NY Times: Better Colleges Failing to Lure Poorer Strivers

[oldmom4896]

<p>Most low-income students who have top test scores and grades do not even apply to the nation’s best colleges, according to a new analysis of every high school student who took the SAT in a recent year.</p>

<p>The pattern contributes to widening economic inequality and low levels of mobility in this country, economists say, because college graduates earn so much more on average than nongraduates do. Low-income students who excel in high school often do not graduate from the less selective colleges they attend.</p>

<p>Only 34 percent of high-achieving high school seniors in the bottom fourth of income distribution attended any one of the country’s 238 most selective colleges, according to the analysis, conducted by Caroline M. Hoxby of Stanford and Christopher Avery of Harvard, two longtime education researchers. Among top students in the highest income quartile, that figure was 78 percent.</p>

<p>The findings underscore that elite public and private colleges, despite a stated desire to recruit an economically diverse group of students, have largely failed to do so.</p>

<p>Many top low-income students instead attend community colleges or four-year institutions closer to their homes, the study found. The students often are unaware of the amount of financial aid available or simply do not consider a top college because they have never met someone who attended one, according to the study’s authors, other experts and high school guidance counselors.</p>

<p>Remainder of article:
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>There is this discussion from not very long ago:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1472094-opportunity-inequalities-admissions.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1472094-opportunity-inequalities-admissions.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[oldmom4896]

<p>Yes, I know there was a recent discussion. But this is a new article based on a new study published today:
[The</a> Missing “One-Offs”: The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low Income Students](<a href=“http://www.nber.org/papers/w18586]The”>The Missing "One-Offs": The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low Income Students | NBER)</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>Note also that low income students in some states (e.g. TX, IL, PA) may find that their state flagship universities are financially inaccessible, because they do not give good financial aid even to in-state students. Those in some other states (e.g. NC, FL, WA, VA, CA, MI) are somewhat better off in this respect.</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1468378-big-variations-state-universities-state-net-prices-middle-income-student.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1468378-big-variations-state-universities-state-net-prices-middle-income-student.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[barrons]

<p>still the same basic paper. With all the info now online it is hard to believe kids that can figure out their phones can’t do little college search. Many just have a smaller worldview which is hard to change quickly. Don’t know that it is the best idea to throw them into alien upper middleclass environment right away.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>

@barrons

Don’t know that it is the best idea to throw them into alien upper middleclass environment right away.

</p>

<p>Now wasn’t there a previous research paper that indicated that the benefits of attending a more selective or prestigious college were greatest for those from more black, Latino, or first-generation-to-college backgrounds?</p>

<p>[Who</a> Benefits Most From Attending Top Colleges? - Innovations - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/who-benefits-most-from-attending-top-colleges/28852]Who”>http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/who-benefits-most-from-attending-top-colleges/28852)
[Estimating</a> the Return to College Selectivity over the Career Using Administrative Earnings Data](<a href=“http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159]Estimating”>http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159)</p>

<p>

@Stacy Dale and Alan B. Krueger

However, when we adjust for unobserved student ability by controlling for the average SAT score of the colleges that students applied to, our estimates of the return to college selectivity fall substantially and are generally indistinguishable from zero. There were notable exceptions for certain subgroups. For black and Hispanic students and for students who come from less-educated families (in terms of their parents’ education), the estimates of the return to college selectivity remain large, even in models that adjust for unobserved student characteristics.

</p>

<p>(Please let’s not have a general prestige war here. The point of bringing this up is to point out that it may be the students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds who would benefit most from attending more selective colleges, contrary to the apparent common opinion here that it is ok for the most selective colleges to be “reserved” for those from more advantaged backgrounds.)</p>

[glido]

<p>The most selective colleges have not been “‘reserved’” for those from more advantaged backgrounds" for forty years. The best colleges in North America have been working, with varying amounts of success, to seek out and offer admissions to students from diverse backgrounds for many decades.</p>

[oldmom4896]

<p>

The best colleges in North America have been working, with varying amounts of success, to seek out and offer admissions to students from diverse backgrounds for many decades.

</p>

<p>Not according to this study.</p>

[bclintonk]

<p>

@barrons

With all the info now online it is hard to believe kids that can figure out their phones can’t do little college search. Many just have a smaller worldview which is hard to change quickly.

</p>

<p>Well, the “smaller worldview” is just the point, isn’t it? As the NY Times article explains, many kids from lower SES just don’t have role models and mentors in their lives who know the ropes of the elite college world. In many cases their parents didn’t attend college at all, or if they did it was likely the local community college or a lower-tier state university (not the state flagship). And their HS teachers and GCs mostly come out of “directional” state university ed schools. So these kids are, on the whole, kind of clueless. </p>

<p>The elite colleges, meanwhile, make a big show of reaching out to lower-income students in New York, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco and LA–places the admissions officers like to visit. They don’t typically make the rounds in Flint or Youngstown or Fort Wayne or Bakersfield, much less Minnesota’s Iron Range or the hollows of West Virginia or the Carolina Low Country or the cornfields of Nebraska or the Rio Grande Valley.</p>

<p>Affluent and upper middle class kids whose own parents attended elite colleges have an enormous leg up in this competition. They are groomed from early childhood to assemble the credentials necessary to attract the eye of elite college adcoms. Information is, in this context as in so many others, power.</p>

<p>I’m reminded of what former Texas Governor Ann Richards once said about George H.W. Bush: “He was born on third base, and thought he got a triple.” Affluent kids whose parents attended elite colleges were born on third base, and need only to worry about how to get from third to home, much of which involves being attentive to the instructions of the third-base coach, a seasoned veteran. Lower SES kids without role models or mentors from the elite-college world are born in the batter’s box, handed a bat, and told to figure it all out, without anyone ever bothering to explain to them the rules of the game, much less to talk strategy about how to get on base and advance from base to base. It’s not exactly an even-handed competition.</p>

<p>

Don’t know that it is the best idea to throw them into alien upper middleclass environment right away.

</p>

<p>But then I suppose if we can comfort ourselves with the thought that the economically disadvantaged wouldn’t really “fit” in a world of elite privilege anyway, that makes it all OK.</p>

<p>Privilege begets privilege, and socioeconomic exclusion begets socioeconomic exclusion.</p>

[lorelaigirl]

<p>Agree bclintonk. I believe the top schools want a few kids from the lower classes for the benefit of the elite class at the school; so the elite can be “exposed” to diversity. I don’t think there’s any serious effort to let the lower class into the “club.”</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>

@glido

The most selective colleges have not been “‘reserved’” for those from more advantaged backgrounds" for forty years. The best colleges in North America have been working, with varying amounts of success, to seek out and offer admissions to students from diverse backgrounds for many decades.

</p>

<p>The emphasis has mostly been on racial and ethnic diversity (but not too much), not SES diversity. Also, such things as preferences for relatives of alumni and large donors biases the admissions class in favor of students from more advantaged backgrounds.</p>

[calimami]

<p>love that ann richards quote!</p>

[xiggi]

<p>The best quips are often borrowed. Repeating Barry Switzer’s and Jim Hightower’s lines paled against her --also borrowed-- line about being born with a silver foot in the mouth. It also did not help her win the election.</p>

<p>Not that this changes much to the “new” striver research of HoxAvery, or the previous alarms raised by Carnevale et al. </p>

<p>The biggest handicap of the lower SES students is none other than the people paid to guide them in high school. The solution is to learn to ignore the advice offered by the adults around them and break the vicious circles of failure and mediocrity.</p>

[Beliavsky]

<p>

@blintonk

Affluent kids whose parents attended elite colleges were born on third base, and need only to worry about how to get from third to home, much of which involves being attentive to the instructions of the third-base coach, a seasoned veteran.

</p>

<p>Rich kids, like everyone else, are born helpless and ignorant. Their parents may spend more time reading to them and otherwise stimulating them, but they need to read, think, study, and practice like everyone else. I don’t like it when people casually dismiss their accomplishments, as you have done. It is class warfare. Lots of rich kids do not compile a strong academic record by the end of high school and do not go to selective colleges. Being rich does not automatically make someone a good student. The talent and motivation need to be there.</p>

[Beliavsky]

<p>

@bclintonk

Privilege begets privilege, and socioeconomic exclusion begets socioeconomic exclusion.

</p>

<p>I agree that rich and well-educated parents will do a better job teaching their children the rules of the selective college admissions game, but that is not the whole story. Another reason more of their children graduate from college, especially selective colleges, is that high intelligence tends to beget high intelligence, as I discussed in a post in <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15224777-post1350.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/15224777-post1350.html&lt;/a&gt; .</p>

<p>In the book “Coming Apart”, Charles Murray estimates the average IQ of a child conditional on his parents’ degrees as</p>

<p>two high school dropouts – 94
two high school diplomas – 101
two college degrees (and no more) – 109
two graduate degrees – 116
two degrees from an elite college – 121 .</p>

[Madaboutx]

<p>I see this and know kids like this and the situation bugs me.

1. Many times, low income, high achieving minorities are afraid of leaving the comfort of their home environment. Many kids are but high achievement can take a person far from home and it can cause stress to go to far from home.
2. These kids are the usually the “smart one”. They are organized, speak better, creative and hardworking and therefore usually have a history of taking care of the family. Many sacrifice their long term futures to stay home and care for parents and siblings.
3. Parents are most often the academic & career advisors. Low income parents usually have limited knowledge of the ins and outs of higher education and career options. Many parents steer their high achieving kids in the wrong direction-not intentionally but out of limited understanding. A common wrong direction is to go to community college then to a big state school for financial reasons. The drop out rates at community colleges is very high, the degrees only get a person so far and a kid is still tethered to the home environment and may still be reluctant to leave it. I see too many kids at CC rack up bills and a lifestyle they have to work to maintain, they keep loser boyfriends and girlfriends and pregnancy happens and the family situation gets worse, not better, making it harder to leave for school.
4. The list goes on…</p>

[tokenadult]

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>“Most low-income students who have top test scores and grades do not even apply to the nation’s best colleges, according to a new analysis of every high school student who took the SAT in a recent year.”</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>A previous thread on the same subject:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1474318-ny-times-better-colleges-failing-lure-poorer-strivers.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1474318-ny-times-better-colleges-failing-lure-poorer-strivers.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[marymac]

<p>There is also another NYTimes article this Sunday about affirmative action. This article states that being a URM can be a 310 pt SAT boost. The article also states that bright URMs with below test scores below the median for the highly selective school, do not do well in STEM fields and end up transferring to a liberal arts major. They give UCB as an example of a school good at getting students with weaker preparation to transfer out of STEM. The implication is that the less prepared, bright student would be better served attending a school where his/her scores are midrange.</p>

[finalchild]

<p><a href=“Better Colleges Failing to Lure Talented Poor - The New York Times”>Better Colleges Failing to Lure Talented Poor - The New York Times;

<p>The comments are even better than the article IMHO.</p>

<p>As a relatively new participant on CC, I am curious if most of the membership consists of parents either went to relatively elite to elite colleges or became aware of them such that they are sensitized to want them for their children AND applicants/potential applicants who are children of the above. In short, does the activity on CC parallel the themes in the article/article comments?</p>