<p>A few of the recent replies bring me back to an discussion that often appears on CC about the IVYs. There are some super rich kids who live to their wealth and are not very considerate of their classmates and these folks irritate some kids and can make some kids uncomfortable ... but in my experience there are very-very few of them. At a bigger school a student can build a life totally independent of these folks and hang with the vast majority of students who, whatever their economic background, are inclusive and respectfull of their friends. </p>
<p>I was an undergrad at Cornell coming from a lower middle-class background so my family's income was probably in the lower 25% of the families at the school. My overally simplistic version of this summary of the situation was ... after I learned there were a couple frats and sorieties I wanted to avoid, because in my opinion, they were money/class snobs I was good .... in other words avoid a couple hundred kids out of 10,000 and things were fine. Did situation ever arise where I wish I had more bucks ... sure ... but I knew my friends were never intentinally putting me in an awkward spot, and more importantly, I knew when aware my friends (and acquantances) would try to make things right.</p>
<p>I've always said the absolute best thing about Cornell ... and its not even close ... was my school mates. And I say that as someone who went coming from a lower-middle class background and a, relatively speaking, weak public high school ... these in no way hindered my great experience at Cornell.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am surprised that college students are so keenly aware of an economic divide among themselves as opposed to economic differences and choose friends on the basis of income. S's friends run the gamut from the very well off to the low income on full ride. I've met them and they seem very comfortable with themselves and with one another.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A couple of things. </p>
<p>First, there is a broad range of income within which differences will not matter so much unless one makes a point of noticing them. Below that, especially for the poorest, there is quite a "culture shock" on arrival in places where students (for example) actually buy furniture and books rather than settling for whatever is free, abandoned or dirt-cheap.</p>
<p>Second, you and your son may not be well attuned to notice the financial implications of day to day college life, not being (or so I assume) anywhere near low-income. Had your son been from the bottom 1-2 percent of the economy, the supposedly minor differences would be more visible to him.</p>
<p>My S's friends also run the gamut, but they all seem to live as cheaply as possible. They only time they eat at expensive/good restaurants is when someone else is paying the bill. S borrowed dress shows for interviews, but he bought an a/c for his room as an indulgence. S has always had jobs.</p>
<p>I do listen to parents who complain how their kids eat out all the time to avoid dorm food. I suspect these same kids were allowed to do the same in HS, rather than brown bag it or eat the dreaded school lunches.</p>
<p>Calmom--your D and my S go to a full-needs school. Your D, on a Pell grant, has money for the food plan, according to your posts that she is on it. No one at a full-need school (the kind where the "rich kids" are), doesn't have a food plan of some sort--school or home based. I was answering your post where you discussed the fact that your D didn't like the food at the cafeteria, not a phantom post about starving students.</p>
<p>Now, come to where I work, a small HBC which doesn't nearly meet full needs and has a student base of kids who are really low income--that's where you find students who may not have enough to eat. But that's not the kind of school we are discussing--they would be much better off at a Barnard/Columbia money-wise.</p>
<p>Also, I didn't say my kids didn't/don't have wealthy friends; i said they don't hang out with kids who do things they can't afford. Not the same thing.</p>
<p>As far as neighborhoods--that's in response to your continual comments that someone who disagrees with you in this thread must be rich and clueless. Thus, if you saw where we live, you'd know we're pretty aware of class/income issues.</p>
<p>My son is very well aware of differences in income since one of his suitemates is low income, full ride, father an auto mechanic in a small town. But awareness does not translate into deliberate exclusion of certain individuals on the basis of income, either on the part of the well off or on the part of the not-so well-off or downright low SES. The suitemate has an active social life, being part of a singing group. These singing groups do their own fund-raising and also enjoy the support of loyal alumni. I've heard of weekends in Bermuda or CA vineyards, courtesy of these alumni as well as stays in five stars hotels.
But I've also heard of queues at the IHOP for the All You Can EAT ice cream for $1.00</p>
<p>A top school is not the only place students from different income levels get to live together. In many parts of the country, the state's flagship university is where the local bigwig country club set send their offspring, together with a Porsch or SUV. I suspect that economic differences in Ole' 'Bama are even more visible than at HYP, right there in the parking lots.</p>
<p>Having poor friends does not impart the ability to see things through their eyes. Over time and with enough experiences it might do that, up to a point. You and your son probably know some people who are black (or Jewish, Asian, etc) but that doesn't necessarily mean you are fully "aware" of how things look from such an angle.</p>
<p>This is entirely different from the question of whether friendships have to be prevented by economic (or race, class or whatever other) differences. They don't. There is, however, quite a culture shock the poorer the student is, arriving at any elite private school in the US.</p>
<p>By the way, car-mechanic from small town is probably low income by Harvard standards, but does not usually translate into actual poverty -- shortage of meals or clothes or other necessities.</p>
<p>"There is, however, quite a culture shock the poorer the student is, arriving at any elite private school in the US."</p>
<p>I don't necessarily agree with that statement. There are many students from lower-income brackets who have been schooled (with aid) at privates, from a wee age. Culture shock was over at around age 5. They often attend high schools where wealth is actually the norm -- even more so than at even an "elite" college/U with a broader mixture of incomes. My d's experience accords with those of marite's S in post #79. My D has found that indeed, to borrow from post 81, "the vast majority of students...whatever their economic background, are inclusive and respectful of their friends." Those backgrounds (of her acquaintances) include many income levels.</p>
<p>I agree that awareness and bone deep knowledge are different things. But this thread is about SAT and wealth and whether economic differences affect how one selects friends in college. Shortage of meals and clothes (as opposed to merely inexpensive) probably does not go with high enough SAT scores to qualify for a top college or even with any SAT score. Let's keep in mind that SAT-takers represent only a fraction of the total population of 1. students who are in 12th grade and 2. students who should have been in 12th grade but dropped out. As Garland wrote some of the students at the HBC where she works would probably be financially better off at full need schools such as Columbia or Harvard.</p>
<p>About that auto mechanic? He's low income by any standard. The whole town has a median income well below the national average. No Porsche for repair there.</p>
My d. had a Pell grant last year and a mandatory food plan that was a hardship for us. My d. does NOT have a Pell grant this year; she does NOT have a food plan this year, but will be paying for her own food; she has $8000 LESS in grant money this year than last, she will take out $1500 more in loans this year than last, tuition has gone up this year by $2000, and I will be taking a PLUS loan to make up the difference. As I already posted, the difference between this year and last year is that my college-attending son turned 24 and my ex-husband earned more money on paper, but my ex. does not contribute a dime toward support of our offspring or their college expenses - so basically my single parent status means that I am one parent expected to take on the financial burden of two. </p>
<p>And once AGAIN I am trying to get across that I am NOT talking about MY kid, I am talking about kids who have even less than we do, and who are quite likely to have a very tough time at college because their parents aren't paying the "parental" contribution. I have said that over and over again. Your attacks on me and my kid for not being as poor as the example I posit has nothing whatsoever to do with the low income kids I am concerned about. I am sure that there must kids with single moms who earn less than I do but have the same sort of gap to fill every year based on the noncustodial parent form that is required. I can certainly see why such kids would want to avoid the environment of a private school filled with students who are in denial as to their situation and needs. </p>
<p>Go over to the financial aid thread and read the posts of KIDS there who do not have parents who are willing or able to send them checks to cover the family EFC. My posts here are in response to and agreement with a comment early on by Barrons about the problems that lower income students face in an environment where most kids come from fairly privileged backgrounds.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But that's not the kind of school we are discussing--they would be much better off at a Barnard/Columbia money-wise.
[/quote]
The situation I described above in terms of change of aid would be enough to cause many students to have to drop out. I don't know what the financial aid policies are at the college where you work, but the noncustodial parent thing with the CSS Profile is a bear. I spent several months this year stressed out thinking that my d. would lose aid entirely because of non cooperation, and then that was followed by months of stress worrying about what the final numbers would be in a situation that is totally out of control. Lower income kids are far more likely to come from single parent homes -- so they are more likely to face this issue. We do college one year at a time. A "full need" school is a myth if the school has financial aid policies that count an income that is not available to the family. </p>
<p>My daughter wanted to attend a private college and I committed to doing what I could to make it happen for her. But it is significantly harder financially than our in state publics would be -- and if she were attending school in state, we'd have a fair financial aid package based on what I actually earn and have in savings, not on assets & income imputed to me. My d. understands the difference which is why she is willing to work as many hours as she does -- but coming back to one of the other points, the hours she works does cut into her social life. </p>
<p>
[quote]
that's in response to your continual comments that someone who disagrees with you in this thread must be rich and clueless.
[/quote]
I never said anything of the sort, and I certainly didn't use those words. The word I used was "insensitive".</p>
<p>I agree with Siserune's comments. Marite, I am struck by your continued use of the word "resentment". When a kid or an adult chooses not to socialize with people because they cannot afford to participate in the activities the other people prefer, that is not a case of "resentment". It's simply a matter of de facto exclusion. Not enough money combined with embarrassment -- no one wants to be the person who continually spoils everyone else's fun. So it makes more sense to politely decline invitations and let the friendships lapse. </p>
<p>Why do you think the poorer kids "resent" the wealthier ones if they choose not to participate in activities they can't afford?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why do you think the poorer kids "resent" the wealthier ones if they choose not to participate in activities they can't afford?
[/quote]
I can't speak to situations where the social options were expensive (we're headed to the carribean for spring break; do you want to come along?) </p>
<p>In my circle of friends I knew kids who were fine and others who were uncomfortable with my friends and I picking up their cut of the pizza / movie / hockey ticket. Everyone is different and my comments about Cornell relate to what seem to me to be the most common occurance ... friends living pretty cheaply, including all their friends, and their friends seeming to be OK with the situation (participating, not appearing uncomfortable, and not voicing concerns). </p>
<p>The folks who were uncomfortable were few and to be honest I had a hard time relating to their concerns ... but as Siserune described, while I did not have big bucks I was not from a poor family and have not traveled in their shoes ... and for those folks who were uncomfortable they saw lots of things that made them feel that way. I am not denying their feelings but I did have trouble putting myself into their shoes ... and thankfully it seems to me there was a limited number of kids who felt this way. (not thankful because they shouldn't feel that way ... thankful that is seems to have been few people)</p>
<p>If "friends" organize activities that are consistently unaffordable to some, then they are not real friends. There is no loss in letting the acquaintance lapse not because the so-called "friends" are richer but because they are insensitive clods.</p>
<p>My kids went to private upper school for 6 years, so when they selected their college lists, they specifically did NOT want to go to an expensive private school. They have no problem with rich kids, nor did the rich kids at their high school have a problem with them. Matter of fact, they were quite popular. The thing was, the disposable income thing did get in the way of hanging out and doing the stuff that the rest of the kids did on weekends/school breaks. </p>
<p>"Hey, let's all go over to Halloween Horror Nights next weekend. We'll rent some rooms at the Hard Rock. It'll cost about $300 per person."</p>
<p>"Hey, let's go to the Keys over break. We'll tow a boat and get a bunch of rooms- it'll cost about $500 per person."</p>
<p>"Hey, everyone is meeting up to the Japanese Steakhouse after the game tonight."</p>
<p>"Hey, we're all going over to watch a Magic game next week, my dad can get us tickets. We'll get a room downtown. Everyone can chip in a couple hundred."</p>
<p>"The class trip this year is a cruise. It will cost everyone $800."</p>
<p>Pretty soon, a kid gets tired of staying at home instead of doing stuff with his friends.<br>
My kids are happy as clams at their public U. The entertainment venues are cheap. My response to anyone who does not want to feel "different" or "left out" is just to think long and hard before you put yourself into that situation. Maybe that kind of school isn't the best place for you, happiness-wise.</p>
<p>Calmom--the school I work at is a FAFSA only school. Non-custodial parents are not counted, which would certainly work for you. OTOH, we are not "meets-full-need" as Barnard is (I think?), so it really doesn't matter. Many of our students are just enough above the poverty line that our FA dept, which does not seem able to tweak the Pell grants, can't get them Pell or state money. We have almost no institutional money. So we offer loans, huge loans, to kids who are very unlikely to be making much money when and if they graduate. EFC is a mythical entity here--very few parents have anything to do with the payments--it's assumed it's the kid's responsibility. So they work, 30/40 hours a week. Many of them also have children, or are responsible for taking care of ill parents/grandparents, or supervising siblings, in addition to being sorely underprepared for school, often repeating remedial courses multiple times (accruing loans as they do so) in order to be able to take regular classes.</p>
<p>So in the scheme of things, the high-performing lower-income student who gets into a Barnard/Columbia/Princeton/Harvard etc, is so much better off than the vast majority of low income students, that I do not think they need my worries about how they'll "feel" at the above schools.</p>
<p>I most certainly do sympathize with your D for having a parent who will not pay towards her schooling. We see this a lot on the CC boards. I'm not sure what the answer is, though she is certainly fortunate to have another parent willing to make up the difference.</p>
<p>Thank you to the parents who have shown how it can feel to be in situations where your lifestyle choices are limited by your funds. I'm having a chat with DD to make her sensitive to this, so that if she senses it, she'll know there are times to say "let's just go to the on-campus movie," or "my parents just sent me a care package, dinner's my treat tonight."</p>
<p>I don't think it has anything to do with being an insensitive clod; why should someone give up doing things that are fun because someone in the group can't afford it? How many opportunities are they supposed to forego? No, that's not fair either. </p>
<p>It's a fact of life that someone is always going to be able to afford something that you can't, and vice versa. No one should feel guilty about it, nor resentful.</p>
<p>Didn't mean to suggest that students who take part in activities that cost money are insensitive clods; on the contrary, I think most of them probaby care a lot, esp. about their circle of friend. But I think that there are plenty of 19 and 20 year olds who came from backgrounds of privledge, and find themselves surrounded mainly by kids from similar backgrounds, who might not be sensitive to economic differences. I'm thinking particulary about what's going on right now, as students form new social bonds in the first few weeks of school.</p>