<p>idad, I don't think your story is an unusual one. I know of a young man who 2 great schools wanted. His parents were also able to help the ivy see their financial "needs" differently. Lot's of medical expenses for a grandparent, no proof required.</p>
<p>epiphany,</p>
<p>I understand what you are saying. However, even as a need student the information generated by the financial aid calculators is eye opening. What is 100% of need at one school would only be 90% of need at another.</p>
<p>Regarding those that you and others perceive to be non-need candidate, i.e. over $60K but less than $150K, it really depends upon the families situation. Look at the financial aid information on a number of the sites and you will see some financial aid is given to students with a family income of greater then $150K.</p>
<p>Regarding merit aid, there is significant amount out there. I would not suggest going to a school just for merit aid so the fit has to be correct first. Once that is determined, I would suggest the following, </p>
<ul>
<li><p>Using the student's SAT scores, see if they are in the top 25% of the class.</p></li>
<li><p>Using USNews online edition, about $20/year, check to determine their merit aid policies. It is stated as the average amount of non-need based aid awarded to a student and the % of students receiving that aid.</p></li>
<li><p>This provides a first cut of the type of merit aid a student could receive.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Let me use a concrete example. Let's assume a student that would be on the waiting list at an Ivy league school. Their stats are 1450 SAT, top 10% of their class, good ECs, etc. They would like to go to an engineering school in the south. Tulane is an excellent option (there are others). Thier middle 50% SAT scores are 1240-1420. The merit based aid information is as follows:</p>
<p>Non-need-based aid
Avg. merit award
(% awarded aid) $16,402 (28%)</p>
<p>I would expect that this waitlisted Ivy league student would have a very good chance at receiving a $16K merit package from Tulane because they average merit package goes to 28% of the students.</p>
<p>Anyway, my point is that there is merit money out there at a number of schools. Here are a few: Tulane, Emory, BU, University of Chicago, Villanova, UNC, Duke, USC, etc.</p>
<p>Some of the schools mentioned above are also 100% of demonstrated need schools, Chicago, Duke and USC for example. Good luck with your search!</p>
<p>redstar: No, all-around gifted, but no special math talent.</p>
<p>idad,
Your story supports an earlier point I made on another thread, that I have always believed that much need-based aid is hidden merit aid -- esp. when comparing needy candidates. That is based on our family experience with differently aided students for the same year, same institution, & one set of financial docs.</p>
<p>I do think that negotiation can be part of the picture, as can Appeals, etc. But I don't see an abundance of these kinds of opportunities, nor do I see a middle-class income family with the same number of options at the same number & level of Universities (not LACs) that a lower income family has. I'm sure that a determined middle-class family with 2 modest incomes can make the whole research, negotiation, etc. effort their third job, but less employed households seem to have more time for that. (One also has to research which U's have such wiggle-room, etc.) I would also doubt that every middle class family applying to University X, that can justify a certain level of gap need-aid, actually achieves their needed result, whereas it seems that it is more straightforward & the results more predictable with lower incomes. I have no proof of that difference; that's just my sense of it.</p>
<p>There is a good reason that over 80% of kids in this country attend a state U.</p>
<p>I work at a college where most of the students are truly lower income. That does not mean they come from homes run by the "lesser employed". It also does not mean that everything is handed to them. Far from it. They work long hours, their parents work, and they generally don't have home equity, savings accounts, retirement plans, etc etc.They get through school at a level of struggle and poverty that most here can only read about, if they care to. </p>
<p>Any family of 90,000-110,000 can pay 40,000 minus student loans, minus student work commitment, minus the tax deductions/credits, and live at a standard of living that my students can only read about, if they had time to.</p>
<p>It really, really isn't bad to be "middle class" (esp. when we define it at such high incomes which really aren't "middle" at all.) I know a lot of smart, hardworking students who hope to reach it some day.</p>
<p>garland,
I didn't say it was "bad" to be middle class. Never said that. Never implied that. I said & implied that major private Universities in the United States might want to think about how their financial aid policies may be limiting the economic diversity picture of college enrollment in general (i.e., segmenting it), due to the available opportunities for low-income students to receive need-aid versus fewer opportunities for middle-class students. Among the private U's, the Ivies seem to be doing a better job at achieving economic diversity than non-ivies are, in general. And keep in mind that some merit aid is <em>also</em> need. Thus, there are special "merit" scholarships/grants given by award to a select one or few students at certain U's, but one must also meet the need standard for those, which tends not to be a middle class category. That is even true at some publics, such as U.C.: For example, Regents (which is a merit recognition awarded via achievement & interview) is matched with funds according to need.</p>
<p>Actually I said "less employed," not "lesser employed." By that I include a salary component, not just a time/labor component. Yes -- obviously -- many families struggle with 2 full-time incomes & no home equity to leverage.</p>
<p>The one thing I will agree with you about is that there are families of many levels of income -- not just middle & upper-middle class, btw -- who do not seem to value education to the extent that they will make serious sacrifices in their lifestyles to commit to that value. More than one middle class & upper-m.c. parent has told me that they "won't" pay for a higher priced education for a highly deserving student, while admitting that they <em>can</em> pay for it with much adjustment. I find that a little shocking, I guess. But then I can't expect others to share my values. Our family, of lower income, has made tremendous sacrifices (& despite financial aid) in choosing education over travel, clothing, frequent new cars, club memberships, remodeling projects, & electronic equipment -- to name just a few amenities which many friends, relatives, acquaintances consider "essential." </p>
<p>Some would call our choices foolish, I guess, but so far, it's been an investment that has paid off in many ways.</p>
<p>I think some of the middle-class enrollment in Publics <em>is</em> family budget choice; I think some of it is lack of awareness about some of the fine points & strategies announced in this thread; I think a portion of it is true lack of designated gap-aid for middle class families applying to private U's.</p>
<p>Epiphany: my remark about it seeming to be bad to be middle class was directed at the tone of the thread, and many others, which seem to imply that it's tougher to be middle class than to be poor. That whole middle class "squeeze" thing. Not you, sorry!</p>
<p>We agree in a lot of ways; I just think that with enough sacrifice, there aren't many people in that higher price range mentioned who could not send their kids anywhere. But I also get the raised eyebrows about how much I'm willing to give up to give my kids choices.</p>
<p>The heartbreakers I see are kids that would so benefit leaving their home environments but do not have the stats to get into the needblind, 100%need met colleges. When you are dependent on state and federal aid, and are poor enough to qualify it and are not the type of merchandise that the colleges are "buying", your choices are the community and local state schools. In our area it is a particularly pathetic situation since the only choice is community college and if you don't have a car or can't afford one, it means multi transfer two hour commutes to and from the school. I am sure I don't live in the only such environment.</p>
<p>I hope someone who is more internet savvy than I can retrieve an article about the State of Georgia which was in the NY Times about two years ago... it talked about the parking lot of the State U's being filled w/BMW's and luxury cars since the new policies on in-state admission and merit aid. Parents were telling their kids, "go instate and I'll buy you any car you want"; the lower middle class and truly needy were being shut out completely of higher ed, and the article blamed it on "the law of unintended consequences".</p>
<p>It's also the "law of living in a consumerist, material culture" or the "law of people who protest increases in taxes so the poor can get an education", but I digress.</p>
<p>I personally don't find it offensive if middle class kids with middle tier stats end up in State U's. I'm happy to pay taxes to support these institutions; I just wish my own state were more committed to funding education and not in building fancy athletic facilities. I get very offended when I read about the huge percentage of kids who aren't going to college at all.... they read at a sixth grade level after 13 years of K-12 education.</p>
<p>I wish the ire we all show about how private institutions run their campuses could be directed at our public educational system. After all, who gives a #$%^ about whether Smith or Wellesley does a better job admitting Pell Grant recipients?</p>
<p>I agree with you, Blossom.</p>
<p>Poor and middle income students are statistically not in competition with each other at the prestige institutions. Their portion of the pie is relatively fixed, with both receiving financial assistance, and the difference in their financial assistance is less than the "subsidy" both are receiving. And for the most part, there aren't enough poor students there to be competing with anyone. (new article out today in The Williams Record called "Peer Wages, Tuition and Price Discounts" by Gordon Winston on this subject, but I don't see it on-line yet.)</p>
<p>Where there is competition is at the big publics, where the balance of state interest in creating an educated workforce (incorporating the poor) is stacked against middle class interests for lower taxes and rewarding "merit". This is a much more vital concern to society than anything occurring at the private colleges because, if there are inequalities, this is where in public policy they have to be addressed. At the privates, it is their money, and they can do what they want with it (or so I think). It would just be nice (not "necessary", just nice) if they were more transparent about it. And let's give credit where credit is due: for the most part, 50 years ago, neither middle class nor poor nor minority students attended prestige colleges at all.</p>
<p>"for the most part, 50 years ago, neither middle class nor poor nor minority students attended prestige colleges at all"</p>
<p>That is doubtless true for minority students but am not so sure about the middle class. Private colegs were relatively more affordable 40 years agao then they are now. There has been a lot of gold plating in the intervening decades plus tuition has been artificially driven higher by government student financial aid policies. Not wanting to leave any money on the table, especially the governments, private colleges have jacked the list price to ensure that they squeeze max finaid out of federal and state loan and work-study programs.</p>
<p>At current list price levels the competition for students is starting to really heat up. At the same time the tremendous "information advantage" the schools have enjoyed in the past is starting to evaporate thanks to the internet and discussion boards like this. AWS and HYPS may brag about turning away 2 or 3 classes as talented as the one they accept but the reverse is true too. Their admitted students turn down 2 or 3 schools as good as the one they choose.</p>
<p>The mismatch between applications and spots in a given school may be huge but the mismatch in numbers between seats in highly selective schools and the top 2 percent of students is not. Once the market figures that out self-correcting mechanisms will be found.</p>
<p>whoever said life was fair..........and no i'm not even qualified for any aid because i am an international student...and i'm aware that this is a parents forum.</p>
<p>i agree with the second post by gadad...and this IS how universities excel. and money controls so much of this reality we live in....</p>
<p>you give unlimited $$ to the crappiest university, you can easily transfer them into like top ten by buying in students, professors, rebuilding departments, advertisements...i mean it's not an instant process obviously...but it's possible.</p>
<p>furthermore, people with wealth ARE in a greater advantage in GENERAL it's not only in the area of education. with money you can look your best by maxing out potentials, nutritionist, clothing, make up, style...etc.</p>
<p>it's the harsh reality.</p>
<p>sorry i havent really gone through all the posts, it's 3am over here and i'm going to bed soon.</p>
<p>since merit aid season is upon us, i've bumped this thread. interesting discussion. thanks all. some good points of view and many varied comments.</p>