<p>In many states, the community colleges are nothing more than grade 13. Going there doesn’t guarantee transferring into a better 4-year college, and it is a lot harder for transfer students to get fin aid.</p>
<p>njcdmom,</p>
<p>that is why I mentioned merit. </p>
<p>In general the only hard part for transfer student to get is merit aid (not need-based aid).</p>
<p>It’s a lot harder for transfer students to get financial aid at private schools, not public ones. </p>
<p>The purpose of CC isn’t always to get into a better school or to have a guarantee of transferring. It’s to save money and be able to graduate college with less debt. If a student works hard at a CC he/she will be able to transfer to a state school.</p>
<p>Would you agree then that the state aid should go only towards last 2 years of public Us charging more than Pell and Stafford? In other words, the tax payers should not be paying for luxury of the first 2 years being completed at the 4 year college?</p>
<p>If you’re asking whether states with high tuition (like PA and ILL), shouldn’t give state aid until junior and senior year, to encourage those kids to start at a CC first, then that depends on a few things…</p>
<p>Could the CCs handle such a change? Probably not quickly, but maybe over an adjustment period. </p>
<p>Maybe there could be a GPA req’t for those to get state aid for those first two years (kind of a modified HOPE). Then states would waste less money on C students who haven’t yet gotten their acts together and will just waste time and money at a state uni. </p>
<p>And, maybe UCLA and Cal could offer aid from their endowments for the high stats modest-income kids that they want to start frosh year. And, maybe those schools should be charging a higher rate than they do. We all know that the higher income folks would pay $25k per year (instate) for UCLA and Cal fees (tuition).<br>
I’d like to see more CCs being allowed to offer BA degrees… for instance: el ed education, history, Spanish, French and other majors that don’t require pricey lab set ups and stuff. Heck, many degrees can be obtained online, so if that’s possible, why can’t a number of them be obtained at a CC?</p>
<p>However, it’s always harder to “pull back” once a more generous situation has been in place. I grew up in Calif. It wasn’t always this way. Low income and middle income kids knew their financial limitations, knew that aid was there to help with tuition, and planned accordingly.</p>
<p>mpch13 -</p>
<p>The college aid formulas assume that the family contribution will be paid from money from past income (savings) and/or current income and/or future income (loans). Each family is expected to come up with its own determination of which sources to draw on. No savings? then current income and/or loans. No savings, and unwilling to take on loans? then current income only. If this determination limits the educational options for the children, then, again, that is the option of the family. There are no financial aid fairies out there to guarantee that each student is able to attend the college/university he/she desires.</p>
<p>I believe that many things are fair the way things are done. That PELL is available for those families who are least able to afford college works pretty well. The amount up to $5550 makes a reasonable dent in most local state colleges and certainly most all community colleges. Then with the $5550 automatic loan available through Staffords that kids can take without a credit check or history, and with those parts covered by EFC need being subsidized and interest free up to $3500 while in school, is a good deal. Since entire cost of attendance is taken into account as need, most all kids go can go college if they commute, and that option is available most everywhere in the form of community colleges.</p>
<p>Where there are problems are the quality of the CCs and the availability of courses in them. That is where I want to see federal and state college funds funneled. Why should PELL pay for those few kids going to a private school that is integrating their financial aid by what the government is giving? More kids would benefit if that money were put towards shoring up the community college so that option is improved for more people.The biggest problem with CCs right now is that many do not have there courses on par with 4 year schools to facilitate a seamless transfer and there are not enough courses available.</p>
<p>CCs are not the only local options for some kids, however. There are often a number of 4 year state schools that are also affordable though more in cost than the CCs if they are within commuting range. For those kids who have no such option, I do believe that the years that such kids have to go away to get a degree at another state school should be covered. Take the money from the funds going to privates that are just integrating their need formulas with the federal aid they know are a given. Heck, I see aid packages all of the time where the schools are presenting PELL, STafford, and even PLUS which is no guarantee as their own aid. That money should be diverted to benefit the most number of students and it should go towards the education, not the boarding school experience. If a college wants a kid enough, let that school pay for the kid as they do now. Or the parents pay. </p>
<p>Every time there is a federal subsidy of any sort, the private industry is in line to grab those funds and just hike up their costs to incorporate it. Looking at private schools who enroll PELL students, it’s not like that many of them are bending over to take them, even among the more generous privates. Yes, some will not include the PELL, but most of them do. Just reduces what that college needs to give. It isn’t that big of a bit off of those schools and every bit can help these local colleges whose entire tuition cost may be less than the PELL max.</p>
<p>I live in the NYC suburbs and any B student with a reasonable SAT (all my kids have gotten this offer) gets offered a full ride at Lehman College with summer opportunities, books and a computer included. Florida has Bright Futures, GA has Hope, WV has Promise. There are states that are working to make college available for everyone. But that does not mean paying for room and board for those kids who want to go to a “sleep away” college with state and federal money. If a college wants the kids enough, they can pay for them out of their own funds or the parents can pay for those kids. We have facilitated the colleges on this point so that college students who are adults for just about everything else are considered “kids” and dependents for the purpose of college financial aid, so that parents can be hit up.</p>
<p>Mom2ck,</p>
<p>I understand that the current system will require major changes. But, the current system does not work: not for 81K+ families and not for the state of California as a whole. (I have my own story to tell how “well” the system works in San Francisco for a 4 kid family making low 6 figures but having one child born with heart defect). </p>
<p>So, the solution should be a complete revamp of the system.</p>
<p>
While I agree with the graduated award (just like Pell) I don’t buy the $81K family should get something. Where do you then draw the line? $85K, $90K? There is always going to be an issue for the ones getting nothing. Just like the ones with EFC’s higher than $4995 not getting anything from Pell. I do think that the ones with $81K would be less bitter if the $79K incomes are not getting much due to a graduating scale.</p>
<p>P.S. If you tied it to FAFSA EFC like Pell I doubt anyone over $75K would get anything as I imagine the cut-off for Pell is around $70K assuming normal assets.</p>
<p>If things are graduated to fade, the diference between making $81K and $80K isn’t going to cause a stir because the money diffential received by the family making $80K will probably be about $1K. By structuring the graduation, it would mean that families towards the upper limits will get less. Perhaps the income amounts will be raised so that families making more than $80K will also get something.</p>
<p>However, it is done, be aware that it doesn’t mean more money in the pot. Throwing more money at the problem will obviously give more, but restructuring anything without more money means some people will be getting less, you reallize.</p>
<p>Per-student taxpayer funding at America’s public universities is at its lowest point in 25 years.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.sheeo.org/finance/shef/SHEF_FY2011-EARLY_RELEASE.pdf[/url]”>http://www.sheeo.org/finance/shef/SHEF_FY2011-EARLY_RELEASE.pdf</a></p>
<p>In 1986, states spent $8,025 per student.</p>
<p>In 2011, states spent $6,290 per student.</p>
<p>Average tuition revenue in 1986 was $2,422 per student.</p>
<p>Average tuition revenue in 2011 was $4,774 per student.</p>
<p>(Constant, inflation-adjusted dollars.)</p>
<p>So state funding has dropped about 20 percent while tuition has risen 90 percent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which brings up our need for a national health care system, because I can only imagine the medical bills your family faces :/</p>
<p>^^^^^thats a shame, because public universities are where middle class kids often continue their education.</p>
<p>Students are having to pay more & more of the total cost- when IMO, it benefits the community to have an educated populace, so it makes sense that some of the burden could be assumed by taxpayers.</p>
<p>Compared to 1986, a college degree today is practically a required criteria for finding a job that pays a liveable wage.</p>
<p>Without more information, it’s difficult to say what those stats mean. Are more kids now going to college so that the the per student amounts are less but in overall amount has increased? Are more kids going to private college with their subsidies which would affect that rate? Why should Hope in GA pay kids going to Emory the amount of a GA state school tution which is a drop in the bucket of Emory cost, when the money could be going to enhance the GA pubic university and cc system? If more of the money is going to public schools, I see problems here where the funds are not being used to benefit the most number of needy families.</p>
<p>OP: Didn’t your Regent’s Scholarship come with some significant money? Usually, they do.</p>
<p>Polarscribe,</p>
<p>I am torn about health care. I know that the European and Canadian and Japanese and … systems have proven not to work long term. I myself don’t have a solution. </p>
<p>My immediate family is healthy (2 adults and 2 kids), but we spend more than 10K per year on our health care needs (health and dental insurance premiums plus out of pocket expenses). I should say, we used to spend that much. This year, my company changed to HSA and high deductible plan and our total will be about 15K a year if not more (although some of the money will be carried over to next year HSA). </p>
<p>While our family can afford it, I have no idea how lower paid workers (secretaries, factory workers, lower-paid professionals) at my work do that. So I certainly feel for many families who either don’t make enough money to pay a deductible or face large medical bills regardless of their income. </p>
<p>My relatives (the ones with 6 figure salariy) do not live like they make that much. Their younger kids wear used clothes from my daughter or my sister’s boys. When my sister visits, she raids my closet and closets of my kids to take stuff to CA and many of my things end up in the relative’s closet. They have not taken a vacation since the girl was born around 12 years ago. All their money go towards girl’s health care bills. Yet, their older son had to pay full tuition at UCD. Like many people they did not realize that it would have been cheaper for him to find a financial safety private college.</p>
<p>Anyway, I don’t think I have a solution. But I also don’t think national health care system will be the solution either. Not in a long term anyway.</p>
<p>Out of topic completely. I know.</p>
<p>Community colleges are fine for some students. But the quality of the course work is not the same as the quality a student would receive at UCB, UCLA, etc. I’m learning that medical school admissions committees look down upon science requirements taken at a community college. The rigor just isn’t there. If the student takes the basic science requirements at a CC and then transfers to a UC, and continues to get A’s in science at the UC, then all will likely be well. </p>
<p>Medical schools also want the applicants to have research experience which isn’t available at a CC. </p>
<p>Personally, I think the state would benefit more by giving full rides to the top A students for the UCs rather than spending money on C students at the CCs. It is a crying shame that the OP with top grades has to go to a CC.</p>
<p>There are some things that national health care would address. First of all, we are providing “free” medical care on emergency and what seems to be emergency care. Walk into any hospital ER and there are people there who should be seeing a private physician or clinic,not be in the ER. A lot of those people, have no insurance, so the option of seeing a doctor is just not there. I just took my kid to a gastro group and until they got verification that he was covered, they wouldn’t even give me an appointment. If I’d had no insurance, he would have gone to the emergency room–what else could I do? Any and everyone who is in life threatening condition has to get care, in this country, regardless of insurance status. We are not going to go there in not providing such care, so it is a baseline given. So we do have national health care of sorts. Just no planned way of getting paid for it and passing the costs on to those that can be charged. By making more people pay into the pot, it is spreading this cost out more evenly. It’s all well and good that MR B feels it’s his right not to be insured, but listen to him scream and wail about his kid on Medicaid not getting the same care as those with private insurance and decry being diverted to one hospital over another. ANd yet, he will be treated if he is in a life threatening condition as his wife was when she collapsed. That is the reality of the state of health care today. </p>
<p>As for colleges and health care costs. if your relative is making 6 figures, it is not an automatic that a private university would have recognized those expenses and compensated directly for them. In fact, highly unlikely. My friends who have applied to both types of schools have often found that the “discounts” offered by the privates just bring them down to about what the costs would be at the state U. One friend had 3 in college, and though they would have made out better for the one year they were all three in college, over all they did better just paying the full freight at State U. Also, you don’t get a dollar for dollar consideration for health care costs,</p>
<p>Tatin, I know a number of people who went to CC and got into medical school What a lot of medical schools do not like to see is if you are taking one slate of classes at a regular university and taking your premed courses as community college. That can be an issue. Community college comprises only the first two years of your college experience. Your final two years are going to be at a 4 year school and that is where more scrutiny is placed on the courses and grades.</p>
<p>CPTofthehouse,</p>
<p>I agree with you on many points. </p>
<p>I am not sure who mysterious MR. B is, but yes, I agree, if somebody has a right not to be insured, that same one should have responsibility to pay for their own health care if such need arises. Dare I say, even in emergency situation?</p>
<p>My thinking is that either everybody has to buy insurance (on a sliding scale for those with who cannot afford to pay full price) or there should no free medical care (even in emergency). </p>
<p>Also, I realize that privates do not give aid dollar for dollar for medical bills. Although, I think that maybe some colleges would have been more generous. The girl had at least one surgery every year. She was not expected to live past 2011 (she could not even walk anymore - was out breath). She was a lucky recipient of heart transplant in November of 2010, but she still goes through many medical treatments. Anyway, the expenses were ongoing for the entire girl’s life and are supposed to continue for a very a long time.</p>
<p>However, I was thinking that a young man could have gone somewhere where in addition to some financial aid he could have received some merit (he was a good student).</p>
<p>Community college may work out, but it can also put a pre-med student at a disadvantage. The science courses at a CC just are not as rigorous as at a UC. So when the student transfers to a UC, he/she may not be prepared for the upper division courses. </p>
<p>And there are no research assistant opportunities because they aren’t research universities. So the transfer student goes into his/her junior year and has to scramble to get something for that year before he/she applies to medical school. </p>
<p>The med school will have just one year of UC coursework to evaluate on the application which is done at the end of junior year. </p>
<p>It can be done, but it is more difficult. </p>
<p>The OP didn’t say what her ultimate goal was. But as I said before, the state’s money would be better spent on the best brains in the state, rather than to the C students at the CCs. (Not to mention the other ways our state wastes money on proposed bullet trains and three hundred thousand dollar a year pensions and on and on).</p>
<p>There’s a reason the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act isn’t even remotely controversial. Civilized countries don’t allow people to die on the streets because they’re too poor to pay for their broken leg to be set.</p>
<p>You can bill someone all you want, but if they’re low-income… you’re going to spend way more on lawyers and debt collectors than you’ll ever get back.</p>