SAT test and wealth.

Parents Forum
101

<p>calmom: your DD is an exception at a 100% need school. She decided she wants a private education, she made her choice, and I respect this choice. At least, she had a choice to go to a public school (and unlike many other kids, she has some pretty good ones in her state!) My DD was in exactly the same financial situation several years ago - and she had to graduate from her university in 3 years, overloading each and every semester (you bet it affected her social life and her education in general!). BTW, we still did not finish paying off the money we had to borrow... but I really don't see why you keep bringing up all this. Yes, you are right, your DD would be much better off financially at any of the UC schools (as well as many other kids from 3-4 quintiles). Yes, she has to make sacrifices so that her dream could come through. But still, she does not have to feel inferior and humiliated because of that.</p>

<p>I don't know. Were you offended by my phrase "if our kids don't feel like working, they don't"? Well, that's true, they don't. And I do not see anything wrong if a kid prefers to have just $200 in his bank account for emergencies and go on without spending money; if he does not even dream of thinking that the dorm food is not good enough for him; if he does not buy any clothes or shoes and does not go to any events that are not free - but wants instead to use his college years 150%, to take a couple of additional classes and to try a couple of new clubs (not THAT clubs, but something like Math or Karate). </p>

<p>My son had his dream school: an OOS public, imagine that! He was accepted, but the gap would be over $20000, so he chose to go to a full-need LAC (which, as I can see now, is much better option for him academically, so no regrets there). If he went to his dream school, he would be in much the same situation that your DD is now; he would have to work longer hours (or take the entire $20000 per year in loans). But I really don't think he would act or feel differently. Same as Garland's kids, mine know about the existing differences (they feel those differences all their lives). They just don't care about them (and they don't hang out with people who care too much; somehow their friends happen to be of a similar mindset, no matter their income level).</p>

<p>You may keep thinking that your opponents and their kids are thick, insensitive and ignorant; but all the bashing will not change the point: </p>

<p>For some kids it does matter. For others it does not.</p>

102

<p>


I thought that this was worth repeating.</p>

<p>


Isn't that the point of this thread? The 100% need-based FA schools also tend to be among the most selective in the country. There seems to be some irony in that these schools will meet the need for any student, but the kids who would most likely qualify for that aid, are unlikely to get in. They probably are not being raised in the kind of enriched, academic background that the high-scoring, wonderful EC kids are. There is an inequity here, but I don't know how to solve it.</p>

<p>It seems natural to me that kids make friends with others from similar backgrounds. But I think that Calmom's point is that since there are fewer kids like her daughter at the highly selective schools, it is harder to find such a peer group.</p>

103

<p>I often imagine after I die I will be able to review my life with a broader view and see what the true situation was and not from my myopic view at the time of my real life experience.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But I think that Calmom's point is that since there are fewer kids like her daughter at the highly selective schools, it is harder to find such a peer group.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>My experience at a equivalent school seemed to be so much different ... was that because the schools are so much different? that the times are so much different (separated by about 30 years)? that the gap has become so much more pronounced? that I lucked out in the circle of people I dealt with and in the greater population at Cornell things were not as "nice"? that Calmom's daughter was unlucky that the circle of folks she is dealing with somehow make the income difference visible/real? There is no way to know the actual answer ... but it's great to hear the varying experiences of the folks on CC ... the more I hear of others realities the better!</p>

104

<p>But should people from the same income brackets hang out together?
The low income kid is likely to travel to more places, and in greater luxury ,than my S is likely to do in college (and probably beyond). That's because he joined a particular singing group that also functions as a social group, bringing together people from different income levels. But that's not why he joined the singing group: he just wanted to sing.
We know about the finals clubs and the money it takes to become a member and the parties they throw. But they are really irrelevant to the social life of most students, and certainly of S and his friends.</p>

105

<p>I think that one of the benefits of a college education is the exposure to people from different backgrounds -- geographic, economic, ethnic, political or whatever. So, no, I don't think that college students should restrict their social lives to people from the exact same background.</p>

<p>But has anyone seen the movie, "Real Women Have Curves?" It is the story of a Hispanic girl from east LA who wants to go to Columbia.<br>

[quote]
This is the story of Ana, a first generation Mexican-American teenager on the verge of becoming a woman. She lives in the predominately Latino community of East Los Angeles. Freshly graduated from high school, Ana receives a full scholarship to Columbia University. Her very traditional, old-world parents feel that now is the time for Ana to help provide for the family, not the time for college. Torn between her mainstream ambitions and her cultural heritage she agrees to work with her mother at her sister's downtown LA sewing factory. Over the summer she learns to admire the hardworking team of women who teach her solidarity and teamwork. Still at odds with what her mother expects of her, Ana realizes that leaving home to continue her education is essential to finding her place proudly in the world as an American and Chicana.

[/quote]
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296166/plotsummary%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296166/plotsummary&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>There's no way this girl, whether a fictional character or not, is going to just fit right in with the Prep school kids at any selective college. It would be a remarkable achievement for any student with a comparable background to get into such a school. It just doesn't happen that often. So such a student would have adjustment issues beyond those of most upper-middle class kids.</p>

106

<p>"There's no way this girl, whether a fictional character or not, is going to just fit right in with the Prep school kids at any selective college."</p>

<p>However, as I mentioned earlier, a surprising number of low-income but very bright kids have sat in classes with 'Prep school kids' for a number of years before matriculating to an "elite" college. So for them, not for a factory worker, there is less of a cultural adjustment than for some others.</p>

107

<p>
[quote]
'm thinking particulary about what's going on right now, as students form new social bonds in the first few weeks of school.

[/quote]

My take is that people who organize things that are out of reach for others are not real friends. One would not suggest going hiking to a friend whose ankle is in a cast or pressure a friend who's on diet to eat a Triple Death chocolate cake. Why should one suggest going out to or even talk about an expensive restaurant to a friend who has to watch every penny?<br>
So students go ahead and forge acquaintances in the first few weeks of classes; then they discover that they come from different backgrounds. If these backgrounds become obstacles to friendship, then that the friendship is not real. If the friendship is real, then accommodations will be made.
S's friend, whose dad thinks nothing of flying across country to see his son perform, most likely gets treated to a nice, expensive meal by his dad when dad is in town. But when he eats out with friends, he suggests going to the place where you can eat for $5.00. Because they're friends, not just people who happen to attend the same college.</p>

108

<p>Marite, I agree with you -- real friends accomodate one another, and that is also the situation my son has found. But there are many kids like him at his school, both in terms of academic ability and SES. I just imagine it's harder for those few kids who really come from disadvantaged backgrounds.</p>

109

<p>
[quote]
Why should one suggest going out to or even talk about an expensive restaurant to a friend who has to watch every penny?

[/quote]

They don't do it on purpose. They probably don't suggest going to an expensive restaurant. But it does not occur to them that ordering a pizza or going out for ice cream is something anyone would think twice about. In their mind it "costs nothing".</p>

110

<p><a href="http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/17692/?page=1%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/17692/?page=1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are tru****l, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves. Even when they enter deep into our world or sink below us, they still think that they are better than we are. They are different"</p>

<p>F. Scott Fitzgerald who knew a few.</p>

<p>Also see "Metropolitan" and other Stillman films</p>

<p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100142/#comment%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100142/#comment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

111

<p>Re: posts 109: All true. But if they do it once, they'll realize that the low income friend cannot afford the pizza and ice-cream. If they do it again, they're either not real friends or they are insensitive clods. </p>

<p>Re: post 110: Gatsby was a social climber. He did not know the difference between acquaintanceship and real friendship.</p>

<p>There's an easy solution to the discomfort experienced by the commingling of the rich and the poor: Expensive colleges should admit only those who can pay full fare. No financial aid to anyone, especially not to anyone who hasn't got money for the occasional ice-cream or pizza. Then the rich won't feel bad about their blowing big money on expensive meals or purchases and the poor won't feel bad about not having the money to spend on expensive meals and Jimmy Choo shoes or whatever. </p>

<p>In case there are some literal-minded folks, this is not a serious policy suggestion.</p>

112

<p>


As I thought I made clear, "meets full need" is an empty promise when the college has the power to decide on its own what "need" is. In addition to the noncustodial parent issue, there is the consideration of home equity, which can be a huge problem for longstanding residents in depressed areas where real estate values have skyrocketed. (Zillow.com reports recent sales of homes in the Visitation Valley and Bayview/ Hunter's Point areas of San Francisco for well over $600K; there's a one-bedroom, 1250 sq. feet home in Bayview that sold for $719K -- here's a link so you can see what it looks like: <a href="http://www.zillow.com/HomeDetails.htm?zprop=15157207%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.zillow.com/HomeDetails.htm?zprop=15157207&lt;/a> -- I note that my home which is 14 miles away from that one is valued at 10% less than that one, just so you can keep that in mind the next time you decide to tell me how nice my neighborhood must be). </p>

<p>The point I started with was that most kids with the stats to qualify for any so-called 100% need school would also get generous aid at their in-state public, whether or not they guarantee to meet full need of all their students. That's because schools that do not promise to meet full need still tend to package aid favorably to their strongest students -- when you couple that fact with the tuition differential, you end up in most cases with a very strong award. The subject wasn't whether a high-stat low income student at an Ivy is better off than a medium-to-low stat student at a lower tier private, the subject was whether that high-stat student is going to be better off at the Ivy financially than the same student at their in-state public. Barrons pointed out that there are a lot of expenses that come up at elite privates that aren't part of the COA, and they can create financial issues for the lower income students who are there. </p>

<p>You've shifted the debate to something else. Instead of comparing what would happen with one hypothetical kid with two different options, you have shifted the discussion to compare the plight of entirely different populations of kids. I'm sorry for the difficulties your students face, but I doubt that many of them turned down Ivy spots to be there.</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
There's an easy solution to the discomfort experienced by the commingling of the rich and the poor: Expensive colleges should admit only those who can pay full fare.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't think there are any easy solutions. That does not mean that the issue should be ignored.</p>

<p>Some schools are trying. There are mandatory diversity workshops for freshmen that address issues of race, class, sex, etc. At some schools all college-sponsored activities (movies, sports, parties, etc.) are free for all. It does make a difference, even if it does not solve the problem.</p>

114

<p>"Re: posts 109: All true. But if they do it once, they'll realize that the low income friend cannot afford the pizza and ice-cream. If they do it again, they're either not real friends or they are insensitive clods."</p>

<p>Since I had this happen to me throughout my entire college career, this is something I know about. But I wouldn't call them "insensitive" clods (even if they were not real friends); simply ignorant. But (as I've written elsewhere), I got the better part of the deal - I learned about their habits, ways of thinking, ways of being, ways of interacting with the world, some of which was useful (and which I made and still make use of), and some of which, well, let's just say I tried to leave it where it was. </p>

<p>I'm not sure they learned much from me that is useful, but who am I to judge? By sophomore year, though, my roommates and I did manage to create our own little lower middle-class ghetto (or should I call it "suburb"? ;))</p>

<p>I now have good personal friends (from both very poor and very, very wealthy backgrounds) doing great work around these issues on campus:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.classactionnet.org/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.classactionnet.org/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I think on the whole private prestige colleges - both students and administrations - are more aware or attuned to these issues than they used to be. At the same time, these colleges are on the whole less economically diverse than they were 25 years ago.</p>

115

<p>Epiphany, the vast majority of lower income kids attend public schools, just as mine did. The "surprising number" who attend privates through scholarship may be those who were lucky enough to get on the track to an elite education early on-- but they are probably not the kids who are the subject of this thread -- those whose SAT scores reflect the circumstances of their economic status as it impacted their upbringing and the nature of schools they attended. </p>

<p>On a lighter note entirely, my d. thought this video was hilarious when I sent it to her:
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_are_our_children%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_are_our_children&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>She can definitely attest to the fact that California public schools are doing very well by that particular measure, and if college admissions to elite schools were premised on a multiple choice test asking questions about whales, she definitely would have had a leg up in the process. (And to the humor-challenged on cc who inevitably take links to The Onion seriously -- everything on that web site is meant as a joke -- I don't mean to start a new debate on the pros and cons of the opinion expressed in that fake news segment).</p>

116

<p>Mini:</p>

<p>My take is that the first time is due to ignorance, and perhaps the second time. The third time is insensitivity.</p>

<p>nngmm: You are absolutely right there are no easy solution if one wants to mix those who can afford full fare and those who cannot. That's why I made sure to note that my "solution" was not offered seriously.</p>

<p>But seriously, I envy all those young things who can afford to wear their Jimmy Choos. I cannot. I wanted to spend the money, I could. It's just that my feet need to wear sensible shoes without heels. I cannot go two blocks in anything but sensible shoes. And sensible shoes don't go with glamorous dresses. Sigh. Life's unfairness is not just a matter of money or lack thereof.</p>

117

<p>Marite, I think your comment about "insensitive clods" is itself insensitive, or at least lacking in understanding of the nature of the problem -- I think nngmm has done a good job explaining it, and I suspect that part of the reason that you have a hard time understanding is that you are thinking in very concrete terms of rich vs. poor and don't quite understand what life is like for people who live from one paycheck to the next. </p>

<p>These kids can afford to go to movies and buy pizza and ice cream. Just not all the time. I know from my kids experiences that there are a lot of little hitches that can hold up a work study check - it seems that my kids have run into a lot of issues over timesheets that have been "lost" or do not seem to be consistent with the hours they have worked, at 3 different colleges. I think its simply a matter of the fact that the paperwork is passing through various levels of administrative personnel in different departments, and not all of them are as diligent about handling payroll as you might find in a major corporation (though my d. also experienced huge difficulties getting paychecks from a national retailer as well). </p>

<p>To most people on the upper end of the income spectrum, if a check is delayed a few days, its no big deal. On the lower end, it can leave kids very short of money -- it's Friday night, they expected a paycheck that didn't show up, and they have $4 on their pocket to last through the weekend, and if they are lucky the pay check might arrive on Monday. </p>

<p>They aren't going to announce to their friends that pizza night is cancelled because they didn't get their money -- they are going to beg off for other reasons ("I have to study -- I have a paper due"). Their friends are clueless, but not because they are insensitive clods -- its just that their friends have never been in the no-money situation.</p>

<p>The point is, it ebbs and flows. A kid who hasn't been in that situation would have to be very perceptive to anticipate which day or week is the bad one for their friends. </p>

<p>Again, we aren't necessarily talking about big ticket items -- sometimes the bigger ticket items are more doable for the lower income students because they are the type of things that can be planned for over time -- it is the little unexpected things that come up that can cause issues.</p>

<p>That's why I say its like living on a different planet. My kids are living day to day with a whole different set of assumptions about life and money than the kids they know from more privileged backgrounds. My daughter has a couple of very good friends who come from extremely wealthy families, but some of what they say and do leaves her shaking her head. They aren't insensitive but they don't really understand either. You wrote:
[quote]
My take is that the first time is due to ignorance, and perhaps the second time. The third time is insensitivity.

[/quote]
What we are trying to explain is that the first time, the FA kid just said that he couldn't make it because he had to study, the second time the FA kid came along, and it is only on the third occasion that the FA kid laughs it off and says, "no thanks, I'm a little short on cash." These kids are not bursting into tears and pleading poverty at every occasion - they are doing their best to budget what they've got and be courteous. Money is an issue for them all the time, but that doesn't mean they never go out and spend.</p>

118

<p>"Life's unfairness is not just a matter of money or lack thereof."</p>

<p>That said, we should all lay aside our differences and enjoy a wonderful weekend ahead.</p>

119

<p>calmom:</p>

<p>Calmom: You don't know enough about me to tell me whether I know what it is to live from paycheck to paycheck. I won't engage in further discussion with you.</p>

120

<p>One more reason that the adjustment to live among the rich was difficult for my daughter: she said that everytime she opened her mouth it seemed that someone took offense at what she said. Apparently if you mention the discrepency or the issue, there is some other unwritten rule about not talking about money that has also been violated. Post #119 is a great example. Oops. </p>

<p>Marite -- I apologize if I offended you -- you have posted a series of posts that have offended me, I assumed it was inadvertent and tried to explain my position rather that accuse you of being deliberately offensive. I'll leave it at that -- i think Siserune's posts #82 and #87 would explain why the "not a problem" attitude expressed by those who are not walking in the shoes of those who are experiencing the problem is so frustrating. It is not helpful to advance understanding to tell people who are expressing the hurt or frustrations of their own experience that the problem does not exist, or is in their own minds, or is of their own making because they are overly sensitive or resentful. </p>

<p>There is an air of dismissiveness about many of the posts on this topic that was summed up best by Barrons in post #110. Whether intentional or not, labeling the poor kids as "resentful" and the rich kids as "insensitive clods" seems to me to just be an reiteration of the concept of noblesse oblige among the gentried. It still fails to acknowledge the reality that an elite campus can be a very uncomfortable environment for many. </p>

<p>But I will reassure you, my daughter did get the message to keep her mouth shut about it unless she was in like company fairly quickly. Just one more way in which the class barrier led her to gravitate toward "her own kind."</p>