<p>
</p>
<p>This is exactly why I always enclose URM and ORM in quotation marks: “underrepresented” / “overrepresented.” The terms are problematic for multiple reasons. First and foremost, the nature of the prefixes “under-” and “over-” suggests that something is not “right.” There is either too few or too many of the “group” at hand. Any “group” that is “overrepresented” cannot be correctly represented, for if it were correctly represented, then it would not be “overrepresented,” now would it? No, it would be correctly represented.</p>
<p>As a consequence, second, proper usage of the terms requires a definition as to what the “correct” level of representation is. As shown in the above quote, from two CC members, ask how the terms are defined, and for people who use the term without reservation, the best they can do is pass the buck and say it is defined however admissions officers want it to be defined. Which is another way of saying that the words are absolutely meaningless.</p>
<p>When did teachers stop reproaching their students to never use words they can’t define?</p>
<p>Moving back to the opening post, I guess it’s a case of your mileage varying. With regards to my own family, I knew very well that even if we received an admittedly generous financial aid package as calculated, the total COA was simply so high that the EFC was still in the low-to-mid five digits. I attended a state school, Georgia Tech, and the price of my degree was less than the price of one year at a top private university or LAC after aid.</p>