Middle-Class Gets a Raw Deal

<p>EMMI said, "At the elite schools, virtually all financial aid awards need-based "
Thank you for your response back to me. However most people still think that scholarship money is based on need. That is simply not the case. Do some research on merit vs need-based grants. Don't take my word. Start at the New York Times. I thought the same thing. </p>

<p>To Northstarmom, who doesn't have sympathy for middle class kids. </p>

<p>To you I say as a mother, I fear for this society when the best talent doesn't get rewarded. Our children, yours and mine, have the deck stack against them at the start. I don't have to like it that your wonderful child didn't get to go to the college he wanted to. I don't like it that mine doesn't either.<br>
One of the greasiest booms to this country was after the Second World War when my father's generation got to go to college through the GI bill. Many older friends told me of attending those great schools on the GI bill. They would have never had that chance. We would have never had those doctors, lawyers or scientist or trade school folks. Most were coming out of the depression with their family and widowed mothers. I think we all lose when great talent is not rewarded. Do I think these kids will succeed at the colleges where they attend now? Yes. But, I don't think the system that exists now benefits our society or the working class family. The system that I just went through with my child is fraut with many pot holes that only the very few know how to negotiate.</p>

<p>"To you I say as a mother, I fear for this society when the best talent doesn't get rewarded. Our children, yours and mine, have the deck stack against them at the start. I don't have to like it that your wonderful child didn't get to go to the college he wanted to. I don't like it that mine doesn't either. "</p>

<p>IMO the talent in this country does get rewarded by being able to go to college even if they come from a poor or middle class background or don't have family connections. That's not true for people in most countries in the world.</p>

<p>I don't think that our kids have the deck stacked against them. It's not as if their ending up at an in-state public or a second tier private means their lives are ruined. That's not the case at all. </p>

<p>I highly doubt that anyone posting here knows of any current middle class high school grad who is unable to afford to attend some college in the U.S. Certainly such a student may not be able to attend their first choice college, but they can attend some college. </p>

<p>Here's info from a 2002 USA Today article:
"WASHINGTON — Americans are more educated than ever before, with a greater percentage graduating from high school and college than a decade ago, U.S. Census data released Tuesday show. Eighty percent of Americans are graduates of high school or higher, compared with 75.2% in 1990, the 2000 figures show...</p>

<p>The Census data, based on estimates from the long form sent to one in six households, showed that among people 25 and older:</p>

<p>21% of Americans had taken some college courses but had not earned a degree in 2000, compared with 18.7% 10 years earlier.
15.5% had earned a bachelor's degree but no higher, compared with 13.1% in 1990.
8.9% earned graduate or professional degrees, compared with 7.2% earlier....</p>

<p>He [Terry Hartle of the American Council on Education, an umbrella group for colleges] points to U.S. Department of Education statistics that show there were 13.8 million students enrolled in postsecondary education in 1997; 15.5 million students are enrolled this year. Education officials project the number will rise to 17.5 million by 2010.</p>

<p>"To put that 15.5 million college students in context, there are 15.1 million secondary-school students in the United States. So we have more college students in this country than high school students," Hartle says.</p>

<p>"It's exciting. It's dramatic. I think it's pretty safe to say most people wouldn't dream that we'd have more people in college than we have in high school."</p>

<p>Presently, 63% of high school graduates go to college immediately after graduation, the highest rate ever, Hartle says. In 1970, when the military draft was in full swing, 52% of high school graduates went immediately to college...."
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2002-06-05-education-census.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2002-06-05-education-census.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Frankly, I don't have a lot of sympathy for middle class students whining that they can't afford the BMWs of education.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nmom,</p>

<p>With all due respect, I think that comment is cruel and almost insulting. Its not like OP and others are complaining about not getting an expensive car or the top-of-the-line video game player. They are talking about their educations, for Pete's sake!</p>

<p>These kids' ambitions are to be admired, not denigrated, IMO. I think their frustrations are well-founded. It is certainly not their fault that their parents didn't save or earn enough.</p>

<p>From a 2006 article by the Education Trust:
"We Americans have long been dedicated to the idea that hard work should pay off — that even those from the most humble origins should be able to work their way to the top. </p>

<p>That still happens, of course. Antonio Villaraigosa, the high school dropout from a poor Latino family in East Los Angeles who went on to graduate from UCLA and is now mayor of the second largest city in America.... We repeat these stories over and over.</p>

<p>But ... this kind of upward mobility happens far less often than most of us realize. Today, we not only have less mobility than we did 20 years ago, but we also have less than in most other developed countries. Indeed, there is now less economic mobility in the United States than in France, Germany, Denmark, and a whole host of other European nations. ...</p>

<p>Why...? Principally because of education – or more precisely, the lack thereof...</p>

<p>President Lyndon Baines Johnson and the 89th Congress made a solemn promise to America’s young people in 1965. “Tell them,” said the President, “that the leadership of your country believes it is the obligation of your Nation to provide and permit and assist every child born in these borders to receive all the education that he can take.”</p>

<p>But over the past few decades, we’ve gradually abandoned that promise, and along with it the promise of far too many of our children. ....Today, our highest-achieving low-income students actuallygo directly on to college at rates about the same as our lowest-achieving students from wealthy families....</p>

<p>And indeed, there were robust increases in grant aid — up 68 percent from 1985 to 1995 and 51 percent from 1995 to 2005 7 — that were almost commensurate with increases in tuition and fees.</p>

<p>But along the way, something very important changed. Instead of focusing those increases on students who absolutely needed additional funding to attend college, the biggest increases went to more affluent students who could afford to attend college without such financial support. How did this happen? It happened because all of the key players in student financial aid -- the federal government, state governments and institutions themselves — increased the proportion of their aid dollars going to non need-based aid....</p>

<p>Historically, the federal government’s principle vehicle for providing college access to low-income students has been the Pell Grant. Created in 1972 as the Basic Education Opportunity Grant (BEOG), the Pell Grant program has enabled millions of students from low-income families to attend twoandfour-year colleges.</p>

<p>But investments in this program, while up, have not kept pace either with college costs or with rising demand for college. In 1975, the maximum Pell Grant covered approximately 84 percent of the cost of attending a public college or university. Today, it covers only 36 percent, effectively blocking access for thousands of aspiring college students from lowincome families.....</p>

<p>In four-year private colleges and universities:
• In 1995, the average student from a family with income below $20,000 received $3,446 in institutional aid, while the student from a familyabove $100,000 received $1,359 in assistance.</p>

<p>• Just eight years later, the average low-income student award had increased by 52 percent to $5,240, while the average award to students from families with incomes over $100,000 increased by
254 percent to $4,806...."</p>

<p>You can read the whole report by going here and then clicking the link in the third paragraph: <a href="http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:QlEE000LGC4J:wunc.org/voices/considering-college/facts-about-access-to-higher-education+u.s.+percent+%22go+to+college%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=14&gl=us%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:QlEE000LGC4J:wunc.org/voices/considering-college/facts-about-access-to-higher-education+u.s.+percent+%22go+to+college%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=14&gl=us&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Northstarmom quotes from an extremely liberal source that would not have a link to any study that does not further their agenda. From what I see, there are not many kids who truly want to go to college that don't. For the past few years, I have seen my alma mater, UNC, turn down several smart kids near the top of their class with good ECs in favor of those much further down the line without such stellar resumes. There is a lot of social engineering on behalf of those deemed less fortunate. They have good financial aid packages and get a ton of local scholarships which are increasingly becoming need based. Also, the community college system where I live in NC is extremely good and a great alternative for those who can't afford 4 years at a residential college. I have worked there and the pell grants not only covered tuition and books but the students have quite a bit over and above. There is a way for any child in the US to go to college if they so desire. Now, getting their parents to instill that desire is another hurdle...</p>

<p>The sources mainly come from the :U.S. Department of Education, The College Board and Harvard's Civil Rights Institute.</p>

<p>Sigh! Totally missed my point. I'm not talking about all kids going to any college. Im talking about going to the school you get in to but can't afford. I guess one should go the great CC at home and shut up. UNC and most elite schools do take and fund a few kids (is that social engineering?) Are those the football kids?</p>

<p>"There is a way for any child in the US to go to college if they so desire."</p>

<p>ForeverBlue,</p>

<p>There is at least one population for which this statement is misleading--inner city minority children. In my experience, most would want to go to college to get the kind of opportunities that our children take for granted. However, they often face insuperable obstacles. Many have no money and simply do not know how to navigate the financial aid system. Moreover, as a group they are woefully unprepared to have any chance of succeeding if they DO manage to get to a college somehow. Accoding to recently published statistics, the average SAT score (math + critical reading) was below 700 in no less than 20 public high schools in Philadelphia.</p>

<p>By contrast, middle class kids (and working class whites) are much more like to have some idea about the way that financial aid works, and to be at least moderately well-prepared for college. They may not be able to get to their dream schools, but can go to college somewhere. And it is the fact of college--not the name of the college--that is the greatest factor in opening up economic opportunities.</p>

<p>"Im talking about going to the school you get in to but can't afford. I guess one should go the great CC at home and shut up. "</p>

<p>It's a fallacy that just because one works hard, gets good grades, is intelligent that one will get to go to one's dream school. Lots of parents seem to be feeding that bull to their kids, who then feel tricked and upset if their dream schools don't accept them (yet accept others who seem to have lower or equal stats) or if they can't afford to attend their dream schools.</p>

<p>There's also no rule that says that because one is smart, hardworking, gets high scores and then is fortunate enough to be accepted by a highly competitive college, one has the right to attend that college. </p>

<p>The flip side of this is that in this country, where you attend college isn't that important. That's why most CEOs and even medical professionals and lawyers went to ordinary public institutions.</p>

<p>I worked very hard in my life yet can't afford a mansion or a luxury car. Them's the breaks. </p>

<p>In this country, what one achieves in college and afterward is what's important, not the name of one's college. Some research, for instance, has indicated that while Ivy grads on the whole make more money than do nonIvy grads that's because Ivy grads on the whole come from families that are more affluent. It's the family's connections that appeared to be what most affected the graduate's salaries. </p>

<p>Going to a public 4-year or community college doesn't doom one to failure.</p>

<p>In my well respected state, the lieutenant governor -- who has a law degree -- got his start at an in state community college and then got his law degree from our state flagship, which isn't known as one of the very top public universities.</p>

<p>One of the top students whom I ever taught when I was a prof at a third tier had gotten her start at an in state community college because that is all that she could afford despite having high scores and a high gpa. She ended up graduating to a job making $52 k a year and had to turn down at least 9 other offers from top companies in her field (which is not one of the highest paying fields, so that $52 k job that she got about seven years ago was an extraordinary starting salary).</p>

<p>Since then, she has gotten a top professional fellowship -- and was the first person in her specific field to ever get that fellowship, and she has been asked to teach a course at Harvard. She couldn't have done any better professionally if she had attended an Ivy instead of getting her education at a community college and third tier public.</p>

<p>What EMM1 said is true: "And it is the fact of college--not the name of the college--that is the greatest factor in opening up economic opportunities."</p>

<p>Perhaps some people are just aiming too high. In our state a student who goes directly from high school to college and maintains a 2.5 gpa for 12 units after 1 semester automatically gets free tuition that continues as long as those criteria are maintained. Sure, local colleges are well below the radar of most of CC's followers but kids who attend our schools get a good education and many are accepted to prestigious schools grad and professional schools. Opportunities like this make it more affordable for both middle and lower classes to get a good college education. Kids who work harder in high school and get higher gpas and test scores are awarded with free tuition and fees right out of high school and , in the case of some scholarships awarded, are even paid stipends varying from $250 to $1750. These are not ccs; they are 4 year colleges offering advanced and professional degrees.</p>

<p>"Im talking about going to the school you get in to but can't afford. I guess one should go the great CC at home and shut up. "</p>

<p>Well you should not apply to schools you can't afford. </p>

<p>It is my observation that on these threads it is those who are in 'comfortable' middle class who do the most moaning. I have seen threads of families/kids making 100K+ and now they are in sudden shock that the college fairy was not kind to them. </p>

<p>There are only two solutions 1. Apply to schools that are financial reaches, or 2. Lower your expenses and find creative ways to fund your child's education.</p>

<p>Simba: Exactly. I would say there is a third solution, 3. Lower your income and assets. Of course, few people want to do that, any more than they do the first two things.</p>

<p>I was thinking today about this thread and others like it, and it occured to me to say something that I think should be obvious: "middle class" is a social category, not an economic one. This is true at both extremes most notably. </p>

<p>For example, my son is EFC 0 and on paper would look "poor". But he comes from parents and grandparents with some college education, with experiences and culture that is solidly middle class. I've made sure that both of my children are aware that they have advantages that other kids at their income level do not, and that they benefit from "middle class privilege" even when their parents are unemployed. </p>

<p>At the other end, there are CC posters who talk about how the "middle class" is getting shafted, but who also admit to having family incomes above 200K. These people are, in most economic definitions, <em>rich</em>, and do not represent at all the median of income or "the middle class". OTOH, like my children, they are <em>socially</em> middle class. Their parents do not say to them, "We're upper class, not middle class" any more than I tell my children "We're disadvantaged, not middle class." </p>

<p>Financial aid policies are (theoretically) about economic divisions, but most posters seem to expect them to be about <em>social</em> divisions, instead -- that is, that if a family self-defines as "middle class, not rich", then financial assistance should be available to them, regardless of where their income places them economically.</p>

<p>What portion of “wishing that my child could go to the best school she can get in to” do you not understand? What is so hard about that? What deep emotion have I tapped into with you people? My family doesn’t make 100,000$ or LOL $200,000. One would never call that Middle class unless they were lying. And class is defined by economic standards when we are talking about paying for college. Lord, I thought we all could agree on the basics facts. </p>

<p>These arguments are straw men set up by you to knock down to prove your own arguments. Have fun with that! By the way, I just finished paying off my husband’s education, like last week. And right now I can’t work because I’m taking care of my 86 year old father with terminal cancer and 85 year old mother with Alzheimer’s. What box do I write that in on My FASA? What is the matter with you people? ALL I want is my daughter to go to school where she got in. Thank you for all the wonderful support. Bye !</p>

<p>Being accepted does not carry with the right to attend if you can't afford it, and that's that. Just because I can get a reservation at The French Laundry (world class restaurant in the bay area that is very difficult to get a reservation for) doesn't mean I'm entitled to have someone pay for my meal. As a result, I don't <em>make</em> reservations for it, or other places I can't afford. </p>

<p>I'm sorry, I simply do not understand this mindset, and it is to me the very definition of entitlement. "I am <em>entitled</em> to financial aid, I am <em>entitled</em> to attend this school." You're right, I don't get it. I just don't.</p>

<p>PS: I <em>do</em> understand "I want my child to attend the best school they can get into THAT WE CAN AFFORD." Through the entire app process, I have been clear about what I could afford, and my son has understood that he needed to both be accepted, and be offered enough aid to attend given our financial situation. If my son had not been offered full aid at his first choice school, then he would have been the best school that accepted him <em>that we could afford</em>. I was clear about that, he was clear that he understood it. </p>

<p>If people are not honest and up front with their children about that to begin with, then they are setting themselves and their children up for disappointment.</p>

<p>"By the way, I just finished paying off my husband’s education, like last week."</p>

<p>That does not mean a thing. Often the interest rates on student loans are below the market rate, and some pleople play the interest arbitrage game. Often interest on student loans are tax beneficial.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Being accepted does not carry with the right to attend if you can't afford it, and that's that. Just because I can get a reservation at The French Laundry (world class restaurant in the bay area that is very difficult to get a reservation for) doesn't mean I'm entitled to have someone pay for my meal. As a result, I don't <em>make</em> reservations for it, or other places I can't afford. </p>

<p>I'm sorry, I simply do not understand this mindset, and it is to me the very definition of entitlement. "I am <em>entitled</em> to financial aid, I am <em>entitled</em> to attend this school." You're right, I don't get it. I just don't.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think your analogy would be more apt if colleges charged the same tuition to all comers, take it or leave it. In that case, people would come to see Harvard like they see French Laundry - a luxury service for the elite. </p>

<p>Instead, places like Harvard seem to promote the fiction that money should not be a bar to attending. And they apparently do give reasonable financial aid to a few lucky lower class people to help promote their BS. Which is basically a slap in the face to everyone else.</p>

<p>If places like Harvard announced that they were no longer not-for-profit and instead were going to charge as much tuition as possible to make as much money as possible, I suspect that the "entitlement" mentality you decry would disappear.</p>

<p>Just my humble opinion.</p>

<p>My D applied to 6 schools originally. We recieved no guidance from guidance. In fact the guidance C seemed annoyed and thought 6 was enough. Of the six only one was a state school. D got into 5 schools and except the state school fin. aid ws subpar. She would be in over 60,000 in debt to become a secondary math teacher. Faced with the only option of attending the state school that she is not too happy about we had her apply last minute to an additional state school she had not considered origianlly and one more private school. We are waiting on fin aid and she will be making a last minute decision. The moral of our story is applya to a variety of schools and dont be intimidated by the guidance counselour.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But ... this kind of upward mobility happens far less often than most of us realize. Today, we not only have less mobility than we did 20 years ago, but we also have less than in most other developed countries. Indeed, there is now less economic mobility in the United States than in France, Germany, Denmark, and a whole host of other European nations

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Just my own observations, but I work in New York City and I see people from all over the world -- including Europe -- beating down the doors to come to America so they can work hard and go from poor to middle class or beyond. Maybe I'm biased, but I think that the United States is still very much the land of opportunity. </p>

<p>If I were poor, hard-working, smart, and wanted to get rich; and if I could choose to seek my fortune anywhere in the world, there is no question but that I would head straight to the United States.</p>