@dfbdfb: That’s crazy.
How does that even occur when a major typically takes up only 1/3rd of classes (give or take, outside of some pretty specialized professional majors) at American colleges?
At one of my kids’ schools, a lot of majors easily require 14-15 classes, so close to half. If you are trying to study abroad, do a minor, combine with another major, or all of the above,on top of gen ed or core requirements, it does take some juggling and planning and guidance from an insider can really help.
OTOH, every student has access to an online Degree Audit that goes through every major and gen ed requirement they’ve accomplished and still have left to do. So the individualized information is available.
Plus, guess what? Even big state schools have advisors. No, they don’t hunt students down and make them come to their offices, but they’re there.
At colleges with lower graduation rates (less selective schools that are usually filled with commuter students from families with income far below that of the upper middle class), the typical student is probably juggling one major, general education requirements, and a part time job to earn money to pay for school. The latter may require taking light full time course loads (12 credits per semester) instead of full course loads (15 or 16 credits per semester) to make room for work hours.
@PurpleTitan, it probably depends (every university with a well-though-out curriculum has a well-thought-out curriculum, but every university that has a badly-designed curriculum has it badly designed in its own way), but in the case here, it was a set of three different requirements (university, college, major) that appear to have been designed (a) for purposes of convenience, and (b) without recognizing the changes in each part of it that were occurring over time.
Poorly set up prerequisites played a role, as well. It’s entirely possible for a major to only require, say, 45 credits, but also require 24 credits of prerequisites.
(And formal advising for students has always been available, but it was essentially a well-kept secret. It’s only the last three-ish years that there’s been any serious effort to get students into meetings with advisors.)
Is each set of requirements voluminous and non-overlapping to the point that the student has very little room for free electives (and hence very little room for error in choosing courses) even for majors that do not ordinarily have voluminous requirements?
Or do they tend to create prerequisite sequences that are longer than would ordinarily be expected?
Exactly, @ucbalumnus . In terms of a 4-year graduation rate, the majority of our students have to work. So it’s hard to take the 15 credits every semester to keep you on the 4-year track. One fewer class every semester puts you on the 5-year plan unless you take summer classes, but that’s usually not covered by FAFSA from what I understand.
One student I talked to recently had 3 part time jobs! He worked every night and for a catering company on weekends. He was nervous about taking out loans to pay for school.
News flash: This thread is not about the “VAST majority of schools.” To quote the OP’s original post:
My remarks are made with respect to the schools OP is talking about. I think you will find if you are dirt poor and manage to get into a school like Midd or Williams, you will not be taking out direct loans for everything above the Pell grant. You will likely get a full ride. These schools actually BRAG about Pell grant recipients now—it’s considered good marketing. Malcolm Gladwell recently did a podcast praising Vassar (one of, if not the most expensive schools in the country) for having lots of Pell grant recipients, and castigating Bowdoin for having better food than Vassar but fewer Pell grant recipients.
These schools are tripping over themselves to show how non-elitist they are. Williams, in its 2021 ED results press release, crowed that “nearly 20 percent of Early Decision admits come from low-income families.” Do you know how Williams defines low-income? Household income of $85,000 or less!
The points you make about the financial difficulties faced by true low-income (as opposed to Williams low-income) students, while valid, are not relevant to this thread. They are not news to me. They are worthy of discussion. On a relevant thread. Just as the issues brought up by OP are worthy of discussion here.
I notice that you have written over 30,000 posts. I really hope you have better things to do in life than get angry at people you don’t know, for irrelevant reasons.
Is popcorn a breakfast food?
@keiekei Could you post a link to that podcast? He does not label the titles with what you would expect the content to be.
@keiekei: “These schools actually BRAG about Pell grant recipients now—it’s considered good marketing.”
You make that sound like a bad thing.
One thing that’s off-putting about this thread is just how entitled (and lacking in perspective) some people are.
This thread has been fascinating in one sense, I have to say:
It’s made clear which posters have never been poor/lower-middle-class (and also can’t put themselves in other’s shoes).
@PurpleTitan
“You make that sound like a bad thing.”
Uh, no. That’s your projection.
@Portercat I believe the podcast is titled “Food fight”
An upper middle class family who is at full pay, and chooses to pay it, will still have an economically better, more secure, life than any pell grant family, even if the latter are fortunate enough to be among the tiny percentage who get into meets-full-need colleges.
So again, if you think they have it better, by all means, choose to be poor. And eschew that solid, secure lifestyle that’s dragging you down, so you too can enjoy that full ride.
How is @PurpleTitan “projecting”? Your statement refered to is written in a tone of astonishment. “Actually BRAG about…!”
While I do have empathy for the OP, I don’t agree that the social problems on campus are the result of less middle class students on campus.
UMC kids have not been shut out of “elite” campuses. They are there because their parents are willing to pay the price for them to attend. This is only a problem if the parents aren’t willing to pay, even if they could. This is a non-problem.
@PurpleTitan or it could be that growing up poor makes one realize no undergraduate degree no matter where it is from is worth $250k. It is also clear which posters don’t have college age kids.
With 13% and 18% of undergraduates with Pell grants respectively, it is not like Middlebury and Williams are enrolling that many from the lower half of the US family income distribution (while they get 50% and 41% of undergraduates needing no financial aid, so presumably from families with more money than the upper middle class whose complaints are the subject of this thread). Should they really be bragging about being schools for the scions of wealth with some from the rest of the upper half of the income distribution and a few from the lower half of the income distribution?