Let’s go with the racial analogy. Only 2% of Princeton comes from the bottom 20%. If Princeton was only 2% black or 2% Hispanic would you still claim it’s racially diverse?
Well, forget the racial analogy. Here’s the latest student racial profile at Princeton for the Class of 2022 of 1,346 students:
Asian American 22
Hispanic/Latino 10
African American 8
Multiracial (non-Hispanic) 5
American Indian <1
International Citizens 13
Sure looks “diverse” to me! Perhaps the “degree” of racial diversity is not to your liking, but the only way I can say it’s not “diverse” is if the student profile at Princeton is 100% homogeneous white, right?
Is there a room for improvement? Of course! But, as with the case of low-SES, where do you get the qualified cohort of applicants enough to substantially increase the percentage of Hispanic/Latino, African-American and especially American-Indian students at these elite schools? Do you know?
…and I’ve responded before.
- My kids
- Tons of kids posting on CC ask about this - is this college a bubble, it is too much like high school, will I be the only "____", etc. Look around.
- Colleges do it to benefit society maybe but most definitely to benefit their students. Students in a homogeneous environment are just not as smart-worldly-able to understand and deal with people. It's a critical part of education. It ought to happen a lot sooner but this is College Confidential not Elementary Confidential.
Of course it is and that’s completely beside the point - no one is getting into H thinking that. Calculus students don’t and won’t live and work in a vacuum, first of all, so the benefits of different perspectives are as valuable for them as for Econ majors.
But there are immediate benefits too - having kids in that study group that bring varied backgrounds and perspectives - not divide by zero that’s stupid - but “this is how we were taught at X” or “in my country/school we approach a problem this way” could be very valuable indeed. Stretch your thinking a little bit.
You think more than half the accepted class at Harvard got into MIT and CT?? Please. I doubt half the accepted H class even thought about applying to MIT and CT, they’r eon opposite coasts for one thing, and have very different focus and reputation.
I’m thinking the number of kids choosing from those 3 is more like 10.
I’ll call this out again - but thank you Data10 for putting it in quotes.
There is no full ride from Princeton. Even a family making $20k with zero assets/cash has a student contribution that is, the first year, $4000. It goes up after that. It is generally the amount in excess of tuition/fees/R&B - meaning students are expected to work to pay for travel, personal expenses and books. And come up with much of that before they arrive on campus. It’s a big chunk for a very low income family.
Let’s not perpetuate the idea that these poorer kids get everything for free.
In the case of low SES, Harvard (and likely Princeton + similar) only give a small boost for low SES compared to the boost for URMs and various other hooks. If the hook strength was swapped, low SES percentage could be dramatically increased. However, the current FA system would not be financially viable, as half the class would be under the income threshold for no cost to parents, and the overwhelming majority would be getting FA. An Ivy League Athletic Conference level athletic program would also not be viable, with ~95% of recruited athletes being rejected. Specific numbers are below, as calculated by Harvard’s expert, if Harvard’s Class of 2019 switched to an admission model where they removed all hooks and instead increased the strength of the benefit for low SES:
Stat Metrics Are Similar
Average SAT Score: 2235 → 2239
Average ACT Score: 33.4 → 33.3
Average GPA: 4.03 → 4.00
Average Academic Rating: 2.19 → 2.22
Average EC Rating: 2.38 → 2.40
Average Personal Rating: 2.31 → 2.27
Other Metrics Differ
No Cost To Parents: 18% → 48%
Recruited Athletes: 11% → Under 1%
Legacy: 17% → 5%
URMs: 26.5% → 18%
Asian: 24% → 34%
Here’s what the Princeton FA webpage states:
If your gross family income is $0-65,000, then the average grant is $67,350, which covers full tuition, college fee, room and board.
Since you mentioned “a family making $20k with zero assets/cash,” I did run through the Princeton NPC based on that. The result?
Student’s Expected Summer Savings of $1,100 and Zero parent contribution. If this is not a full ride (admittedly from the parents’ perspective), then I don’t know what it is. And PLEASE don’t tell me that $1,100 of student’s expected summer savings from work is going to kill him with hardship. Your figure of $4,000 (actually, $4,600 to be precise) is from Harvard’s NPC, not Princeton’s.
Princeton’s FA Calculator lists 2 parts to the student effort contribution – a “campus job” and “summer savings”. The minimum values of these are $2900 + $1100 = $4000.
@Data10 - “In the case of low SES, Harvard (and likely Princeton + similar) only give a small boost for low SES compared to the boost for URMs and various other hooks. If the hook strength was swapped, low SES percentage could be dramatically increased.”
First, thank you for usual excellent work in providing the pertinent data. I don’t know where in the world you get these, but I’m loving them!!
What I was interested in getting at, however, is the AVAILABILITY (i.e., supply) of the number of academically qualified low SES students to increase the percentage of their presence across the top institutions. If the qualified number is there but they aren’t admitted to these institutions due to a burden on the FA system, that’s one thing. It’s of course entirely another matter if the qualified number simply isn’t there to increase their percentage across these institutions.
Except, no one believes that, at least not very strongly. If you wanted your kids to be exposed to lower SES, you might send them to a CC for their first two years, or a directional state U, or even the state flagship. If exposure to lower SES kids was the goal, you would send them almost anywhere other than the Ivy League.
@Data10 - “Princeton’s FA Calculator lists 2 parts to the student effort contribution – a “campus job” and “summer savings”. The minimum values of these are $2900 + $1100 = $4000.”
Ah, I see it the second time I ran the NPC. Good that it still beats Harvard’s $4,600! LOL!
The question still remains what constitutes a full ride. I think it’s silly to argue, really. From a parent’s perspective, it still remains a ZERO contribution.
What’s the income threshold? Is it $150k? If it is, why should a family with $150k income be treated as the same financially (i.e. getting a free ride) as the one with $30k income? Shouldn’t it contribute something?
Even if Harvard were generous enough to give an additional 30% of its students full ride, the cost would be about $140m/yr (additional 2k students at $70k/student), or less than 0.4% of its endowment assets. For an endowment that generates 10% return annually, it’s far from financially non-viable.
@roethlisburger - " If exposure to lower SES kids was the goal, you would send them almost anywhere other than the Ivy League."
For the Class of 2022 at Princeton, 20 percent of students in the class qualify for a Pell grant, and that’s about the same at HY and other Ivys. I don’t know at what percentage point would truly satisfy your “exposure” issue? 30%, 50% or…? But you’re right, if exposure to a larger percentage of lower SES kids than the Ivys is indeed anyone’s goal, then go elsewhere. On the flip side, though, for my upper income kid, I’d like him to be exposed to BOTH the lower SES and the aristocratic SES kids, as well. Isn’t that what diversity is valued for? A kid can learn as much from lower SES kids as from higher SES kids, no?
The numbers I listed are based on the actual applicants from the class of 2019. There were enough academically qualified low SES applicants in Harvard’s class of 2019 pool to produce the SES distribution listed above with ~48% of the class below the ~median US household income – a balanced representation with the full US population. The low SES admits as a whole had weaker admission criteria than high SES admits as a whole, but the overall class SAT/ACT/academic… stats were similar to the actual entering class because the weaker low SES admits took the place of existing hook groups that often have weaker admission criteria than the overall class.
That said, most high achieving low SES students do not apply to selective colleges, as described in the paper at https://www.nber.org/papers/w18586 . Even fewer apply to Ivies. There is a limited supply of high achieving low income applicants, just as there is a limited supply of high achieving URM applicants. The limited supply makes it difficult to achieve a well balanced representation without modifying usual admission standards for the limited supply groups. The situation becomes more challenging, if other similar HYP… type elites are trying to get the same students.
@Data10 - “That said, most high achieving low SES students do not apply to selective colleges, as described in the paper at https://www.nber.org/papers/w18586 . Even fewer apply to Ivies. There is a limited supply of high achieving low income applicants, just as there is a limited supply of high achieving URM applicants. The limited supply makes it difficult to achieve a well balanced representation without modifying usual admission standards for the limited supply groups. The situation becomes more challenging, if other similar HYP… type elites are trying to get the same students.”
Thank you. That answers my question.
The threshold Harvard OIR uses to indicate low income in the lawsuit is $60k, which seems to be approximately the threshold where the “disadvantaged” flag gets applied. After adjusting for inflation, that would be a threshold of ~$70k today or slightly more than US median household income.
Harvard gives excellent financial aid to middle class families making $150k, with a net cost to parents of only ~$15k in their calc assuming typical assets. However, they don’t get flagged as for having “modest economic means” and get the corresponding boost in chance of admission.
If Harvard were to give 50% of it’s students “full ride” and have 50% full pay, then that would suggest either an odd income distribution with middle class families missing or a sharp cut-off in FA. If they instead gave 50% of students “full ride” and gradually tapered off to maybe 10% of students being full pay, then they’d dramatically decrease the amount received through tuition. Yes, Harvard has a high endowment that can be used to pay for a variety of things, but they are restricted in how they can use it, and want the endowment to increase over time, rather than decrease.
I see now how Harvard picked $60k/70k as a threshold. That’s frankly deceptive. We’re not talking about making Harvard socioeconomically representative of America. It never will. All it needs to do is to give applicants of low SES a boost (or “tip”, in Harvard’s terminology) to offset some of the disadvantages these applicants may have experienced. No one is arguing that they should be admitted based on a quota or a fixed percentage (by picking $60/70k as a threshold, Harvard is essentially saying that’s the alternative).
Again, the endowment generates annual return of about 10% and I believe Harvard currently spends about 5% of its endowment earning annually. Adjusting for 2-3% annual inflation, there’s another 2-3% left, much more than sufficient to fund the additional FA. Harvard would only be spending a portion of its endowment earnings and the endowment itself won’t decrease at all.
32% of undergraduates receive Pell Grants. If you want to brag your college has SES diversity and increased exposure to low SES students, your institution should exceed the national average.
Why do you assume that students and families can only have a single goal? Why assume that if diversity isn’t the first priority it doesn’t count? My D has some very high priorities regarding major, availability of facilities and off campus opportunities, advising and geography. However, several schools satisfy those requirements. Greater diversity is a large plus for her in differentiating among the schools that satisfy her primary needs.
Maybe YOU don’t believe that but clearly many people do.
As far as racial, ethnic, SES, geographic, international diversity? Those are virtually nonexistent at a CC in our area. Not to mention the education there involves large, often only-online classes and lots of remedial options. Not a good fit for most high-achieving students.
Things are somewhat better than CC at state school or flagship, but not nearly as diverse as my kid’s “elite” school. Also, the cost (even instate) is much higher than the generous privates. And the percentage of Pell students is about the same.
Diversity - or lack thereof - definitely took schools off my kids’ lists.
Does it? Someone has to come up with the money for books and transportation and sheets and whatnot. It may be the kid, it may be the parents, it may be both.
…and just on CC we’ve had many lengthy threads about teens being unable to find summer work. Relatively well-off teens, in fact, with access to a car, doing apps at malls and restaurants and such to no avail.
There are many areas where it’s much harder for a teen heading off in the fall to find work, or if they can get a job, to have transportation to it.
I’m not picking on Princeton, it’s true to varying degrees for all the elite “meet full need” schools. They want kids to have “skin in the game” and I get that. But it’s useful for us to recognize that for some families that “skin” is really a big deal.