<p>The Morehead Foundation today announced a $100 million dollar gift. From the Morehead website:</p>
<p>"The John Motley Morehead Foundation today announced a gift of $100 million from the Gordon and Mary Cain Foundation of Texas to support and expand the Morehead Scholars Program. The contribution is one of the largest gifts ever to an undergraduate scholarship program. </p>
<p>The Morehead was established in 1951 as the first undergraduate merit scholarship program in the United States. It has evolved into an experiential learning and leadership development program that is unparalleled in the world of higher education.</p>
<p>The contribution from the Cain Foundation will significantly increase the number of full scholarships offered each year to attend the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and will expand the Program's international service, study and internship opportunities. Both the Foundation and Scholarship Program will be renamed as Morehead-Cain to honor the Cain investment. </p>
<p>"The similarities in the lives of John Motley Morehead and Gordon Cain are truly remarkable. Both were hard-working men of integrity who found success in the chemical industry, and both recognized the importance of investing in the education of young adults with the talent, commitment and character to make a difference in the world," said Lucy Chatham, chairman of the Morehead Foundation. "This gift offers us a tremendous opportunity to advance the legacies of both men.""</p>
<p>This is truly an amazing gift since Mr. Cain is an LSU alum and had no ties to UNC. I'll bet the development folks at LSU are having to answer some difficult questions today.</p>
<p>I already posted on the UNC thread, but this is--as you say-- an amazing gift--wonderful for both the Morehead program and for UNC. Very impressive.</p>
<p>This is indeed an amazing gift, and one that might allow the scholarship to eliminate one of its most glaring deficiencies, namely the unneccessary elitist restriction imposed on out-of-state candidates that eliminates a substantial number of students because of their school's lack of recognition or ... means.</p>
<p>I-Dad, while this particular one was not designed to focus on lower income students, it is also quite unusual. In the grand scheme of things, I believe that the balance of scholarship money available is skewed towards the lower incomes. One of the better examples is the Gates Millennium Scholarship Program (see gmsp.org) which has income qualifications. </p>
<p>Wealthy donors have the right to pick the battles and decide the programs they want to support. We have the right to form our opinions about the validity of their choices. If Bill Gates, Michael Dell or the Walton Foundation are on a better track than the Morehead-Cain is not an easy question to answer.</p>
<p>interesteddad: The Morehead scholarships are merit-based, and while xiggi has made the point that the out-of-state scholars are nominated from a set group of fairly elite (all private?) high schools, it's quite possible that some kids who attend those schools (and who might get nominated for the Morehead) are "lower-income students." It is, of course, more likely that the NC students who are nominated might be from a lower-income family, since every public school in NC can nominate a student, or students (the number of nominations dependent on the size of the school). </p>
<p>Interestingly, the news here just showed Wade Smith who attended the announcement ceremony today. Both he and his brother were Morehead Scholars. He pointed out that neither he nor his brother could have gone to college, were it not for the Morehead Scholarships; their family simply didn't have the money to send them. So, I suspect that there are "lower-income students" who have benefitted from this Scholarship over the years. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The Morehead scholarships are merit-based
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly. And the merit includes high SAT scores.</p>
<p>Sorry, I think the trend towards public universities giving free rides to wealthy customers is very troubling.</p>
<p>Only 33% of UNC-CH's students last year were determined to qualify for need-based aid (i.e. 67% were determined to be wealthy enough to pay full freight). Of the 33% who qualified for need-based aid, only 3 out of 4 had their need met.</p>
<p>So, I ask you. Would an extra $100 million endowment be better spent addressing that glaring shortcoming of a major state university? Or being offered in the form of price discounts to wealthy students to bolster the average SAT scores of the university?</p>
<p>And, while they are at it, UNC-CH might want to address their problem in minority recruiting. While they have a solid African American cohort, their percentages of Asian Americans and Latino students are very low. The school is 77% white...a figure that is directly tied to tuition discounting policies.</p>
<p>interesteddad: You should first understand that the Morehead Foundation is separate from UNC-CH, the UNC University system, and the State of NC. The University itself does not administer these funds. They are from a private endowment. </p>
<p>You should also know that the Morehead Scholarships are not based solely on SAT scores--far from it. I would say that SAT scores, in fact, are a minor part of a nominee's application. </p>
<p>While you can argue that the University can and should go out and search for private monies that will help recruit "lower income students" or "minority" students, the Carolina Covenant is, in part, funded with private monies. UNC was one of the first universities (if not the first) to create a fund like this. The Pogue Scholarship (also privately funded), once available only to NC students (now also open to out-of-state students), is specifically for "minority" students. </p>
<p>It is true that UNC-CH's percentage of African American students is something like 12%, and the State as a whole is about 21%, so--yes-- that could improve. However, here are some 2005 and 2006 freshman class stats for you (the most recent I could find): The Asian population of the state of NC is 1.8%. The Asian student population at UNC-CH, freshman class 2005, is 7%; for the 2006 class, it is 7.5%. So I would say UNC-CH is doing extremely well in that regard. In fact, there's a strong Asian student group on campus, I believe.<br>
The Latino population for that same 2005 class at UNC-CH is 4.4%; the 2006 class is at 5.4%, while in the State, the Latino population is at 6.4%. These percentages, of course, do not even take into account the 15 other campuses in the UNC system. </p>
<p>So I'm a little confused by your assessment here. I also don't understand your last sentence.</p>
And, while they are at it, UNC-CH might want to address their problem in minority recruiting. While they have a solid African American cohort, their percentages of Asian Americans and Latino students are very low. The school is 77% white...a figure that is directly tied to tuition discounting policies.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Problem with minority recruiting?</p>
<p>Jeez, what has the world of the redemptive liberals come to now?</p>
<p>Is the only acceptable option free massages and catered dining for prospective "under-represented" minorities along with handwritten letters and knee-begs of "please come here"?</p>
<p>I'm for that (it would be of immense benefit to the rich, white students). Wouldn't cost much either (my wife is a massage therapist, and awaits the invitation.)</p>
<p>I can't find a citation for you yet, but I believe that, nationally, merit discounting now exceeds the total dollars of need-based aid at public universities in the United States. The merit discounting has no income caps and goes substantially to higher income families. The result of this trend is reduced opportunity for low income students to attend college. The national stampede away from need-based aid is quite disturbing, especially at public universities. I wish I could remember the university president who said on a panel discussion I watched (because it may have been the UNC-CH president) that the shift to merit price discounting is the worst thing to hit public education in decades.</p>
<p>For example, if UNC-CH's merit discounts had been applied to their need-based aid program for low income students, they could have met 100% of need last year instead of just 75%. What admissions slots do you think will be eliminated to provide slots for the new Morehead-Cain Scholars next year? In most cases, low income slots are shifted to high income merit-discount slots.</p>
<p>Just make sure the massage is for half an hour and the food includes whatever the "under-represented" minority desires. When the admissions officer begs the student to come, please ensure a soft surface. I don't want to cause any knee problems, you know.</p>
<p>That way, the rich, white students can have a more "diverse" campus without ever having to meet anyone!</p>
<p>I see that you are from Georgia, where the HOPE merit discount program (with no family income cap) has been a model. The 12 states, including Georgia, with a broad based merit discount program spent a combined $863 million to cover the merit price discounts compared to just $308 million for need-based aid.</p>
<p>Oh, and by the way, since the HOPE merit price discounting program took effect, the black enrollment at the University of Georgia has declined from 11% in 1995 to 7% in 2000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Exactly what is inadequate about the Carolina Covenant?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You tell me. UNC-CH's own figures state that they only met 75% of the need of their need-aid students last year. And, that's with only 33% of their students qualifying for need-based aid.</p>
<p>"Oh, and by the way, since the HOPE merit price discounting program took effect, the black enrollment at the University of Georgia has declined from 11% in 1995 to 7% in 2000."</p>
<p>Well, it is awfully easier to find merit in a white student....</p>
<p>Yes, I am from Georgia. HOPE is one of the major reasons why I chose to stay in-state. The fact that both Georgia Tech and UGA are fine public universities only helps.</p>
<p>There is a slight problem with your sentence, "Oh, and by the way,...black enrollment...has declined."</p>
<p>Some time ago, UGA abolished racial preferences. Obviously, lack of preferential treatment coupled with utter unwillingness from redemptive liberals to demand high standards from "under-represented" minorities resulted in a sharp decline in Black enrollment at UGA.</p>
<p>Thus, why did you choose to attribute the drop to the HOPE scholarship?</p>
<p>While I am interested in your response, the situation is history. With the Supreme Court's 2003 decision, UGA reinstated its affirmative action program. It's now back to diversity levels antebellum.</p>
<p>Besides, at that time (2000), HOPE was different. The requirement used to be "minimum of 80 numerical average." Now, it's 3.0 minimum.</p>
<p>There's no "test bias" involved when maintaining a GPA greater than or equal to 3.0.</p>
<p>As far as the Carolina Covenant, I see only two demands - an agreement to work and an agreement to let the university take care of the financial aid package through a variety of sources to obtain grants and scholarships (no loans). Perhaps some students are unwilling to work or are unwilling to place their trust into the hands of the financial aid office? Beats me.</p>