NYT college access index rank is out

[OHMomof2]

Third annual. Top Colleges Doing the Most for the American Dream https://nyti.ms/2r0S5rv

[OHMomof2]

1 University of California-Irvine
1.90
2 University of California-Santa Barbara
1.61
3 University of California-Davis
1.60
4 University of California-San Diego
1.58
5 University of California-Los Angeles
1.52
6 University of Florida
1.46
7 Amherst College
1.44
8 Pomona College
1.43
9 University of California-Berkeley
1.38
10 Harvard University
1.36

Editorial​ is pretty rough on the publics but promises a similar one for the privates next week: The Assault on Colleges — and the American Dream https://nyti.ms/2r1k9e6

[Zinhead]

American colleges and universities deserve the criticism.

[OHMomof2]

Over the last several years, however, most states have cut their spending on higher education, some drastically. Many public universities have responded by enrolling fewer poor and middle-class students — and replacing them with affluent students who can afford the tuition.

–

Some of the biggest declines have been in the University of California system, which has long been the most economically diverse place in elite higher education. On the San Diego campus five years ago, 46 percent of freshmen received Pell grants. Last year, the share had dropped to 26 percent.

Agree, @zinhead .

[nordicdad]

It is interesting that they really highlighted the decline of the UC system and UCSD in particular. Their data then shows 6 of the 10 most economically diverse schools are still UCs including the top 5 schools, of which UCSD is one. It “has long been the most economically diverse place in elite higher education”… and still is.

[OHMomof2]

Agree, the list is more interesting than the editorial.

I always find it interesting to look at the bottom ten, too:

162 University of Miami
163 Marist College
164 Worcester Polytechnic Institute
165 Quinnipiac University
166 Bryant University
167 Elon University
168 Saint Joseph’s University
169 Emerson College
170 University of Puget Sound
171 Puget Sound

Endowment per student doesn’t seem to have as big an impact on this list as one might think. There are no huge ones in the bottom ten, but some in the top ten have lower ones.

[twoinanddone]

Many public universities have responded by enrolling fewer poor and middle-class students — and replacing them with affluent students who can afford the tuition.

It may not be the universities doing anything different, but just that the only ones who can afford the school after the FA packages are released are the ‘affluent’ students (oh yes, I’m ‘affluent’, lol) so that’s who enrolls. COA has increase while the FA hasn’t, so even those admitted can’t afford that college any longer.

I don’t know the numbers for Pell grants, but overall the grants have gone up a little over the last few years while tuition and other costs have gone up a lot. Maybe 5 years ago the Pell grants covered 1/2 tuition and now only 1/4 at a particular school. Lower income students have to go to schools where the Pell grant can cover more of the COA.

[bluebayou]

Many public universities have responded by enrolling fewer poor and middle-class students — and replacing them with affluent students who can afford the tuition.

This statement is incorrect wrt to the UC’s, and the author shows inconsistency here.

The expansion has allowed the colleges to continue enrolling similar numbers of lower-income students…

Also, the author picks on Michigan, but his/her own data chart shows that Michigan barely moved in 5 years. (Of course, as most of us know, Michigan has always been expensive, even for instate.)

[OHMomof2]

@bluebayou the way I read it is that the % of Pell has gone down at the UCs (chart: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/opinion/sunday/the-assault-on-colleges-and-the-american-dream.html - second graphic down the page)

…but for at least one they’ve kept the absolute #s the same by packing in as many students as they can.

[ucbalumnus]

@OHMomof2

…but for at least one they’ve kept the absolute #s the same by packing in as many students as they can.

That is basically what the editorial is saying:

@David Leonhardt

With state support down, university leaders have decided that their least bad option is to enroll more high-income students. In only four years, undergraduate enrollment in the University of California system has risen 15 percent, or by 27,000 students. The expansion has allowed the colleges to continue enrolling similar numbers of lower-income students, rather than displacing those students, but it has created severe crowding.

I.e. add high income students who pay more tuition (particularly the higher out-of-state tuition) in order to keep the money coming in to be able to enroll the same number of low income students who need lots of financial aid.

Of course, state universities must choose between wants and expectations that may be impossible to fulfill all of as state budgets cut back:

A. Low subsidized in-state tuition.
B. Plenty of space for in-state students (limiting out-of-state students).
C. Generous in-state financial aid for low income students.
D. Good opportunity for admission for low income students.
E. Good quality academics with a college experience that is better than the “economy class” experience of big crowded classes, etc…

California publics seem to be unusual among state universities in placing a high priority on C and D.

[bluebayou]

yes, but the following thesis of the article does not apply to UC. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Many public universities have responded by enrolling fewer poor and middle-class students — and replacing them with affluent students who can afford the tuition.

And of course, unlike in NY, California has plenty of CSU’s which also provide an excellent education for cheap. But that narrative doesn’t fit the author’s pov either.

Public colleges have an unmatched record of lofting their students into the middle class and beyond. For decades, they have enrolled teenagers and adults from modest backgrounds, people who are often the first member of their family to attend college, and changed their trajectories.

If she/he wants to use California as an example, the author had better add up all of the CA public college students and see how many are poor.

[Cheeringsection]

This is not intended to be a political statement. I always find it interesting that an article such as this blames “the states” for reduced support of higher ed. We are the states and the states are us. It is good to examine the data and then ourselves to see why this is happening.

[OHMomof2]

An editorial that deals with private colleges on the list with a focus on Princeton’s recent efforts to enroll more low income students: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/30/opinion/princeton-takes-on-class-divide.html?mwrsm=Email&_r=0