Interesting new study: Increased Parental Support Resulted in Lower Grades

[Barbara H]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/14/study-finds-increased-parental-support-college-results-lower-grades

 

This new study is worth a read. Students who are given high financial support, often do worse in college, particularly when this is coupled with a lack of specific parental expectations. The researchers suggestion isn't that parents withhold support, but instead that they make "smart investments."

[regentrude]

I am not surprised by those findings. Students who work to pay for their own education, or who have worked and are now returning to school on their savings, are more invested. I don't imagine any of the students who fail my course multiple times are paying for it - otherwise they would not waste their tuition money by cutting class and skipping assignments. (Of course, there is also the opposite problem of students who have to work so many hours that they can not devote sufficient time to their studies and perform poorly because of that.)

 

For one other aspect however, it was not clear to me from the article whether they corrected for that: students with a strong drive and good work ethics are more likely to be the ones earning merit aid, thus decreasing parental contribution. So, in a sense, the top students' parents have to contribute less because their students are good - and not vice versa.

[TranquilMind]

http://www.insidehig...ts-lower-grades

 

This new study is worth a read. Students who are given high financial support, often do worse in college, particularly when this is coupled with a lack of specific parental expectations. The researchers suggestion isn't that parents withhold support, but instead that they make "smart investments."

 

That is totally logical and makes perfect sense. I'm not throwing money away on anything, including a child who won't work like a dog to do his best in an academic environment.

[Lolly]

I am not surprised by those findings. Students who work to pay for their own education, or who have worked and are now returning to school on their savings, are more invested. I don't imagine any of the students who fail my course multiple times are paying for it - otherwise they would not waste their tuition money by cutting class and skipping assignments. (Of course, there is also the opposite problem of students who have to work so many hours that they can not devote sufficient time to their studies and perform poorly because of that.)

 

For one other aspect however, it was not clear to me from the article whether they corrected for that: students with a strong drive and good work ethics are more likely to be the ones earning merit aid, thus decreasing parental contribution. So, in a sense, the top students' parents have to contribute less because their students are good - and not vice versa.

 

 

 

BINGO! We have a winner folks!!!

 

 

I know that in my own family, the amount we, as parents, will be contributing is an inverse proportion to the likelihood that particular dc will do well. The ones receiving less $ from the schools themselves have less natural ability or are battling ld's which result in lower grades (and less $ coming in from outside the family).