NY Times: Better Colleges Failing to Lure Poorer Strivers

[momof3sons]

<p>sorghum,
re:your earlier post-yes, we only have a handful of graduating students I believe could be academically successful at a “top” college. The guidance counselors here are focused on getting the seniors into college, not a particular college.</p>

[ariesathena]

<p>

Most of the so-called top colleges are irrelevant to the educational life of the nation in any case. They could disappear from the face of earth tomorrow, and it would hardly make any difference.

</p>

<p>Mini, with all due respect, that’s completely wrong. While many wealthy international students will go to schools like UVA, the reality is that we attract amazing talent from around the world because of our universities. </p>

<p>Reality is also that many students do not thrive at state honours colleges, and the one-size-fits-all approach that you are advocating would destroy American higher education. Unless, of course, you are planning on building state-run versions of Swarthmore, which would (a) be nearly impossible, (b) would create resentment in people whose kids aren’t smart enough to get in, and (c) just be blatant statism.</p>

[mini]

<p>“Mini, with all due respect, that’s completely wrong. While many wealthy international students will go to schools like UVA, the reality is that we attract amazing talent from around the world because of our universities.”</p>

<p>The wealthy kids would go to state universities just like everyone else. The faculty would be at those state universities. The academic character of many of those institutions would increase, and would pull up everyone. People around the world would flock to them.</p>

[barrons]

<p>I’d like to see the demographics of the Pell students at UC schools. I think it might be significantly different than at other schools outside the west coast.</p>

[bclintonk]

<p>

@barrons

I’d like to see the demographics of the Pell students at UC schools. I think it might be significantly different than at other schools outside the west coast.

</p>

<p>Why would that be, barrons? My understanding is that Pell grant eligibility is based strictly on EFC (using FAFSA). For 2012-2013, only those with an EFC of $4,995 or less are Pell-eligible. So that pretty much guarantees it’s only students from families at the lower end of the income scale who are going to get Pell grants. Why would California be different in any relevant sense?</p>

[GreatKid]

<p>This has been an interesting read. It would seem likely to me that an excellent performing student in the circumstances described by the original poster would really stand out. It would seem logical that additional time and attention would be devoted to students excelling under these circumstances. It is indeed incredibly unfortunate if this is not the case! The amount of needs based aid is very significant for young people coming from these family circumstances and their ability to be admitted in the more highly ranked schools is proportionately greater. In the absence of sufficient direction from guidance departments it would be wonderful if people well educated in the process would volunteer.</p>

[barrons]

<p>Because bc, when it comes to low income students not all are equal in academic commitment and purpose. I think some ethnic groups might do significantly better than others of equal low income.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

So that pretty much guarantees it’s only students from families at the lower end of the income scale who are going to get Pell grants. Why would California be different in any relevant sense?

</p>

<p>The above assumes that the reported numbers are correct.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>I missed this previous post:</p>

<p>

Pure red herring. </p>

<p>Financial aid per capita is utterly meaningless when you’re starting from a sticker price that might be $30K per year higher at the private school. And the most affluent privates give a lot of FA to families with incomes in the $100K to $200K range. They might give generous FA packages to a few lower SES students, but if those students represent a small fraction of the total student body, it’s little more than window-dressing.</p>

<p>The proof is in the pudding, and the “pudding” in this case is Pell grant recipients.

</p>

<p>Herrings and pudding? Sounds like the Food Network is taking over!</p>

<p>Well, one could say that the “All the proof of a pudding is in the eating!” I could also say “that the proof of a pudding is in the cooking” which would be quite appropriate in the reporting and usefulness of the reporting of the Pell data. </p>

<p>Fwiw, the percentages of Pell grants for schools that do NOT meet 100 percent of demonstrated cost are worthless for establishing who is generous or not. In almost all cases, the Pell grant represent a very small fraction of the net COA. The above lists are clear indicators of the type of public schools that are relying on Federal Aid to balance their deficient state budgets, and passing the proverbial buck. There is nothing romantic in the way the UC accomplishes this.</p>

<p>This is what really matters:</p>

<p>Take the example of two schools on your list, namely Texas and TAMU. How much less do you think it would cost a zero EFCer/Full Pell grantee to attend those two schools as opposed to Stanford or … Haverford? Should we ask GAMom to share a similar analysis between her State school and Amherst? </p>

<p>While you are it, could you explain what the two Texas schools do particularly well in attracting low EFC students? Short of having automatic admissions?</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>

@xiggi

Fwiw, the percentages of Pell grants for schools that do NOT meet 100 percent of demonstrated cost are worthless for establishing who is generous or not. In almost all cases, the Pell grant represent a very small fraction of the net COA.

</p>

<p>It does tell what schools the students from lower income families who receive Pell grants actually attend.</p>

<p>(Of course, as another thread discusses, “meet need” does not seem to have a very consistent definition, as running NPCs or getting financial aid offers at various schools that claim to “meet need” produces significantly different net prices.)</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

It does tell what schools the students from lower income families who receive Pell grants actually attend.

</p>

<p>… which obviously does nothing to establish which school is generous. The enrollment at a particular school is a result of many elements, including admissions.</p>

<p>Fwiw, this discussion is about better colleges failing to attract the lowest SES students. The relevance of the NET COA dwarfs one statistic that only represents a small fraction of a student’s budget. And it does not matter if the COA is $60,000 or $30,000 when a student only has access to $5,550 of aid. </p>

<p>It is all about the financial gap!</p>

[barrons]

<p>More info on the low income top students.</p>

<p>“69.4 percent of low-income very high achievers are white and 15.2 percent are Asian. By contrast, 5.7 percent are black and 7.6 percent are Hispanic.”</p>

<p><a href=“http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/03/19/the-untapped-pool-of-low-income-strivers/[/url]”>http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/03/19/the-untapped-pool-of-low-income-strivers/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[beachlover15]

<p>That’s not shocking info Barron. That might be because I’m black but still, not shocking.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>Re: #92</p>

<p>The article continues with:</p>

<p>

@CHE article

But when one digs deeper, it becomes clear that the racial dividend of class-based affirmative action could be considerable if race were barred from consideration. To begin with, Hoxby and Avery find that black students are almost four times as likely to be found among the high-achieving low-income cohort than among high-achieving students generally (5.7 percent versus 1.5 percent). Likewise, Hispanics are 1.6 times as likely to be found among high-achieving low-income students as the general high-achieving population (7.6 percent versus 4.7 percent).

</p>

<p>It also mentions previously:</p>

<p>

@CHE article

studies by Princeton’s William Bowen and colleagues and by Georgetown University’s Anthony Carnevale and Stephen J. Rose find that universities give significant weight in admissions to underrepresented minority students but virtually no consideration to socioeconomic disadvantage.

</p>

[barrons]

<p>Still 5.7 and 7.6 percent are pretty slim pickings compared with the white/asian cohort. With limited resources do you go where the people are?</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>Obviously, the colleges are currently mostly going for “visible” (i.e. racial and ethnic) diversity, as opposed to less visible SES diversity. SES diversity is also likely to be more costly to the financial aid budget than adding “visible” diversity of high-SES students.</p>

[OperaDad]

<p>Why is it the job of the College to lure the student? In the USA, there are approximately 3.5 million High School Seniors in 15,000 high schools. Do you have any idea what it would cost to send a Admissions person to actively recruit at each high school? In my are of 2 million people, you are lucky if the college comes to a college fair. Forget trying to visit each high school.</p>

<p>

Among high-achieving, low-income students, 6 percent were black, 8 percent Latino, 15 percent Asian-American and 69 percent white, the study found.

</p>

<p>If they could have, the NYT would have played the race card. Unfortunately, with 69% being white, they couldn’t.</p>

<p>The problem is with the High School. With minimal standards for teachers, why not set minimal standards for the Guidance Counselors? With mandatory curriculum for the teachers, why not establish a mandatory curriculum for the Guidance Counselors to educate the kids?</p>

<p>A one pager the Counselor does with each high performing freshmen kid - here are the classes to take if you want to go to college, and you are good enough to go to college. Another one pager the Counselor goes over with 2nd semester Juniors. Here is the application process, it is free if you are low income, and lots of need based aid at the best colleges.</p>

<p>It is not rocket science. Every high school could do it. Every Guidance Counselor should be doing it.</p>

<p>At my kids HS, every incoming freshmen submits a 4 year plan when registering for classes. Every freshmen must then meet with the Guidance Counselor to go over the course selection and 4 year plan. Doesn’t take much more effort to push the high performing kid in the right direction.</p>

[Snowdog]

<p>

If they could have, the NYT would have played the race card. Unfortunately, with 69% being white, they couldn’t.

</p>

<p>Please explain.</p>

[GA2012MOM]

<p>

Should we ask GAMom to share a similar analysis between her State school and Amherst?

</p>

<p>I didn’t do the math exactly for our flagship State U, but out of pocket for State U would be approximately $6,000 per year (90% of tuition covered by the Hope scholarship) vs $0 for Amherst. Pretty much a no brainer, at least for us.</p>

[BBCUK4]

<p>Let’s just face it, the entire admissions process has become a crapshoot. Everybody wants their piece of the pie. Some get it and some are turned away. </p>

<p>I am a student whose family has worked hard over the last four years with the unemployment of my parents. I have sibling too so it is a family of six. And believe me, they would love to be back at jobs…real jobs that are full day and everyday! My family has blown through any savings they have and the only option left is the retirement fund. The house will probably need to be sold in the next six months because the mortgage payments are going to be unpayable. It is not like we ever lived high, that is how we saved the money that we have lived on the last four years! Of course that was to be the college fund, but hey, you have to make priorities…like making ends meet. I am proud that through it all I have remain at the top of my class, scored 750 or over on the SAT sections, Sat II of 790,800, 800, and 4 Aps of 5’s.Believe me, it is not fun to hear the “unemployment talk” and still keep a good flow of positive energy going.</p>

<p>I will find a place at college and consider cost in the equation. How can I not? how can I take what is left of my parents’ retirement, or even the proceeds of a house sale when they need a future too? - they are still a decade away from retirement!</p>

<p>I guess what I am most angry at is that I have been told by college counselors that " you are white, your parents unemployment and financial situation will make no difference to the Ivies as you apply, now if you had been…"</p>

<p>Hey, I need a leg up too!
The whole situation stinks…there should be reform in the system</p>