Middle-Class Gets a Raw Deal

Paying for College
101

<p>coolweather: My son has an EFC=0 and was offered such a package at two different schools; one a top 20 LAC, and one a relatively good state U. Both packages explicitly gave grants instead of loans and workstudy. One other school he applied to offered a package with 6K loans per year, and another top 20 university still hasn't sent an award letter. </p>

<p>Based on my reading of CC posts for the schools (and other online community postings), I know that many "middle class" students were disappointed with their aid offers at the top 20 LAC. </p>

<p>The no-loan aid my son got were tied to need-based "merit" awards. That is, the award letters stated that based on his performance etc, he was being given an award in the form of grants replacing the usual loans and work study.</p>

102

<p>Iskinner: No matter how much you moan, groan, or growel - colleges will expect your to pay substantial portion of your kids education. And let me give you some bad news, if your kid applies to Rutgers or other state U, your application will sent to shredder even by the kid who is working in the fin aid office under work study program.</p>

<p>You make way too much money.</p>

103

<p>well I guess from that cartoon and from opinons of some, is that low income families have it made
Which seems to leave the way pretty clear- if you believe the above
First:
Live in an area with crappy schools where everyone who can afford to, goes private or moves, so that your kids will easily be in the top 10 or even 5 % of graduating class.</p>

<p>Make sure you don't have savings in their name- or that you have huge medical expenses ( possibly no ins with your part time jobs?) that can help to lower the income that is available for college.</p>

<p>Don't own a home, that you can borrow against for college, probably not an issue anyway, as if you keep your income to below $60,000 you won't be able to find much anywhere in your price range.</p>

<p>You wont be able to afford tutors or summer programs, but make use of the books at library for the kids to study to raise their SAT scores as high as possible.
Since the drop out rate in their high school is probably fairly high, the GPA shouldn't be much of a problem- although they probably should also study for the AP tests, as that could save some money re college credits.</p>

<p>With top scores and GPA your student will look comparable to many students across the country, so the hook will be great writing skills- ( not on the SAT essay, which schools don't seem to be using, but their own essays).</p>

<p>As the English dept at their high school may have their hands full with remedial students, it will be up to you to be their advisor and coach, but it will all be worth it, when they get their offer to Harvard ;)</p>

<p>( They could try for merit at another school, but since they may be competing against students who dont need the money, and have attended more rigourous high schools, the competition will be tough)</p>

<p>I haven't tried this plan, but if schools place more emphasis on need based aid, especially waiving incomes below a relatively decent number- it may be the wave of the future!</p>

104

<p>
[quote]
Iskinner: No matter how much you moan, groan, or growel - colleges will expect your to pay substantial portion of your kids education.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I have no idea what your point is here.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And let me give you some bad news, if your kid applies to Rutgers or other state U, your application will sent to shredder even by the kid who is working in the fin aid office under work study program

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, I have no idea what your point is.</p>

105

<p>Deleted . . . will check with mods first.</p>

106

<p>emerald: While I disagree with some of your tone in the most recent post, some of the things you mentioned are choices I've had to make to ensure my children could go to college. I don't agree that you have to go to a bad school -- my son's new charter high school is one of the top performing schols in the area -- but yes, we have made choices not to have things, so that the children would have better aid. </p>

<p>If I had a nickel for every time I said to one of my children, "I know you wish we had X/Y/Z, but we can't have that so you can get good aid to college", well, our EFC would be higher, that's for sure! No cars, no house, none of those things, despite living in a very affluent area.</p>

<p>I have to say that I disagree with "have it made", though.</p>

107

<p>
[quote]
well I guess from that cartoon and from opinons of some, is that low income families have it made

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I certainly don't think that. My sense is that some colleges give very generous financial aid to a lucky few lower class people so that the colleges can promote the fiction that money doesn't matter. It's still a slap in the face to the middle class though.</p>

108

<p>I'm not "lower class", I'm someone just like you, who managed my income and assets. If you see my son's grants as a slap in the face, well, so be it.</p>

109

<p>lskinner:</p>

<p>One point that has been made on a number of other threads bears repeating: In the vast majority of cases, any person who is admitted to Harvard (or for that matter, most top 20 universities or top 10 LAC), has the option of attending a variety of solid colleges and state universities for NOTHING on a merit aid basis. So it ill behooves you to complain simply because you would prefer to make a different choice.</p>

110

<p>
[quote]
lskinner:</p>

<p>One point that has been made on a number of other threads bears repeating: In the vast majority of cases, any person who is admitted to Harvard (or for that matter, most top 20 universities or top 10 LAC), has the option of attending a variety of solid colleges and state universities for NOTHING on a merit aid basis. So it ill behooves you to complain simply because you would prefer to make a different choice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not sure if you read the entire thread. My main point has been that places like Harvard are being dishonest when they suggest or imply that they meet peoples' financial needs. The fact that other universities might be free doesn't undermine this point, as far as I can tell.</p>

111

<p>
[quote]
I'm not "lower class", I'm someone just like you, who managed my income and assets. If you see my son's grants as a slap in the face, well, so be it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It seems to me that if you were just like me, your son wouldn't be getting significant need based grants. Are you saying that you finagled things so that you would appear poor?</p>

112

<p>No, I didn't finagle anything. We have chosen to live on less. "Lower class" is a social status, not an income status. Do we have a lower <em>income</em>? Yes. Are my children "lower class"? My children are descended from "Southern aristocracy" and can count the founders of Stanford University and the founders of Coca Cola as their cousins. </p>

<p>Low EFC does not equal 'lower class' any more than 'poor' equals 'lower class'. Lower class, middle class -- those are all social constructs, dealing more with social values and culture than financial amounts. There are tons of financially impoverished college graduates out there, some of them raising children. They would define themselves as middle class, not "lower class".</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
We have chosen to live on less. "Lower class" is a social status, not an income status.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Can you tell me exactly how you define "lower class"?</p>

<p>For purposes of this discussion, I would define it as people who have low income, little or no assets, and not a lot of prospects to substantially increase their income or assets.</p>

114

<p>Why don't you use "low income" instead? "Lower class" is, as I've said, a social value judgement. I have known plenty of people who made more money than I do who were "low class" -- they simply did not have the social knowledge and education that the "middle class" has. Let me put it this way. If you take the most redneck, uneducated, ignorant, belly-scratching family in the world and give them a million dollars, they'd still be socially "lower class". They might be <em>rich</em> lower class, but they're still lower class. </p>

<p>This is the problem with people talking about "the middle class" getting a bad deal. "Middle class" in the US is a social division, NOT an economic one. Economically, many folks who self-define as "middle class", including some people who post to CC, are wealthy. That is, they fall into the high end of the division of wealth in the US. </p>

<p>When you insist on using "lower class" to mean "poor", you're making a <em>social</em> value judgement about an <em>economic</em> situation. It makes you sound...elitist. Get it?</p>

115

<p>I'm old, tired and crabby, so maybe I'm missing something but where is this "they aren't meeting need" coming from? You don't really mean that someone had an EFC of 15,000, but Harvard or Princeton (no clue on prices now, I'll pretend it's 50k) only offered 20k and there is a gap of 15,000? (to send the child you need to find 30,000 instead of 15,000)
I am assuming you mean you can afford 15,000 but the federal govt. FAFSA number came back at 30k. Or you did the profile, which as noted is available at multiple websites, and it came back at 30k instead of the 15k you feel you can deal with?
Did Harvard-the school mentioned most in the thread-offer to meet the EFC with larger student loans than the usual one?
DD2 was offered a number of packages that did not meet need AND one gave a lovely 5k extra loan to her on top of it, but the school is up front that they don't even try to meet need.
note to one poster -the Rutgers remark -not mine but I relate- is because at least this current year, Rutgers will not offer ANY need based aid to families with an EFC over 4,000, according to the FA person I spoke to at a student day. So any semi middle class income would mean they don't consider you for aid at all.</p>

116

<p>TrinSF - very good point about income rather than class as the key word.</p>

117

<p>OldinJersey: P was the poster who made remark about Rutgers. Iskinner's post said that his EFC was half his after tax income. He is talking about Harvard a lot, so the EFC of about 45k.</p>

<p>The point I was trying to make is that with his high income (via EFC), he may not get any aid from Rutgers or any State U in NJ.</p>

118

<p>I wasn't addressing- any particular posters- with my comment-
It was partly TIC, however, like many things, those who could most benefit, from hearing how they sound to others, probably won't see themselves, especially students who may not have all the details and make assumptions about distribution of aid.</p>

<p>I do realize, that there are those who are well educated, and choose to earn less, in order to have more free time, more flexibility and less taken out in taxes.
However- there are also those families, who don't have a choice to be downwardly mobile, they can't afford to live in areas that have good public schools, yet they have seen that a college education is all but mandatory for students now in school to be able to afford what our parents assumed they would be able to provide for their family.
To own a home, to have medical ins, maybe take a vacation once in a while.</p>

<p>Middle class covers many families, those making $50,000 a year to $200,000 all consider themselves middleclass.</p>

<p>What I hear often on the boards, are those both proud that they have a high EFC, but resentful that the colleges that they want for their kids, don't give merit aid, and also expect them to pay most of the expenses.
They are very resentful, even as they acknowledge that their kids have had many opportunities over the years, that contributed to their even considering the most competitive schools.</p>

<p>I admit I have toured only a few schools.
But I have observed, that colleges that might have been good bets for students who didn't have highly rigourous educations, who don't have parents who can pay their way, to gain acceptance to one of the schools who are now "need aware" 10 years ago, have now bumped down acceptance rates and are no longer a "safety" or even a match for an average, or even slighly more challenged student.</p>

<p>The folks who focus on only what their childs education will cost them in dollars, are convienently ignoring what the lack of focus on urban/rural education is costing those students who don't have the advantages that comes with a higher EFC.</p>

119

<p>
[quote]
Why don't you use "low income" instead? "Lower class" is, as I've said, a social value judgement.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To you it is, to me it isn't. But feel free to substitute the phrase "low income/assets" for the phrase "lower class" in all my posts. My points all stand.</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
I'm old, tired and crabby, so maybe I'm missing something but where is this "they aren't meeting need" coming from?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>For what it's worth, my main point is that what the institutional formulas expect parents to pay is so high that it can be expected that a lot of parents -- even decent parents who care a lot about their childrens' eduction -- will tell their children "sorry, we're not paying it." In that case, the child's needs have not been met and it's dishonest for the college to claim that it meets peoples' needs.</p>

<p>My sense is that this problem is concentrated towards the middle of the income/assets spectrum. These are people with significant assets (typically a house and modest savings) but who can't give up those assets very easily. (They need a place to live and money for when they retire.)</p>

<p>So the child who has been left in the lurch like this might go on an internet message board and complain how the middle class is being screwed. To me, this is a legitimate gripe since the college led him and his family to believe that his or her needs would be met. </p>

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