<p>gwgrad and lerkin, those stories are not representative of the vast majority of people who are on public assistance, struggling to make ends meet and provide a decent life for their children. Without a social safety net, these people would be starving and living in Dickensian conditions. Show a little compassion. I bet none of the people posting on this thread have ever lived in poverty so this attitude is just more of the wealthy looking down on the less fortunate. Besides, this site is about college, not about Social Security, welfare or any other issues.</p>
<p>As for the people complaining that the poor get to go to college for “free” while the middle class are expected to contribute, that attitude is completely at odds with reality. Very few colleges have such generous need-based financial aid policies, and those that do still expect the students to work, so they’re not getting the education for free. Most low-income students have to take out debt to afford even the “cheap” colleges.</p>
<p>The unemployment rate for freshly graduated engineers is less than 2% nationally. There is such a high demand in America that is not being met that American companies are outsourcing engineer jobs. Not because they’re cheaper, but because there’s more. We must end this.</p>
<p>Students from poor families get their $5000 Pell grant. That’s all there is, there is no more. Ok, maybe something from their state–another $5000 TAP grant in NY which adds up to enough to commute to a state or city school if you happen to live close enough to commute.</p>
<p>Otherwise they are “entitled” to the same subsidized and unsubsidized student loans as everyone else. Maybe a little more since their parents are not likely to be credit-worthy to take out Parent-PLUS loans.</p>
<p>Yes, there are colleges that give very generous financial aid. But not so many, certainly not enough seats for the number of high school graduates that come from poor families. And it’s not like most of them went to quality high schools where they were well-prepared for elite colleges.</p>
<p>I read it all the time about how lucky poor families are, that their kids get a free ride. Not so!</p>
<p>Honestly, I don’t think children from a private high school have a better education than those at a public school oldmom…the environment is most definitely different but for example…the valedictorian and salutatorian of my public HS always go to a top 20 school. Last year it was Cornell and UPenn. The year before it was Notre Dame and MIT. The year before it was Colgate and Vanderbilt. Most kids do end up going to CC or a local school, but my point is if you want to get the education…you can. It’s silly to think that because you pay $50,000 for high school a year that you have a better chance…at the end of the day it comes down to the student. Some kids at my school do great things while students at a local private boarding school whose parents paid $200,000 for their high school education end up going to Washington and Jefferson or Pitt…nothing wrong with those schools…it just goes to show you that it doesn’t matter where you go for high school, it just matters about what you do with it and what your attitude is.</p>
<p>What does everyone suggest? First of all, there are some downright “rich” families who live among rich families that are richer than they are so they thing they poor. At what point is someone “poor”, rich or middle class? And how should the financial aid system be structured. Bear in mind that there is not enough money by a long shot to give everyone a free ride.</p>
<p>Right now the federal government gives PELL grants to those who have a zero EFC up to about $5K in EFC, That come out to those who net $30K after taxes get some PELL on a gradation. Also those so eligible can borrow up $5500 with some of it subsiidized depending on COA and EFC. Those making more than that lose the PELL but can maybe get some subsidization of Stafford loans. Those who with an EFC over the COA of a school can still borrow, but will have to pay interest on the loans.This arrangement allows for anyone to go to a local state school/community college. Those with the lowest income families can go tuition free, to such schools, and use the Staffords to offset commuting expenses. Those whose families’ situation gives them access to Staffords only, need to get some contribution from family or a job. The neediest do not get interest accruing, but those without the need will. </p>
<p>A fundamental problem with this model which I think works from most students in the US, is that the community college is often not very good. They may not offer essential courses to be available to enough students, and the rigor of those courses may not match those of most 4 years school. To me, it is of paramount importance that all community college be set up for a seamless transition to the state flagship schools. Maryland’s model is one to use with some teeth to be added to it. Money needs to be pumped into the system to make that a priority. I would like it to be a priority for federal and state funds going to private schools right now, be funneled into this venue, so that our community colleges become centers of excellence where people want to work and attend. I 'd like to see work study funds diverted there as well as subsidized work options for those kids who come from families that do not qualify for aid. No,it still won’t be fair for those whose parents are deemed able to pay and won’t, but there will be more parity this way.</p>
<p>The private college entitlement mentality is just a symptom of the societal entitlement mentality. I can’t wait until the government pulls a Greece-like move and “taxes” my savings and retirement accounts. I am NOT feeling good about things in our country these days, alas …</p>
<p>ctcountess: The unemployment rate for freshly graduated engineers is less than 2% nationally. </p>
<p>I would like to see your reference for that. It generally says something like 98% of our graduates are employed, or pursuing graduate school. That is not the same thing as the unemployment rate is less than 2%. Yes, those kids may be employed, part time at Starbucks… And some (many) of the ones in graduate school are there because they couldn’t find an engineering job with their bachelors.</p>
<p>My son went to a college with a good engineering school, and yes, some of those kids were shocked when they had to face the reality that every single of one them were not going to be rolling in the gravy making those high engineering salaries for which they were licking their chops. A lot of them went to graduate school or took other work or were without jobs for a little while. But now, 10 years out, they are all doing pretty well. I beiieve their unemployment rate is very low and they are making a living wage plus some.</p>
<p>The same cannot be said about a lot of those who graduated with liberal arts degrees. Too many unemployed, underemployed, back in school just to have something to say as to what they are doing. I don’t know the percentages but there is a big difference between those who took courses in things where jobs are more available. But it is not like that job manna flows from the heavens automatically. A lot of kids with a lot entitlement issues. It’s harder than applying to selective colleges to get a good job with a good company for good pay even if you have that degree in that field from that school.</p>
<p>I have not read this entire thread, so this may have already been covered. I, too, have noticed a lot of complaining about FA, and I was a bit perplexed by some of the kids (and parents) who were moaning over substantial FA packages they felt were less than generous. Then, DSs third FA package rolled in. I was stunned! It was from a “meets full need” school, yet their EFC (student + parent contribution) was almost $10,000 higher than what FAFSA said it would be. However, after I thought for a moment, I realized that DS had outside scholarships that more than covered our student + parent contributions. So, I thought that all was well! </p>
<p>THEN, I found out that all of those hundreds of hours DS spent writing essays and filling out myriad scholarship forms were, basically, for naught, as outside scholarships don’t cover expected Parent contributions, and there wasn’t a chance in Hades we could come up with the cash to cover it on our own. Suddenly, the FA package for DSs dream school seemed like a cruel joke. We felt VERY misled, both by the “meets need” promise and by the fact that we had seemingly wasted tremendous time and effort applying for scholarships that would not allow DS to attend the college of his dreams.</p>
<p>We felt misled by a barage of information that led us to believe that things were VERY different than they are in the world of college financing. We are currently working with his top choice school to reevaluate our EFC, and we are hoping that the significant amount of scholarship money he brings with him to the school each year (which is double our combined student + parent contribution) will help us make our case. But all of the complaints you see on CC may not be created equal. Sometimes, in the FA world “the advertising” and “reality” are simply not aligned. Definitions of “need” seem to be impossible to balance from school to school. In my world, when you are told you’re buying into one program and end up being sold a different one, the concerns are valid, not simply “entitlement syndrome run amok”.</p>
<p>I’m sorry to read this, Happymom. The way it usually works with outside scholarships when they are applied to packages from full need schools is that they reduce the loans and workstudy part of the package and then the need based grants. Until there is no need based award left, they do not reduce the expected contributions of the parents and students. Different schools do apply this differently, but as a rule, the outside awards reduce the need first. </p>
<p>It’s even more painful when a college gives merit awards as well as need based aid, because they will reduce their grants first so the kids still get the loans and Self help, at times. The Lafayette Marquis award works that way. You get one; it reduces your financial aid grant if you have need. If you have no need, it’s your money to do as you please. </p>
<p>They don’t call it “Every Friggin’ Cent” for nothing.</p>
<p>Right, cptofthehouse, and somehow in the midst of the “apply for scholarships to pay for college” mantra, we missed that clause about it not going toward parent contribution. OUR bad, there, not the schools, though there are a whole lot of us in the same boat right now. I also understand how impossible it can be for schools to take every student’s individual circumstances into account when devising financial aid packages at the busiest time of the year. We are moving forward with a reevaluation request, as are many others. My only point is that there are A LOT of people on here who are more concerned/confused and looking for answers than there are those with entitlement issues. Yes, there are some people on here who give clarity to the '90’s hit, “Things That Make You Go…Hmmm…”. LOL. But I think that sometimes those who are truly grateful for the opportunity to go to college but are truly baffled by their FA packages and are looking for explanations are lumped in with those who need to “give it UP, already” and it seems to make the attitude of entitlement seem more prevalent than it is. Perhaps. JMO. Most of the people I have seen on the FA threads are just trying to put all of the pieces together. :)</p>
<p>I think there is conflicting data about STEM employment figures because it is not uniform. There is an oversupply of some majors (architecture, civil engineering, etc.). Meanwhile physicists, biomedical engineers, computer engineers, electrical engineers, computer scientists, petroleum engineers, and others are in very high demand. The unemployment rates in some of these fields are as low as 0.3%</p>
<p>One of the problems with the financial aid policies of the schools is the lack of clarity. You can get a formula for the FAFSA EFC, flawed as it might be, and come up with it. Not so with these other schools. The NPC are a step in the right directions, but throw any curve ball in there, and it can be way off. They are new, so perhaps they will be fine tuned. But as long as there are any discretionary factors in these calculations, it’s impossible to figure out how these schools are calculating need, aid packages and merit. </p>
<p>It’s getting tighter every year, from what I can see. In my day, we could double, triple dip with outside awards. I was rolling in the money when went to college ride+ with merit bucks in my bank account. The $2K that NMF status gave you really meant a lot when the tution was a big $3500. And a lot of colleges would throw in a full ride or extend the award for all four years with their own funds back then. Now there are minimum contributions that schools are building into their formulas so that it’s virtually impossible, if not totally impossible to get a zero contribution. Get outside merit money and it has to be more than your need package to reduce the EFCs. Some schools are looking hard and greedily at 401k money and are sticking those students with any money in their accounts with a minimum 25% of that money each year–actually holding the kids to that first year balance!</p>
<p>I agree, Bob, but there is the element of time in that equation too. Some of these kids are just a bit too green to get jobs at first and some foolishly turn down what are good offers because they are thinking that they are going to be getting big fish from the fish stories they’ve been told. THey all learned and are gainfully employed a few years down the road, but it’s not like shooting fish in a barrel. Then they have to learn that they are low man on the totem pole at work, and not one of the annointed ones. </p>
<p>Some of these kids get an entitled attitude. They were treated like child gods while in high school got into the schools of their choice and were told how great the school is that they chose and worth the 6 figures it’s costing to go there. Some of them have never held a job, or if they did they were well taken care of there as they were doing internships or other such programs. It’s a brutal climate out there when one is working for money for a firm that is out to make money. You are no longer paying for the privilege of being there so you are not a customer but overhead. Big difference. It can be a humbling experience.</p>
<p>A lot of upper middle class and pretty affluent kids get handed everything they want while growing up, and the first “no” they ever receive is from the “college of their dreams”. What do you mean, we can’t afford it?</p>
<p>It is often to the school’s benefit to provide scholarship money for lower middle class and poor students. Part of going to college is being exposed to different ideas, viewpoints and experiences. If everyone is from the same economic and social background, there is not much opportunity to hear opinions other than your own.</p>
<p>MMMGIRL: I grew up in the slums of Rochester, NY. Family didn’t own a car, which was a good thing because it would not have been safe in my neighborhood. Moved to a cheap suburb as a teen when my grandparents helped out so that we did not have to attend a notoriously dangerous high school. I went to a private college thanks to very generous financial aid and working 20 hours a week all through school. The school needed us poor honors students to maintain the academic rankings and compensate for some of the rich party-hearty kids. Financial aid officer told me that.</p>
<p>I earn less than $35K a year, my younger daughter got very good financial and merit money to a private school (older one went to a public and has large loans - not great grades in HS but very happy math teacher now). Younger kid is #1 in her grad school class and first in class to to offered a job - graduation is in August, and two of her supervisors have given her written offers. While in school she started several programs that have gained in popularity - a Christian (NOT fundy, but ecumenical) living dorm floor, a service group, and others. The school benefits from providing her with scholarships.</p>
<p>Entitled - no. But it is to the schools’ advantage to provide aid.</p>
OUR bad, there, not the schools, though there are a whole lot of us in the same boat right now. I also understand how impossible it can be for schools to take every student’s individual circumstances into account when devising financial aid packages at the busiest time of the year. We are moving forward with a reevaluation request, as are many others. My only point is that there are A LOT of people on here who are more concerned/confused and looking for answers than there are those with entitlement issues. Yes, there are some people on here who give clarity to the '90’s hit, “Things That Make You Go…Hmmm…”. LOL. But I think that sometimes those who are truly grateful for the opportunity to go to college but are truly baffled by their FA packages and are looking for explanations are lumped in with those who need to “give it UP, already” and it seems to make the attitude of entitlement seem more prevalent than it is. Perhaps. JMO. Most of the people I have seen on the FA threads are just trying to put all of the pieces together. :)</p>