Paying for the Party II? New Study

A new study published last month has striking similarities to the book, Paying for the Party. I suspect it’s the same midwest flagship and dorm, as one of the authors is the same. There was a lively discussion here about the book when it came out in 2015.

The article below talks about wealthier parents’ involvement and advice in college (from how to get into a sorority to how to prep for dental school and graduate in 4 years etc vs parents who didn’t have college experience themselves and so relied on college counseling and other resources, which led to things like recommending sports communications as a major because the student liked sports and then the student switching out and not graduating on time) and how that affects the outcomes.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/02/28/parental-involvement-drastically-changes-students-college-experience-study-shows

2015 Paying for the Party book: http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674088023&content=reviews

It should not be a surprise that parental resources (money, past experiences with college, connections) are a strong influence on likelihood of success in admission to college, succeeding at and graduating from college, and post graduation outcomes.

For many, it looks as if college is more of a finishing school to confirm one’s inherited higher social class, rather than an opportunity of upward mobility for those born into a lower social class.

At this particular college have no doubt that’s true.

But some colleges do better with low income students than others, in terms of support, advising, etc once they get there.

This “research” was aired a few years ago in several articles. Pathetic

Was it @barrons ? The journal article was published just 2/20/18, for the first time. It may be using the same data as before, not sure.

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038040718759557

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/05/19/qa-author-new-book-how-parenting-affects-student-outcomes

Girl knew how to get max mileage out of a minor study.

Yet if the school in question is IU, IU actually does far better in Washington Monthly’s Social Mobility ranking (61st out of 1404) compared to either the U of C or UMich (both in the 100-200 range):
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2017college-guide?ranking=2017-rankings-national-universities

You could argue that the Washington Monthly Social Mobility ranking is flawed, though you could also argue that this study (based mostly on anecdotes) is also problematic.

Pell grant students make up 17% of IU students, versus 16% at Michigan and 12% at Chicago (percentages as listed in the above linked web site).

Though the Washington Monthly rankings list schools like Harvard, Stanford, and Georgetown with top social mobility rankings, despite similar or only marginally higher percentages of Pell grant students. Perhaps the social mobility is helping kids from the top 2-3% climb into the top 0.5%?

No, they help kids from Pell Grant backgrounds graduate in 4 years, have ready access to a network that will help them even if their parents can’t, and funnel them toward good careers. Admitting lots of first generation students is one step but they won’t benefit as much if they’re left to their own devices to think Criminal Justice will lead to law school, Sports management will know them manage an NFL team, and Kinesiology is a great major for med school. And lots of large universities don’t assign a personal adviser to students, so their ability to navigate implicit expectations and understanding ‘distinction’ (in Bourdieu’s sense) impacts A LOT v. Schools like Harvard or Middlebury where ‘distinction’ comes with the territory (no deciphering needed) and huge endowment+peers so immersed in the habitus needed for upward mobility all ensure that said upward mobility isn’t as hard to achieve. Research has shown that ‘elite’ schools don’t really change academic or life outcomes for upper middle and upper class students (it’s really all on them) but it IS important for first gen and minority students.
(On the broader point, yes Washington Monthly’s criteria may not always be the most appropriate or relevant but they’re explicitly trying to offer an alternative to USNWR, Forbes, etc.)

When the number of Pell grant students is only about half or fewer than the number of no-FA students, that means that the high end private college is not really helping very many Pell grant students with upward mobility.

Also, those most in need of good advising (with respect to colleges, majors, and careers) probably are not applying to high end private colleges in the first place, because no one in their high school environments suggested that they were a possibility.

Yes, not many, but at least, done well. Their challenge now is to attract more middle and working class students.

“Kinesiology is a great major for med school.”

It’s as good as any other major for med school.
All pre-meds have to take the required pre-med courses anyway.

Thanks @barrons - interesting interview at https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/05/19/qa-author-new-book-how-parenting-affects-student-outcomes

LOL on the different types of helicopters…I think am a paramedic…hadn’t heard that one before.

And she makes some suggestions about what colleges can do to help their low income students (those with “bystander parents”).

Re: the Washington Monthly rankings, it would be interesting to see #s for IU from 2005, since this book is based on a study from that time.

LACs have their own category with “social mobility ranks” - https://washingtonmonthly.com/2017college-guide?ranking=2017-rankings-national-universities-liberal-arts

She sliced that bologna in three dimensions.

Shouldn’t it be “they” ie., I see three authors listed for that last study and two authors named for the book in the interview.
Do we know whether the data were ever updated?
Also, it’d be good if the article included tips for parents - what to donor not.
The interview is much more interesting than the book review.
Yes, the ‘pink helicopters’ idea - parents who want their kids to have the best years of their life and make the right social connections - would be especially well-represented on a sorority floor with lots of future business majors.

@PurpleTitan : the major doesn’t matter at all to the algorithm or first reader - but when it comes to interviews, traditional subjects are considered better than vocational majors. That’s why kinesiology, nutrition, or nursing aren’t seen as being as good for med school as music or Spanish, which would be very confusing for students at large universities with no personal adviser and no access to a pre-med adviser till junior year (when it’s too late).

@MYOS1634: I think that would depend on the med school. I don’t think state med school adcoms tend to carry those types of social/class biases these days (and that’s really what it is; Spanish sure as heck doesn’t prepare you better for med school than nursing). Actually, these days, those types of social biases are probably gone from all med school adcoms.

BTW, don’t be fooled by the breakdown of acceptances by major. Yes, health sciences majors, on average, have the lowest acceptance rate, but they also have the lowest MCAT scores and are concentrated among less selective institutions.

Here’s a good synopsis: http://www.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/savvy-pre-med/2014/9/23/which-major-is-most-likely-to-get-into-medical-school

Humanities majors do have a higher acceptance rate than their MCAT scores indicate, but I think one reason is because a greater proportion of humanities pre-meds come from rigorous/more selective schools. English majors at less selective schools probably wouldn’t even think of going pre-med (or do well enough in the pre-med science classes to consider it).

Being bilingual is a huge advantage and remember that the students have to be top 10% in their science classes in order to be selected, so they’ve shown the ability to function at a very high level in two very different fields.
But yes you’d think nursing would be considered an excellent preparation and shows motivation for health care. Yet it doesn’t. Even at state med schools, as far as I know.
@artloversplus @mom2collegekids are active on the pre-med boards and may know whether my understanding is outdated or only applies to private med school. (Are nursing, kinesiology, or nutrition considered acceptable majors for pre-meds nowadays?)

^ @iwannabe_Brown ?
(Examples given in thr article also involved sports communication and dental studies).

That “girl” is a professor who got her PhD nearly a decade ago.

@MYOS1634:
“But yes you’d think nursing would be considered an excellent preparation and shows motivation for health care. Yet it doesn’t. Even at state med schools, as far as I know.”

On what are you basing your conclusion?