<p>Research on the reality of college admission, which is that there are currently many able but poor students who don’t get admitted, or who are unable to attend if admitted, crowded out by unprepared but prosperous high school students. </p>
<p>It’s just as plausible that it has the opposite effect. According to “research” (granted is social science research…), Alg I testing (graduation requirement) encourages drop high school outs bcos kids get the point where they know that they can’t pass; they just quit, thinking, ‘what’s the point?’.</p>
<p>It’s possible that a merit-based finaid programs could have the same effect (assuming the bar is not low). It could discourage low income kids off the college prep track once they earn a few C’s because they will quickly come to believe that they will never be able to meet the merit bar to receive money to attend college. If a juco is their only real opportunity, why work in HS?</p>
<p>I appreciate the problem you’re pointing to, but what are you suggesting as a solution? Eliminate public higher education on grounds that it subsidizes the affluent? That would only further exacerbate the inequality, wouldn’t it?</p>
<p>It seems to me a central challenge here is to reach out to socioeconomically disadvantaged but academically capable students and make it clear to them early on that college is a realistic option. That, it seems to me, is the singular advantage of these uniform taxpayer-supported merit aid programs: the benchmark is clear, “Do this well and we’ll help you go to college.” The present process is completely opaque to far too many socioeconomically disadvantaged kids, many of whom never even take SATs or ACTs, or if they they get that far and do well, in many cases don’t pursue college out of a (possibly mistaken) belief they can’t afford it, or end up settling for a community college or lower-tier school than they are qualified for. But the idea that if you show 'em the money up front they’re more likely to pursue it strikes me as very plausible.</p>
<p>Yes BlueBayou, I agree with your previous post that public land grant schools are wonderful. The reality is that if private colleges didn’t exist then many of the students who are currently attending/will attend them would be pushed out because there would not be enough spaces for all those desiring a college education. Of course the states could open more schools, but that would mean higher taxes and I’m sure that wouldn’t go over too well. I live in Virginia and the competition to get into some of our top state schools ( UVa, Wm. & Mary, Va Tech) is pretty fierce. If some of our top students did not choose to attend private schools ( for various reasons), the competition would be even worse.</p>
<p>I see so many students on this board that have dead beat divorced parents, parents that rather buy Mercedes than to pay for their kids education, parents that refuse to pay because their kids don’t want to major in ___ or go to school ___. Those kids have a lot less options than lower income students. More schools should have merit aid. It would give some control back to those students.</p>
<p>the solution in Virginia is somewhat obvious (at least to me). Reduce the OOS students! Eliminate the financial aid that UVa & W&M provides to OOS students – require them to be full pay. </p>
<p>But, let’s be real. A $4k state merit grant to a private college is only gonna be a marginal benefit for those middle class kids who opt to attend that private college. Thus, it would be a determining factor in only a small number of cases. (And, of course, it would enable such private college to reduce its own need-based aid by the amount of the state grant.)</p>
<p>“I see so many students on this board that have dead beat divorced parents, parents that rather buy Mercedes than to pay for their kids education, parents that refuse to pay because their kids don’t want to major in ___ or go to school ___. Those kids have a lot less options than lower income students.”</p>
<p>I don’t agree. The lower income students who have parents who didn’t go to college and may not even have graduated from high school have fewer options because unlike the kids with educated parents who refuse to pay for their college, the lower income students lacked the exposure to education, educated people, and to being around people who valued education. The well of kids with deadbeat parents are more likely to have also taken a college prep curriculum than are poor kids without educated parents.</p>
<p>Agreed. For these well stated reasons and for other reasons, smart but poor young people still have the fewest choices of all in American higher education. </p>
<p>I largely agree with bclintonk in the post replying to me, and agree that at the margins it’s a good idea to have some colleges have some “merit” scholarships with no test of a parent’s willingness to pay, because some parents are deadbeats. But to return to the point of the thread, I think it’s regrettable that a state governor would consider reducing funding for need-based financial aid in order to offer more “merit” scholarships, because it would be better public policy to do as bclintonk says and make poor young people more aware of programs targeted to their needs.</p>
<p>I guess I disagree with NSM. If a kid is so poor and so uninformed about going to college, by giving him financial aid to go to college is not going to necessary do anything for him. That money would be better spent to give him a better K-12 education.</p>
<p>I would rather see us putting more effort to educate our kids when they are young, to make the education from K-12 as equal as possible, and have everyone compete for aid equally without consideration for affordability. It would be a good way of using the money to educate the brightest in this country.</p>
<p>BlueBayou-Even if the state of Virginia reduced the number of OOS students, the spaces for in state students would still fall short. I agree the a $4K wouldn’t make up the entire amount for a student at a private college but it would help. </p>
<p>I really would like to see all financial aid have some merit component. Students would not necessarily have to be the “top” performing students. Years ago when I attended college, I recall a number of students with substantial aid. Some of these students worked to get decent grades and obviously cared about getting an education. Others were there to party until the money stopped coming.</p>