<p>
</p>
<p>The college application behavior of high achieving students from high and low income families is shown here:</p>
<p>[Key</a> Findings from “The Hidden Supply of High-Achieving, Low-Income Students” | Brookings Institution](<a href=“http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2013/low-income-high-achieving-hoxby-avery]Key”>http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2013/low-income-high-achieving-hoxby-avery)</p>
<p>Moral of the story: be rich. :)</p>
<p>Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man’s world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man’s world</p>
<p>^^
Has this ever not been true?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not when folks like the Vikings or your average Goth, Hun, Vandal, or other barbarian du jour shows up. :D</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qSkaAwKMD4[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qSkaAwKMD4</a></p>
<p>What’s wrong with nice LACs that have beautiful surroundings and accommodations? What, don’t B students deserve pleasant facilities? What, it should be castles at Harvard but hovels if you’re not that level academically?</p>
<p>Seems this topic resurfaces again and again about this time of year.</p>
<p>Just as a side note, I do find it quite entertaining how many of those who claim “rankings don’t matter” then rapidly put forward the fact, when it exists, that the college (for which they claim rankings are irrelevant) is ranked relatively high by some publication at some time.</p>
<p>Every time I look at this thread title, I think this is a true first world problem.</p>
<p>I’ve gotten something really useful from this thread, thank you cobrat for introducing me to YouTube’s Horrible Histories!</p>
<p>thumper, I agree. </p>
<p>PG: some of the most beautiful campuses I have seen are small Catholic colleges where my daughter has been for dance events. There is a lot to be said about the emotional benefits of spending four years in a visually appealing environment, no matter what kind of student you are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing necessarily wrong per se about a B student going to a nice college. However, B students’ access to a nice and academically suitable college (as opposed to the local for-profit commuter school or not being able to go to college at all) may have more to do with their family incomes than their own achievement. There appears to be disagreement here as to whether this is desirable or undesirable.</p>
<p>Just an FYI…there are many B high school students who actually thrive in college.</p>
<p>Only on CC is a B student somehow inferior and less deserving. Unbelievable.</p>
<p>“Nothing necessarily wrong per se about a B student going to a nice college. However, B students’ access to a nice and academically suitable college (as opposed to the local for-profit commuter school or not being able to go to college at all) may have more to do with their family incomes than their own achievement. There appears to be disagreement here as to whether this is desirable or undesirable.”</p>
<p>I don’t get your point. People raised with nice things shouldn’t want nice things that their families can afford? Should well to do parents not take their B students to Europe for a family trip, or buy them cars or nice clothing or whatever?</p>
<p>Wait a minute. We are going to argue whether it’s good that people with money get to send their B-students to nice looking places and people without money get to send their B-students to commuter colleges? Of course it’s not GOOD, as in full of moral rectitude. </p>
<p>Money isn’t about good, natively. At least not in its first, second, or third incarnations. At least not without real effort, intent, and growth on the part of those who have it. Money is about money.</p>
<p>Now, the larger discussion, what do those with money owe their fellow man, that’s a real discussion.</p>
<p>Boy I sound unlikeable:).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No you don’t; you sound rational :).</p>
<p>Mr. and Mrs. Gotrocks can send Biff or Muffy to a nice LAC that accepts 3.0 students who can pay “full boat” for college because 90+% of all LACs are “need aware” and need those “full boat” students to stay solvent and provide need based scholarships to financially needy academically excellent students. Financially needy 3.0 students may actually have an easier time getting into Muffy’s LAC because their low SES may provide them with a “plus” for admissions and FA. Alternatively, the financially needy 3.0 student can get enough Federal aid and loans go to to the local CC (and live at home). They do not need to go to a “for-profit” school.</p>
<p>BTW, a 3.0 can get you into a lot of very good schools.</p>
<p>This is an aside at this stage but the point of the Brookings Institute study that ucbalumnus linked to was not “be rich” at all. The study points to the fact that for most low income high achieving students it is far more cost effective to attend a selective LAC or university than any other educational alternative including community college. A student with family income under 60K attending a needs blind 100% demonstrated need school will not pay for college at all, and under 100K will pay very little. The problem is that these students do not apply to these selective schools. They don’t know the opportunity exists; they don’t have the guidance at home or at school. This issue isn’t exactly relevant to where this thread is going but it is important to the larger discussion of (some of) what education is supposed to do: create opportunity for individuals, level the playing field, create social mobility, and address intergenerational poverty. According to Brookings there are 25-35,000 low income students who could be attending the top colleges in the country but never apply. Here is a place where opportunity actually exists - now, how to make it truly available…</p>
<p>^^^^^</p>
<p>Now that’s a good, actionable point.</p>
<p>I was top in my public high school class and attended an Ivy, and have a lovely daughter who is a B student at a top public high school. My daughter also has excellent extracurriculars, works summers, and volunteers with underprivileged kids. My Dad also attending two ivies even though his parents were poor immigrants (he was very smart). </p>
<p>Although my D got into many private colleges, she will attend a large public university because it is excellent in the program she wants, and she loved the school when she visited. I think many of these posts are written by people who are stereotyping the parents. While I originally had some sadness that she was not going to be able to attend the same “type” of schools my Dad and I were able to attend, I realized that the world has changed since I applied. There are so many more applicants, particularly from overseas, but also within the US, that our kids just do not have the same odds that we did. Frankly, I doubt I would have gotten into some of the Ivys (and many other top LACs) that I did if I was applying today. Also, we all need to send our kids where they will be successful in their college studies which will lead to confidence in their fields and future success and happiness. </p>