<p>glido–I’m not suggesting eliminating merit aid at all. We worship merit aid and our checkbook thanks it’s lucky stars every day for merit aid, but the balance between that and financial aid at the state school system in AL is way off kilter. It might be a good target market for smaller colleges trying to boost attendance though. Obviously the home environment has to change for anything to happen but something has to be the catalysis for that change. I am just picturing a family that wants to do better for their kids, pushing kids to do well in school even though they are in the under 30K category, hearing that private schools are so expensive, then seeing that they will have $3000/year to live on if they send their child to a “cheap” state school and just giving up because it’s totally unobtainable. Also not having the exposure to schools that do meet 100% of need or close to it that these kids would go to college for free being low income, first generation kids—and probably URM to boot.</p>
<p>Maybe if people would stop blaming the schools and start focusing on the cause, things will change…</p>
<p>BCEagle91–that is why I used the MN/MA example. MA is 6th in math and 10th ?? in science and MN is 2nd in science and 8th in math or something like that. They are also the only two states to have statewide Early Childhood programs for kids from birth-kindergarten-getting kids on track early. There is a definite relationship to those programs and the high test scores in high school. Point being, if families see an “out” to the poverty/low income levels, hopefully the situation in AL will change. It’s not going to happen overnight obviously but like I said, if someone making 30K/year has to pay their entire take home pay for a child to go to college, the system is just messed up. In MA/MN, that same child would go to college for free.</p>
<p>BCEagle91—that’s the point–get more kids into college so THEIR kids will do better. MN and MA are about the same for % of degree holders nationwide, they pass that down to their kids. AL has one of the lowest % of degree holders in the US…but looking at the cost to attend what people assume is the “cheapest” route for college, state schools, it’s just not a goal people in AL can set for their kids—THAT has to change.</p>
<p>I actually think Alabama is one of those states, like Iowa, which can’t fill their spaces with kids from instate, and they are making a concerted effort to get the best out of state they CAN get in the hopes that some percentage will stay and change the landscape, over time. This is the impression I get. As in, as long as we HAVE to take OOS to fill our classes, we might as well get the best ones we can get.</p>
<p>Consider, too, the Peer effect. We talk about this sometimes on CC, that the biggest value of the upper tier schools is that you will be among intellectual peers. Perhaps this is also some of thing thinking behind getting the better OOS students. I think the University of Mississippi is attempting this, as well. </p>
<p>I don’t know how you do the jumpstart thing on college parents. I don’t know that just getting kids into college will result in the same quality of parents that you have in the Northeast.</p>
<p>Alabama has been increasing it’s enrollment for many years now–it’s been one of the goals of the former president (now head of the Board of Trustees). And with that enrollment, there’s been a lot of building and expansion of facilities as well. So I’m not sure that Alabama has been using OOS students to fill seats it already had, or that it was being forced to take OOS students to fill empty seats.</p>
<p>I can’t see how it would be better to make access for an in-state student more difficult on the theory that it would be better for them overall because you are attracting stronger OOS students. If you can’t go because it becomes unaffordable, it doesn’t make a difference how strong the student body is.</p>
<p>Well I’m certainly no expert on Alabama, the University OR the state. But, I do think there is some concerted effort going on on the part of the University to get bright out of state students in their school. And, it is working, to some extent. I don’t know the reasoning behind it, but I imagine there is a mission statement about it, somewhere. Probably Mom2CK would know.</p>
<p>Of course there is the desire to attract a better student, rise in the rankings, be more selective, etc. But Alabama is a state school, and it’s primary mission should be to make access to higher education possible for students of that state.</p>
<p>I don’t live in Alabama. It’s not my job to decide what they should or should not do. I know that in the state of Illinois, which has the one overpriced flagship, where I do live, even though there are very few OOS students, it hasn’t kept the pricing down for in state. Is Alabama in a budget crunch, educatonally? I don’t know.</p>
<p>“BCEagle91–that is why I used the MN/MA example. MA is 6th in math and 10th ?? in science and MN is 2nd in science and 8th in math or something like that. They are also the only two states to have statewide Early Childhood programs for kids from birth-kindergarten-getting kids on track early.”</p>
<p>People in states like AL and MS, to name just a few, don’t want to pay the taxes it would cost to fund early childhood programs. You can’t get blood from a stone.</p>
<p>I actually think Alabama is one of those states, like Iowa, which can’t fill their spaces with kids from instate, and they are making a concerted effort to get the best out of state they CAN get in the hopes that some percentage will stay and change the landscape, over time. This is the impression I get. As in, as long as we HAVE to take OOS to fill our classes, we might as well get the best ones we can get.</p>
<p>Somewhat true. Yes, Bama wants to grow and it needs OOS students to do that. It offers merit to get the best. However, by far, most OOS kids at Bama are full pay. Only a small % of OOS students are getting big scholarships…about 10%. Therefore, Bama is also happy to accept the good-but-not-top OOS students as well. :)</p>
<p>skrlvr quote: Alabama is a good example of a school where merit has come at the expense of need based aid.</p>
<p>Over 50% of Bama’s frosh are from OOS. Why should Bama be expected to “meet need” of mostly OOS students. OOS students should have to pay more. Bama does a good job with it’s instate needy students.</p>
<p>The net price I quoted above from IPEDS–the $13, 815 for families between 0-30K–is the net price for those paying in-state tuition rates. I don’t see how it’s doing a good job with it’s in-state needy students given that net price.</p>
<p>Bama has a highly padded COA since it includes the “private room dorms” and the priciest meal plan (all you can eat - as many times a day as you want), therefore the “net price” assumes that high cost so that families can use PLUS to cover all of those extras if desired. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a state school to provide funds for private room dorms, etc. A standard double (much cheaper) is a fair expectation (which is several thousand less). I also don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a state school to provide for “personal expenses” (toothpaste & shampoo) and transportation. Nor is it reasonable to expect an “all you can eat” meal plan (including several meals a day) for 4 years. </p>
<p>So, when I put in a 0 EFC in the school’s NPC, it shows $10k in grants (which covers & fees), and a student loan and work study, which can cover most of R&B for a standard double. Much of the rest of the rest of the expenses can be paid for with earnings from a summer job.</p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that FAFSA only schools aren’t going to be as generous simply because they don’t account for other sources of money…NCP income, high home equity, etc.</p>
<p>NPCs are not accurate for most people when the school does not meet 100% if need and if it gives merit money. They go by averages which means if your head is in the freezer and your backside in the fire, you are “on the average” quite comfortable.</p>
<p>When I put a 0 EFC, I get total grants and scholarships at 6550–all Federal aid. The net price there is a total of 20, 917, so that’s much higher than what’s listed at IPEDS for a family of 0-30K. And then 8,500 dollars in loan. The family has to come up with 7,630. But the institution itself gives nothing.</p>
<p>Alabama is a great school that gives a great education and experience for those who attend. But it could be doing better for needy families. </p>
<p>To compare to other schools, UWashington has an net price for these families at 6,128; University of Illinois 7,432; UMass at Amherst 8,863; UArizona 8, 297. University of South Carolina 9417.</p>
<p>Let me also say this. My son gets very generous need based aid from a top school. Every year they calculate their cost of attendance (which include books and personal expenses not paid to the school) minus the scholarship to give me an idea of what the net price would be for that year. And every year, I pay more in direct costs to the school than what the net price indicates. It’s off by about 1K.</p>
<p>emilybee–that is where being more educated comes in. It’s got to start somewhere but if people keep making excuses why they don’t do something it will never change. It’s along the lines of that school in New York many years ago where a philanthropist made a pledge to pay for the college education of kids from one class if they made it through school. That little push, that little vote of confidence made a WORLD of difference. Obviously there are a lot of issues to over come but it’s baby steps to make the change.</p>
<p>skrlvr–it’s sad that they can get the same or similar costs outstate as they can instate…</p>
<p>Let me buckle on my flak jacket first, before I say this. </p>
<p>I don’t think it is money well spent for ALL kids to go to college. Priority for scarce dollars should be given to kids (irrespective of their family’s socio-economic status) who demonstrate the potential to gain the most from higher education. This is what other countries do. College is free or nearly free, and only the kids who demonstrate the capability to do the work go to college. </p>
<p>In the U.S., in contrast, there is a push now for EVERYONE to go to college, whether they are ready or not. And this is how we end up with a huge number of kids taking remedial courses and/or dropping out.</p>
<p>If the average net price of paying for college is, say, half of the gross price, then that’s what colleges should just set the gross price at and stop this circus of calculating FA for middle class families. NO MORE financial aid except for the neediest of the poor. Tuition prices should be set like hot lunch prices at school: SAME REASONABLE PRICE FOR EVERYONE, except the very, very poor get help.</p>
<p>Many state flagships DO NOT serve the truly needy in a state very well,as they do not tend to meet need. Even those states that have free or heavily subsidized tuitions through programs like HOPE and PROMISE, leave what’s left, like living expenses up to the students and families, for the most part. Few state schools meet full need for most of their students. There is also the goal of bring up the quality of students and reputation of the school , and that is often secondary to meeting full need of all state residents who are accepted. </p>
<p>I"ve known a number of kids from mid and low income familes accepted to their main state universities and they did not need met. What’s tough is that some of them were truly low income students and it’s pretty danged clear that there is no way families at that level are going to be able to comeup with the gap. Even more of an issue are those students who have done well at local and community colleegs and need to go to the state u to get the degree they want. There should be a high priority to fund these kids who have shown their stripes and who live in an area where they cannot get the major they want or sometimes even any 4 year degree on a commuter basis.</p>