<p>I am really concerned about using on-line for more than a few classes. As an employer, I have real issues about cheating. I also question how well on-line for the kids who need a personal connection. A few classes? Fine. A majority of upper level classes? Not so fine.</p>
<p>I agree, Kayf. I see a lot of potential for mis and dis use. My son who is super diligent took an on line course, and it was tough for him to stay on task. But the course did have some built in features to make a student check in at given times. I don’t see how it will work but with the most motivated students. I’m not even going into the cheating aspects of it.</p>
<p>For some kids without high quality preparation for college, they may actually do better in a community college than a large state university. That is because there may be fewer distractions (vs. dorm living) and much smaller classes. A prof or instructor at a community college will have an easier time telling that a student is falling behind, and can connect him to extra help. With a smaller class size, it also be easier to call upon fellow students for help, than sitting in a class of 500.</p>
<p>The country does not have a problem with insufficient numbers of students starting college. The country has a problem with too few students graduating.</p>
<p>In our state, cc tuition is $3000/year. Any kid living at home can make tuition with a part time job. So, I’ve never understood why there is so much loan/grant/pell money directed toward dependent CC students who are commuting to school. </p>
<p>Why not let cc students, then, defer the eligibility/disbursement of any government grant or loan money they would currently get in their 1st and 2nd years to cover expenses in their junior/senior years at a 4 year school? Total federal aid for that student would still be the same, but that system would encourage more students to start at CC, increase the transition-to-4-year-school rate, and dramatically improve the graduation (especially 4 year grad) rates of low income students (since there would be smaller or no gap in need met). And, when grad rates go up, loan default rates go down.</p>
<p>*But here is why this topic makes me go nuts. So the plan is in Alabama poor kids from Alabama should go to a local CC for two years … and then two years of whatever 4 years school is closest to their home. While at the same time UA gaps in-state students on financial aid and spend tens of millions on merit aid for in-state and OOS NMF kid full rides (and the world greatest dorms).</p>
<p>For some this model makes sense and is desired … I am heartbroken many believe that the poor excellent student from Alabama only option should be CC and .*</p>
<p>Alabama has many state univs scattered all over, so many poor kids could commute to their local state school. So, many wouldn’t have to start at a CC as you stated.</p>
<p>As for the “excellent poor students” that you’re referring to, they would likely get merit to supplement their need-based aid to attend Bama, Auburn, UAB, UAH, or some of the other very good state univs (you act as if Bama is the only “good univ” in the state. lol )</p>
<p>they will be gaped at UA while my daughter (from Mass) could get a free ride at UA (OK, I cheated a bit … she was 1 point from NMF but was only because we’re from Mass … she would have been a NMF virtually everywhere else that year)</p>
<p>You’re mixing apples and oranges. Bama is not the state gov’t. If you have a beef that the state isn’t providing aid to poor kids, then that’s fine. It’s not Bama’s responsibilty to provide enough aid for every low income AL resident. Bama isn’t using tax-dollars for those scholarships. </p>
<p>I’m sorry that your D missed the NMF cut off for your state, but would have made it for some others. I’m grateful that my Alabama son’s score was high enough (236) to make it in any state. </p>
<p>Your annoyance at what a college is doing should be directed at what gov’ts are doing, because tax dollars are being misappropriated. If the state and/or fed gov’ts aren’t providing enough aid for its low income residents, then that’s an understandable beef. Bama isn’t using tax-payer dollars for those NMF or other merit scholarships.</p>
<p>I agree that the way community college works is a problem too. My friend’s son abused what he was entitled to get through PELL and FAFSA,when he was a foolish 18 year old. Now at age 24-25, he owes money and has run through his PELL eligibility. Unfortunately, there are a lot of programs out there that exist just to put their mouths to that government teat, and not enough education is given to kids who are coming out of high school. When you see those who are at some high flying high school with teachers and counselors giving bad financial advice for college, there’s no surprise that those who are not even really going through the college app process find themselves stripped of the educational funds in short order. A fool and his money…right? And that goes for all of us.</p>
<p>M2CK. </p>
<p>In your earlier posts you never mentioned a merit component to the overall offering to low income students … while I not the biggest fan of merit programs … if they are also offered that may make an overall offering the is OK in my book. One measure is that the best students in a state should be able to attend the best state school.</p>
<p>I agree my beef is with governments but wouldn’t that be who is deciding where PELL grants can be spend (the feds) and the level of financial aid that is provided for in-state students (state govs) which are topics we are discussing.</p>
<p>I don’t agree bringing merit into the picture is mixing apples and oranges just because the source is different … where the money comes from does not affect the options the state/school can decide to do with the total pot of money in their budget … as I said earlier I think it is shame if any state ends up with a system where the it’s best students can not go to the best state school in-state … (and I have a broader definition of “best” then only kids at the NMF level)</p>
<p>Alabama schools seem to have a merit component. A lot of OOS students are attending UA, UABirmingham, UA Huntsville based on the merit component tied to GPA plus and specific SAT/ACT scores even outside of national merit.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.uah.edu/financial-aid/aid/scholarships/new-freshmen/non-residents-merit-awards[/url]”>http://www.uah.edu/financial-aid/aid/scholarships/new-freshmen/non-residents-merit-awards</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://main.uab.edu/Sites/students/69026/[/url]”>http://main.uab.edu/Sites/students/69026/</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://scholarships.ua.edu/types/out_of_state.html[/url]”>http://scholarships.ua.edu/types/out_of_state.html</a></p>
<p>*In your earlier posts you never mentioned a merit component to the overall offering to low income students … while I not the biggest fan of merit programs … if they are also offered that may make an overall offering the is OK in my book. One measure is that the best students in a state should be able to attend the best state school.
*</p>
<p>Of course I didnt’ mention merit in earlier posts. I wasn’t supporting the idea that students should skip over their local state schools, so merit wouldn’t be needed. My position was that the state should provide funds for students who can’t commute due to distance. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that many states have more than one “good state school”. You seem to think that it’s “Flagship A or Bust” for good students. As small as Alabama is in population, it has many good state schools, of which about 6 are very good and shouldn’t be dismissed by strong students. </p>
<p>*</p>
<p>I agree my beef is with governments but wouldn’t that be who is deciding where PELL grants can be spend (the feds) and the level of financial aid that is provided for in-state students (state govs) which are topics we are discussing.
*</p>
<p>Not sure what you’re saying there. If your beef is with low-income students being somewhat limted to nearby state schools if they’re totally on gov’t aid, then how is that different from K-12 kids who are limited to attend schools in their area? Poor kids aren’t given “boarding dollars” to attend a higher ranked public K-12 in their state. </p>
<p>But, of course, the strongest low-income students will likely have other choices because of merit at other state schools or nice FA pkgs from privates. </p>
<p>*</p>
<p>I don’t agree bringing merit into the picture is mixing apples and oranges just because the source is different …
*</p>
<p>I didn’t say that. I sad that you’re mixing apples and oranges when mixing the discussion of gov’t state aid with what a particular univ is doing. </p>
<p>*</p>
<p>where the money comes from does not affect the options the state/school can decide to do with the total pot of money in their budget … as I said earlier I think it is shame if any state ends up with a system where the it’s best students can not go to the best state school in-state … (and I have a broader definition of “best” then only kids at the NMF level)*</p>
<p>I never said that the “best” are NMF level. Bama (and other AL state schools) give nice merit scholarships to students with stats well-below NMF level. Plus, many of them give huge merit to National Achievement scholars, whose stats are usually well below their NMF counterparts.</p>
<p>and, again, you’re assuming that many/most states only have one really good school. Many states have several really good public univs.</p>
<p>Should Bama or the state of Alabama be expected to provide lots of aid to a low income student who lives near Auburn, UAB, or UAH, etc??</p>
<p>Don’t forget Auburn! </p>
<p>Also Troy University offers some of the best guaranteed merit awards in the country.
<a href=“http://admissions.troy.edu/undergrad/financingYourCollegeEducation/undergraduate/ugTroyScholarships.aspx[/url]”>http://admissions.troy.edu/undergrad/financingYourCollegeEducation/undergraduate/ugTroyScholarships.aspx</a></p>
<p>Don’t mention Auburn to M2ck, Bob.</p>
<p>Just as the financial credit rating agencies have ignored their public duty, so have the college accreditation agencies (IMHO). To accredit for-profit schools with abysmal graduation rates is just wrong. Larger universities should have more frequent reviews than smaller ones. HEW needs to review standards and institute new standards. Its not fair to take advantage of 18 year olds.</p>
<p>Bob and Cpt…</p>
<p>I did mention Auburn in my post #69!!! … jeez!! </p>
<br>
<br>
<p>But, I did forget about Troy. Could have also mentioned Montevallo, U South Alabama and some other state schools with good merit aid for instate kids.</p>
<p>3togo seems to think each state only has one state school worth attending!</p>
<p>I was directing my “don’t forget Auburn” at texaspg - I think you and I were writing our posts at the same time.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Ahh! :)</p>
<p>Anyway…I don’t understand this idea that everyone should be able to attend one particular school in the state. First of all, there aren’t enough SEATS! Secondly, most state schools have 2-5+ very good state schools.</p>
<p>What next? Is 3togo going to think it’s unfair that a low income student gets “relegated” to UCSD instead of Cal?</p>
<p>Does Auburn guarantee scholarships though? I have seen some disclaimers last year. I am under the impression UA umbrella schools give scholarships automatically with given numbers.</p>
<p>I would like to add that there are a few schools in texas (UTD, University of Houston) which would accept OOS students with high scores and provide scholarships.</p>
<p>Auburn has some guaranteed scholarships instate - OOS they are all competitive. They give merit aid to the top 25% like Alabama, but the amounts are typically not as generous.</p>
<p>I agree that there isn’t just one good school to attend in a state. There are plenty of good options for numerous people. </p>
<p>Here in metro Detroit (including the Ann Arbor and Flint areas), we have a lot of decent universities, like Wayne State University, University of Detroit Mercy, University of Michigan - Dearborn, Oakland University, University of Michigan - Flint, Kettering University, Northwood University, of course the main University of Michigan, and tons of satellites from other universities. In fact, I think Macomb is the only county of the big 3 counties that doesn’t have a university, but it’s close enough to Oakland and Wayne counties that many people commute to Wayne, Oakland, or U of M Dearborn. (plus I think OU, Wayne and other northern unis have satellites at the mcc campuses) </p>
<p>Sure, not a lot of these are well-known nationally, but for us Michiganders, they’re great! Since this is the most populated part of our state, it works out well, I think. </p>
<p>Even if our tuition is increasing at such a high rate, around here, at least mostly everyone has somewhere to attend by commuting. (though sometimes they can’t afford it)</p>
<p>Just kidding Mom2ck. But really, UAlabama should be paying you a commission!</p>
<p>*Here in metro Detroit (including the Ann Arbor and Flint areas), we have a lot of decent universities, like Wayne State University, University of Detroit Mercy, University of Michigan - Dearborn, Oakland University, University of Michigan - Flint, Kettering University, Northwood University, of course the main University of Michigan, and tons of satellites from other universities. </p>
<p>In fact, I think Macomb is the only county of the big 3 counties that doesn’t have a university, but it’s close enough to Oakland and Wayne counties that many people commute to Wayne, Oakland, or U of M Dearborn. (plus I think OU, Wayne and other northern unis have satellites at the mcc campuses) *</p>
<p>Very true.</p>
<p>And, really, most career-interests do not require degrees from any particular school. If someone is going to be an education major, and the state has 6 schools offering good programs that students can commute to, then why should the state be paying for R&B so that lower-income students can dorm elsewhere.</p>
<p>I think we need to remember that most kids in the US (of various income levels) do not “go away” to school. Most commute. So, for gov’ts (taxpayers) to provide the dorm experience to all low income kids is providing something that many middle class families can’t afford for their own kids. It’s really not right for middle class taxpayers to be paying for things that they can’t even provide for their own kids.</p>