaction. But the endowment money keeps rolling in.</p>
<p>What about colleges without the storied past of the prestigious need blind behemouths, colleges which were alway more egalitarian in their mission in days gone by? What about wonderful colleges which were at a disadvantage in days gone by due to merely being geographically challenged, far away from the financial, political powerbase of the northeast in days of yore like a Rhodes for instance(a shameless plug for Cur)? Most agree that the academic experience for all students is enhanced by attracting better students and merit aid is one way to do that. But celloguy would deny them the oportunity to do that for their academic community. And of course all of the colleges willing to invest their limited resources in this way hand out more need base aid than merit aid so it is dishonest to claim that they are not doing their part to society as a whole. </p>
<p>And if you look at the percentage of students who are able to pay the full sticker price, the most prestigious colleges typically have a significantly higher percentage than colleges further down the pecking order. Would celloguy like admissions to address this inequity too? I think not. They also typically have a significantly higher percentage of student coming from the well known prep feeder schools. They are very egalitarian I bet. NOT! How about Harvard, Princeton, Amherst, et al addressing that conundrum.</p>
<p>Oh I see its all about the merit aid. The bribery. The gaming. The manipulation. The shame!!!!!</p>
<p>I'm sure some PhD in Economics somewhere has researched the laws of supply and demand with regards to college admissions, factoring in the following motives - </p>
<p>Elite colleges - we want (and can get) the best students, including diversity</p>
<p>Middle-tier colleges - we want the best students we can lure away from the elites, by either lowering cost or standards</p>
<p>Lower-tier public colleges - we'll take whoever's left, tuition is fixed so don't expect much in frills</p>
<p>Parents - I want DD/DS to attend best school I can afford</p>
<p>Students - Colleges cost money? Do I have to write an essay?</p>
<p>originaloog, that's a thoughtful post, and perhaps I've been unclear. I sometimes find it hard to accurately and fairly present my POV in CC without misunderstanding. My vocab (gaming, bribing, manipulating) is perhaps "loaded," but I'm certainly not alone in believing these terms are accurate. Have you read the "Admissions Revolution" thread on CC -- plenty of debate there too, but also links to statements by adcoms and college presidents who agree with my POV. Are you familiar with the Thacker book, "College Unranked: Ending the College Admissions Frenzy"? Thacker's Education Conservancy is well supported in the LAC community. It's on the parent reading list (along with Homer's "Odyssey") at my daughter's college. There's major institutional funding being earmarked for the Conservancy.
Please don't accuse me of "hijacking" the thread. Posters on this list are interested in merit aid for their kids (making a difference to their own starfish) and you are exactly the people I want to hear from. It's helpful to me to hear that you feel the EFC is unfairly calculated (especially for self-employed); that helps me know where to look for solutions. My own experience was different -- we're middle income, and we found we could afford top privates for our kids, though admittedly there's no nest egg for looming retirement. I expect to be set to sea on an ice floe when the time comes. It sounds like some people feel threatened or insulted, and that's fueling your response to me: please don't shoot the messenger.</p>
<p>Gulp - NO nest egg for retirement? At all? </p>
<p>We have saved for retirement and the trade-off has been that our kids never considered need-only schools. They have a set amount to expect from us, upwards of 2/3 of our full-fare EFC, and can choose a private school with merit aid, a highly ranked out-of-state public (provided they're accepted), or an in-state public, then having the unspent portion for grad school or a stake after graduation. Our feeling is that there are excellent options available to our kids in those categories. We just can't feel guilty about coming up with 120K-plus per kid (times three kids) versus 160K (and rising).</p>
<p>So far one's gone for an OOS public and one's at a merit aid school, with lots of satisfaction all around. Don't know what the third one will choose!
[quote]
Students - Colleges cost money? Do I have to write an essay?
[/quote]
Great line, fireflyscout!</p>
<p>frazzled -- 'fraid so; I was pretty serious about the ice floe. I understand that as body temp decreases a certain transcendental acceptance eases one into peace and oblivion. We've been spending our retirement on education since the first little blighter got on a bus for a country day school in Vermont some 30 years ago, then a top prep on nearly-full scholarship, and we've still got one blighter headed for hands-on working-farm boarding school. It's a choice we made and don't regret.</p>
<p>[Caveat:To my wealthy friends, and to those who while not wealthy have managed to beg and borrow full freight - this post is in response to celloguy -it does not necessarily reflect my views.]</p>
<p>celloguy, as I said in my first post, I'm sympathetic to your argument. I , too, want to see fairness in FA, and 100% of need is a fine but for now impossible to reach goal. Even using the present formulas. There is a limited amount of money at most schools. There are plenty of advocates for diversity on campus, even a fair amount that have the good sense to prize economic diversity as a campus goal. I count you and I among those folks with that good sense. Where you have the blinders on is failing to deal with the reality that the cost of an elite institution is far beyond the reach of "most" average families using the existing FA system. That is an absolute truth and I have given you an example of the gaming and manipulation and avarice , and the insanity and ignorance of the system that allows it. </p>
<p>Until and unless a private college reaches such a point in their endowed funds that 100% of need based aid is a possible goal , each institution has to make choices. I think we all agree with that simple economics - not enough cookies in the jar. But there are other choices I don't think you understand about your favored schools. </p>
<p>Presently schools (even those not considered elite) choose to subsidize the "direct costs" of all students from their endowment. Cost = $63,000, they eat $20k per student from their endowment and charge direct costs of $43,000. </p>
<p>You could consider that a form of merit aid at elite schools, couldn't you? It's certainly tuition discounting without regard to need. Isn't it? (I'd call it merit. These schools respond to the merit aid seekers by saying- all of our kids selected by admissions would get merit aid, so we don't have it. Well, actually you do. You just give the discount or subsidy to all admitted students regardless of need.) Why don't the elite schools charge what it really costs to everybody who makes it through the admissions guantlet ? The money raised from the rich would certainly add to the ability of the school to help fund the true need of middle class kids, not to mention poor kids. The poor could even get some help with zero loans or less or no work study. This amount of money spent on a subsidized education for the rich is a far greater number than merit aid, or even need based aid at the top most schools. If this tuition discounting were removed I think the campus could more closely reflect the economic makeup of the nation, a goal I think we share. It would immediately increase economic diversity at elite schools. What do you think?</p>
<p>I almost get the impression that you perceive the provision of merit aid to students who don't qualify for need based aid under the prevailing formulas wrong or even immoral. Then what do you think about those that accept without batting an eyelash the subsidized merit aid given the wealthy at elite need only schools? Don't you think those funds could be used to make FA more fair to middle class kids? Don't you think rich folks should pay the full costs? ;) I wonder how many would be willing to pony it up? "Looks like the University of Illinois!"</p>
<p>It is my humble opinion that some schools know full well that with the admissions standards they have (and the way they weight those standards) that it is a small cost indeed to provide generous packages to the most poor among us and then crow about them incessantly as if it were some globally significant deal. They know that very few of those kids will make it to campus. It is marketing , pure and simple -and quite effective , too. It lets wealthier folks feel good about the generosity of their egalitarian school while all the while buying their steak at discounted hamburger prices. (To be more accurate, I'd say filet mignon at sirloin prices.;))</p>
<p>Of course the economics of attending is the "Grand Lie" of elite college education in this country and some of us know it. Some of us don't. And some of us won't admit it. The doors are not open to everybody. </p>
<p>So, in closing- before anyone goes all "holier than thou" over merit aid, consider who , as a group, truly benefits from the largest form of tuition "discounting" at the elite schools. Gee, I'm betting it's not the super achieving middle class kids who garner a merit award - because as you yourself pointed out, they don't give merit awards or engage in tuition discounts that don't consider need. Or do they? I'd check.</p>
<p>"Presently schools (even those not considered elite) choose to subsidize the "direct costs" of all students from their endowment. Cost = $63,000, they eat $20k per student from their endowment and charge direct costs of $43,000."</p>
<p>I know that was the case when S#2 headed off for Andover on scholarship. The head made a point of letting everyone know that ALL students were on "scholarship" because Andover's tuition covered much less than cost-per-student. It felt very egalitarian, and we were never made to feel less than full members of the community.</p>
<p>You mention $63,000 as cost-per-student at a $43,000 college -- I didn't know that, but it seems in the same spirit (where DO you get these numbers?). But of course you're right, that is a form of merit aid, and it does dilute my argument. I'll stay tuned.</p>
<p>celloguy, this was fastest. If you want more, I'll try to find a better source but google gave me this first. ;)</p>
<p>Swarthmore-</p>
<p>Operating revenue for the 2004-2005 school year was $104,489,000, over 42% of which was provided by the endowment. As is the case with most every elite institution of higher education, actual costs as measured on a per-student basis far exceed revenue from tuition and fees, and so Swarthmore's endowment serves to offset ever-rising costs of education, subsidizing every student's education at Swarthmore--even those paying full tuition. For the 2005-2006 year, tuition, fees, and room & board charges ($41,280) fell well short of the actual cost of education per student, which was approximately $70,300.</p>
<p>This is more convincing as it is from Swat themselves. ;)<a href="http://www.swarthmore.edu/support/priorities_funds.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.swarthmore.edu/support/priorities_funds.html</a></p>
<p>All alumni, parents, and friends will be asked to contribute to The Meaning of Swarthmore through the Annual Fund, which consists of the Alumni Fund, Parents Fund, and Friends Fund. Along with the endowment, these funds provide what might best be called a "hidden scholarship" for every Swarthmore student. The comprehensive fee (tuition and room and board) charged by Swarthmore (and by most other colleges and universities) is set well below the actual cost of a student's education. </p>
<p>For 2004-2005, tuition and fees are just over $39,400 per student, yet the actual cost to educate a Swarthmore student is more than $67,000. In effect, every Swarthmore student, including those who are not on financial aid, receives a subsidy of more than $27,000 from the College.</p>
<p>BTW, I knew the number for the tuition discount was higher than $20K. Interestedad had quoted these numbers to us many times. LOL.</p>
<p>haha, yes of course, that's one place I never looked on college websites, since there was no way I'd ever be contributing to their annual fund</p>
<p>Old one from H. Suggest 50% discount, non-need based. </p>
<p>"Tuition and fees cover only about half the actual cost of educating a Harvard undergraduate," said Knowles. He noted that major building renovations, such as Memorial Hall and the Barker Center, have been funded by specific gifts from donors, not from tuition income.</p>
<p>celloguy, after all that I'd appreciate knowing what you think about the process and the points raised. Somehow I don't see a line forming at the teller window with H parents saying "where do I pay my other half?";).</p>
<p>I can't blame them. They are just taking advantage of an institution that has decided its needs are best served by a system that discounts costs without regard to wealth or need , even though without such discounts , FA could be made truly "fair" and affordable to all. Even the high achieving middle class kid with self-employed mom and pop service industry parents without traditional ( excluded from assets) retirement plans. (Just an example.;))</p>
<p>I'm not picking at you, celloguy. I agree it's broke and I want it fixed, too. I'm concerned about fairness, also. I want economic and every other kind of diversity on campus. I'm willing to join with you in the revolution , it just seems that the sabers are pointed at :eek: me and my kid (and lots of folks like us). I can't allow that to happen without taking up for the forgotten middle kids for whom the elite need-based colleges are nothing but something on Gilmore Girls, in movies and in magazines. It's tough to tell them "no can do" but we do it and make the most of every other available option. We'll be fine without the closed door colleges, but will they truly be all that they could be without our kids? I'm not so sure. My kid is pretty cool. ;)</p>
<p>curm:</p>
<p>
[quote]
We'll be fine without the closed door colleges, but will they truly be all that they could be without our kids? I'm not so sure. My kid is pretty cool.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You are always an inspiration to those of us who worry a little (dare I say secretly) about our merit-aid kids not being at prestigious, "reach" schools (heck, my kids won't even apply to reach schools - there's no point). </p>
<p>Sometimes it is hard to see the Colgate bumper sticker belonging to a family that I know darn well doesn't make nearly as much money as us, but I know that it is their good fortune (???) to get financial aid. And, then, of course there are the so rich that they don't even consider the cost of these schools. But us slobs in between -- well I just don't understand what's going on in this strata.</p>