<p>Do you have any actual facts to back up your assertion that unqualified students are going to top schools? And, how do you define "deserving?"</p>
<p>Garland, where did I assert that "unqualified students" are going to top schools? And by deserving, I mean the academically qualified students that can't even hope for a chance at an ivy because they don't offer merit aid ,only need based. And as we all know, seriously, need based aid is only given to low income families. I know of no middle income families receiving need based aid.</p>
<p>Rated:</p>
<p>Sometimes on this board, "top schools" is interpreted only as HYPS.. Although those are among the top schools, so are others including some state schools. UCB is ranked higher than many of the traditional 'top' schools. All of the UC schools, UVA, and some other state schools are also ranked very highly (many higher than some ivies) and are pretty affordable - especially if one lives at home and commutes - more so if they attend a CC and then transfer. This holds true for state schools in many other states as well. This might not get the kid their first choice or dream school but I guess I don't take much of an entitlement mentality. </p>
<p>I understand the frustration of being caught in the middle but I guess I don't feel that the HYPS.. or other expensive private schools are "must-haves" so it doesn't bother me that much. I'll say though, that I would have made many sacrifices to pay for them if my kids really wanted to attend an expensive school, they could back it up with good reasons why they should go there versus alternatives, and if I was convinced it was really worth it. Once I decided to do it though, I wouldn't worry about it that much although like the OP, I might let out a grumble or two.</p>
<p>In the UC/CalState system, URMs don't get any boost on the basis of race so URM doesn't apply. They do however, get a boost for first generation, hardship, etc. I understand that many other schools, private and public, do pay attention to URM status (i.e. a desired race). I've already hashed this race preference issue out (I don't go along with racial discrimination) on another thread however, so I won't head further down that path here.</p>
<p>If the state schools got to the point of being ridiculously expensive, I'd probably grumble some more but right now, four year tuition at the top UC schools is only about the price of a typical car ($28K for all 4 years) so I think that's quite reasonable. CalStates are much less than that. If one can afford it, they can pay more and have the kid live on campus but this is what I consider a "nice-to-have" rather than a must-have (unless one lives too far to commute).</p>
<p>Regarding URMs taking up spots at the top privates, well, they're private so I suppose they can do that if they want. If I felt a strong bias was being exhibited against a particular group (middle class, a certain race, etc.) I guess it would make the school less desirable to me in the first place and therefore I'd be less bothered by it.</p>
<p>Dear USC Dad
Thanks for the reply, however, I am not referring to HYPS when I speak of top colleges. And I am happy that the UC system is so generous, but we live on the east coast and our state schools are not so generous. Nor, in most cases, so well regarded. So to send my dd to a state university in CA from NH would be just as costly as a more expensive school closer to home.</p>
<p>I am just so frustrated with the comments from people who state that anyone not qualifying for FAFASA money should have known better and saved more and not have indulged in a certain lifestyle. It is presumputious and ignorant to say the least.</p>
<p>Rated:</p>
<p>1.You don't seem to understand the meaning of entitlement. Entitlement is what you think you deserve. You have not proved that low income students feel they deserve to attend top schools. You have merely shown that top schools wish to help qaulified low income students attend top schools. So, please, once again, where is the evidence for entitlement?
And can you define what "deserving" mean?</p>
<ol>
<li> As ucsd-ucla dad, private schools can do pretty much as they like with their endowments. Or would you prefer the federal government tell you and everyone else how to spend your own money?</li>
</ol>
<p>Edit:There is a good reason why New Hampshire does not have as good a state university system as CA: it's called taxes.</p>
<p>Marite,
You pretty much summed it up, "top schools wish to help qualified low income students attend top schoos." Therefore, the mindset at my daughter's high school from the URM's - "I don't have to worry about it, I am a minority" "I'll get in my first choice school, since my mom is divorced and I am __________".</p>
<p>These quotes are from two students who consistently cheat on exams,
and threaten those that they are cheating from not to say anything.</p>
<p>I know the meaning of entitlement marite, unfortunatley today in our country it means "being politically correct" so we don't offend anyone.</p>
<p>Rated:</p>
<p>Well, it's unfortunate that the state schools in your area aren't that great (I don't know them so I'm just restating your opinion on them). Maybe in hindsight, it would have been worth moving to another state. People move to other areas and even other states to get what they believe are better schools so I think they might want to consider the state college offerings as well. </p>
<p>The minority examples you mentioned will likely have their true qualifications catch up with them at some point. Getting into a school (assuming their GPA, SATs, ECs, etc. are high enough) is only a starting point. They'd need to cut it through school and also once they get into the real world. Those kids aren't doing themselves any favors with their behaviors and probably won't make it as far as they think they will anyway (they're HS kids so they don't know as much as they think they do).</p>
<p>Anecdotes about 2 students are not the same thing as evidence that is used to generalized about a whole group of students. Cheating is not confined to any particular group of students, whether URM, affluent, low income, Caucasian, suburban or what have you. If you feel strongly about it, you should alert the powers-that-be about their cheating. Staying silent is a way of enabling them. But that is really tangential to the main discussion anyway.</p>
<p>If students are qualified, and if they are low income, I don't see what the problem is about colleges giving them financial aid to enable them to attend college. There is a reason why certain groups of students are called URMs. And colleges do wish to increase the representation of these groups. But the key is that they must be qualified in order to be admitted. Same for low income students.</p>
<p>Okay, now I am being criticized for the state I live in? This is ridiculous. The point is no one sees anything wrong with the fact that students with very high stats have to settle for state or "second tier" schools. The old fashioned thinking of "do your best in school and it will be rewarded" is just that, old fashioned. Today's politically correct way of thinking is "give every URM a fair chance" regardless. I am so sick of this. And this whole forum. Who are you people?</p>
<p>marite:
[quote]
There is a good reason why New Hampshire does not have as good a state university system as CA: it's called taxes.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>RatedPG:
[quote]
Okay, now I am being criticized for the state I live in?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>marite didn't criticize you for the state you live in. </p>
<p>She simply observed that the people of California have chosen to tax themselves at higher rates than the people of NH, in part to provide higher quality university education. </p>
<p>According to the website below, California taxes are about 40% higher as a percentage of per capita income than NH taxes.</p>
<p>RatedPG, you said in another thread that you did not expect to qualify for any need-based aid.</p>
<p>Assuming that you've lived in NH your whole life and that you've had a consistent pattern of earnings throughout--if you had voluntarily chosen to put your tax savings from living in NH instead of living in CA into a tax-advantaged college savings account for your daughter, you would have accumulated an amount that would surely offset the out-of-state fees to send your daughter to a California college.</p>
<p>That's not a criticism, just an observation.</p>
<p>Actually, the University of New Hampshire is pretty good. It's not as good as some of the top UCs, but then, taxes in NH are not the same as in CA. But it is at least as good as second-tier UCs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I know of no middle income families receiving need based aid.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are plenty of middle income families receiving need based aid. Harvard computes an EFC of 0 for any family with income under $60K. And $60K is greater than the median income in this country. </p>
<p>Moreover, there are families with incomes over $150K getting need-based aid at private colleges (though usually these are families with more than one kid in college or with other extenuating circumstances like high medical bills.)</p>
<p>Thanks for elaborating on my too succinct comments, wisteria.
I should not have been so critical of UNH in my first post. It is not in the same league as Berkeley or UCSD or UCLA, but it is still pretty good. An undergraduate student body of only 10,000 is a plus, compared to many state universities.</p>
<p>Rated:</p>
<p>If you're referring to my post, I wasn't criticizing your state, I was just restating what you said - I even threw out a disclaimer on it. I don't know anything about the schools in your state. I was just saying that if one's not happy with their school system and want excellent and affordable schools as an option, they should make sure they should consider living in a state where they're satisfied with them.</p>
<p>When it comes to private schools, they can charge what the market will bear and I have no problem with that. People who can't or choose not to afford them or aren't admitted to them but are otherwise top students will end up at other schools and those will also be excellent schools.</p>
<p>I asked in a previous post but, what are your suggested solutions to the dilemma you perceive?</p>
<p>Jumping on the UNH band wagon here - no taxes in NH to support education - but.............. ALL of the New England ''flag ship'' uni's are very expensive - irregardless of the tax structure of the state they are in - we have the honor of ranking in the top 5 most expensive state uni systems in the country - UNH - UMASS - UVM - URI. Must be sooo nice to think that a 4 year state uni would be around $25k for 4 years - we don't have that nice option here in New England - the state uni's here start around $15k - without room/board.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And as we all know, seriously, need based aid is only given to low income families. I know of no middle income families receiving need based aid.
[/quote]
That's garbage. I'm self employed and my income waffles between about $45-$55K, maybe up to $65K in a very good year. Live in California and own a home with about $500K equity in today's market (obviously I purchased it for muc less). I certainly consider myself middle class. My d. has a need based grant of more than $25K to attend Barnard, my son had need-based grants of more than $20K to attend an east coast LAC 5 years ago. My d. also was offered about $10K of need-based aid at the UC campuses she applied to. </p>
<p>Obviously those numbers still leave us paying a lot when the COA for the UC's is running around $23K and the top privates are around $48K. I'm prepared to pay up to about $20K per year for my d's education, and I could never afford that if I were not "middle class". So if you are looking for a full ride or close to it -- then yes, that only goes to the poorest students. </p>
<p>Or maybe you are one of these people who define a family earning $120K a year as "middle class"? If so, you need to realize that no matter how "modest" the lifestyle may seem when compared to the rich and famous, families earning that much are in the very top levels of our society. They may be "middle class" in attitude, but they are affluent by comparison to other 95% of society.</p>
<p>Who are we? For starters, most of your so called offenders would consider themselves a cyber acquaintance of OP NJ. Happy to have you on board, Rated, but you might want to lurk before you whip out the big cyber slaps.</p>
<p>Anyway, you missed the OP's point--which was a bit of humour. But it's a semi-free forum, you're welcome to have a go defending an ironic post with stone cold earnestness.</p>
<p>As a MA resident, I deplore the fact that the state has chosen to underfund UMASS. It was not always that way. I can still remember the time when UMASS-Amherst had a cutting edge comp sci department that was considered on a par with CMU. But MA got the tax-cutting bug in the 1980s, and UMASS has suffered ever since. The greatest sufferers are the low income families--not all of them can get into HYPS, no matter what some might like to claim.</p>
<p>Cheers, No I did not miss the point of the OP, I realize it was tongue in cheek and I believe I stated that. This is a very one-sided forum with many many generalizations about income levels, school quality, who deserves what, etc. I was presenting another, albeit unpopular, side of the story. And to Calmom, no I am not looking for a full ride.</p>
<p>Back to your comment! :) </p>
<p>"I think the US is unique in that it combines both accessibility and affordability"</p>
<p>The U.S. isn't unique in that regard. In Canada, the schools which carry the 'college' designation are somewhat equivalent to the community college system in the States. In many programs which they offer, they are actually superior to the CCs, in our experience. The schools which carry the 'university' designation here are equivalent to the college and university designation in the U.S. The difference is just a semantic one.</p>
<p>Anyone who has a h/s diploma or GED is able to go to a college here. The entrance requirements are such that anyone can attend, with the exception of a few distinct programs which generally require an audition or a portfolio. Admissions to the university system is, generally speaking, easier here, too. What's more difficult is actually staying IN school! The process is MUCH easier and is based largely on final year grades from h/s, although now the complete transcript is required. No SATs, no essays, no letters of rec, no padding of e/c lists.</p>
<p>All of Canada's universities are public. No privates here. The costs, compared to the U.S., as a result of this, are extremely low. Just as an example, a year at the Univ. of Toronto costs approximately $15,000 (Canadian $), while a year at NYU costs approximately $50,000 (U.S. $). All universities are heavily funded through general tax revenues in Canada and thus, the students pay a small percentage of the actual cost of their education.</p>