Stanford: Free Tuition For Families Making Under 125K/Full Ride Under 65K

[8filltheheart]

The schools offering a free ride, or close to it, are for the most part extremely competitive with admissions.  Many top students don't get in regardless of their financial circumstances, barring the ready to donate a new building few.  Colleges a tier down from these will likely give acceptances, but then the challenge becomes how to make up for the gap, even from those who "meet 100% need" because this is often met with loans above the federal ones and counts on student contribution from summer work and work study.  For some, the gap is just too large.  I'm not saying that students should contribute because I think they should.  But work study is not guaranteed and is dependent upon jobs being available for all the students who need them.  Ideally these students should be working during high school and saving up for college expenses, but the economy for a lot of years didn't make for a lot of available teen jobs.  It also means that it might make it harder for the students to pursue their interests during the summers or they may need to work to help support the family, so nothing will be saved.  A lack of money for tuition and room and board is just the beginning.  Add on travel and the unexpected expenses that come up and things that just aren't an obstacle for other students may be huge hurdles for some lower income students.  No easy answers.  Community college fees can usually be covered by the Pell Grant, so that's a big reason why many of these students end up at cc.  Definitely not a bad idea for all, but it might not be the best for some depending on their specific situation.

 

To find out how many get a free ride, or close to it, you can look at the common data set for the percent of students who receive Pell Grants.  The percent varies at the different colleges, and varies from year to year somewhat as well. 

 I agree.   That is the point I was attempting to make while I was typing while you were posting.  Yours is much clearer!

[Serenade]

 must go to cc or even must go to Alma mater.  It is very difficult for some parents to realize their kids can have their own paths that fit them better.

 

 

 

But a cc can truly be the path to something that fits them better.

 

My DH went to cc for two years while he lived at home, and ended up graduating with honors from the engineering school at the University of Florida.   It didn't take him any longer to get his electrical engineering degree than the students who started out at the university.  And he saved a heck of a lot of money and graduated with very little debt.  I imagine a student can take this route to just about any degree.  

[Teachin'Mine]

Here are some stats regarding Pell Grant recipients at some of the top colleges.  Bear in mind that not all of these colleges give a free ride to lower income students, or even provide 100% of need. 

 

National Universities:  http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools

 

Liberal Arts College:  http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools

 

Regional Universities and Regional Colleges:  http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools 

 

Here's another set of lists for one rating of the best return on investment for universities and liberal arts colleges.  Useful info for middle income families as well.

 

http://www.bestvalueschools.com/25-best-value-universities/

 

http://www.bestvalueschools.com/liberal-arts-colleges-best-roi/

 

 

[8filltheheart]

Also the idea that CCs only lead to poor outcomes is stereotype.  Our dd is an Allied Health grad from a CC.  She just graduated in Aug and her income is significantly more than the avg median income in this country.  Her path was incredibly low cost.

[Teachin'Mine]

Honestly, Sarah, not many kids from underprivileged backgrounds are going to have the test scores to be competitive for admissions.  It is a false argument to set up denial around just the lack of ECs.  For top scoring URM  first generation college students, you will see there is typically a different curve for acceptance.  They compare to what the students have available at that school vs. what is available at "Top Prep."  But, the test scores are still going to have to be there.  LOR are going to have to be glowing. And the student is still going to be expected to be actively involved in something.

 

Is it equal?  No.  But nothing about elite admissions is "fair."   It is what it is.  Is it frustrating?  Absolutely.  But, students who would qualify for acceptance into the elite schools based on academics alone DO have the option of applying to lower ranked schools and attend on high merit awards.  Many of those are not dependent on ECs, but on academic record.  It is how our kids have attended college b/c getting accepted is irrelevant.  We can't afford to pay.  

 

This stat makes it very clear that banking on acceptance to one of the elites for education is simply bad strategy: There are 3,500,000 high school students who apply to college as entering freshman.  Approx 1% attend elite schools.  Only around 3% attend selective schools.  The odds are bad for everyone and even worse for those without the advantages of top academic experiences and test prep, etc.

 

Basically, my point is while I don't think the chances of admittance are equivalent to the randomness of the lottery b/c acceptance isn't random, the odds of being accepted are very, very unlikely. 

 

But I think our points are somewhat different.  I think you're saying that it would be more "fair" if elite colleges only admitted based on pure academic record.  I think it's great that colleges do look at what a student has accomplished in comparison to what was available for them at their particular high school.  Otherwise, many lower income students from poor rural school districts, or urban ones for that matter, couldn't possibly hope to compete.  As the top colleges say, and it's true, they could all fill the available spots several times over with 4.0/2300+ students, but that might not make for the best or most interesting class.  A lot of learning takes place outside the classrooms at college.  IMO diversity of many types is a huge benefit to all the students.  But I may have read the above differently from how you intended. 

 

For lower income students, admissions likely takes into account any work experience and understand that if they have put in a lot of time to support themselves and their family that there will likely be fewer other ECs on their applications.  This is just one of the reasons why they do holistic admissions reviews of prospective students.  But you're right that they have to have the stats in order to even be considered in the first place.

 

As for the ECs being important to the elite colleges, they are looking for students who will contribute to activities and assume leadership roles. Elite schools, as I'm sure all schools, like to make service contributions in the local communities and for that they need willing students.   I don't know if there's any correlation, but I would think that students who are involved on campus, and off,  are more likely to have a positive experience, and more likely to be involved as alumni.  Involved alumni are more likely to be contributing monetarily as well. 

 

I agree that the odds are low and while I think that students should aim for those acceptances, they should have other financial and admissions safeties.  Some state schools make this easier than others.  And match and safety privates aren't a sure thing either as many won't admit students who have a lot of need or will admit them with an unrealistic financial aid offer.

 

Your son did really well with winning highly competitive scholarships on top of the full tuition.  For many low income students, getting full tuition alone at a non-commuting school would not be enough to enable them to attend.  For some, there's no easy answer.

[8filltheheart]

But I think our points are somewhat different. I think you're saying that it would be more "fair" if elite colleges only admitted based on pure academic record.

No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying life isn't fair and those with more impoverished backgrounds tend to also have less strong academic backgrounds. That is more like statistical reality and universities do give allowances for that, but they don't overlook less academically prepared. If test scores are avg, admission is unlikely regardless of background.

[Teachin'Mine]

No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying life isn't fair and those with more impoverished backgrounds tend to also have less strong academic backgrounds. That is more like statistical reality.

 

Thank you for clarifying!   Agreed especially when it comes to standardized test scores.  Not all, but a lot of the top stats can be attributed to the difference expensive test prep makes. 

[creekland]

 

Free is cheaper than CC, so why do so many poor kids end up at CC? 

 

At our school many (from any economic level) end up at CC because they want a short term add on/education that leads to a quick job.  These jobs are often in the health field, but can also be things like diesel mechanics or similar things. Our CC is the best value for this and has a really good placement rate. They aren't really looking to start a 4 year degree.

 

Some start there looking for a start on a 4 year degree.  Those who choose that route from our school often aren't really sure what they want to major in or want to stick around home rather than going away for the first two years.  And yes, some choose it for the cost savings as there's no way they are getting into schools with really good deals.

 

Those who get really good deals rarely choose to start at the CC (as in I can't think of any at the moment), but not everyone gets them.

[maize]

Also the idea that CCs only lead to poor outcomes is stereotype. Our dd is an Allied Health grad from a CC. She just graduated in Aug and her income is significantly more than the avg median income in this country. Her path was incredibly low cost.

What kind of job does she have?

[Hoggirl]

Tom Hanks' view on his time at a CC. Sorry if this has already been posted - it came out in January.

 

Full disclosure: His youngest son is currently a frosh at Stanford.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/tom-hanks-on-his-two-years-at-chabot-college.html?_r=0

[Caroline]

I keep coming back to this thought... It is Stanford. Stanford doesn't have to be fair. Stanford doesn't have to take anyone who doesn't pay full freight, but they do. Getting into Stanford is not about the "right" extra curriculars. It is about the drive. It's about not taking no or can't as an answer. It's that way for wealthy kids, too. There are a lot of upper middle class and wealthy kids who aren't going to Stanford either.

[creekland]

Tom Hanks' view on his time at a CC. Sorry if this has already been posted - it came out in January.

 

Full disclosure: His youngest son is currently a frosh at Stanford.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/tom-hanks-on-his-two-years-at-chabot-college.html?_r=0

 

Awesome op-ed piece!  Thanks for sharing it!  If it had been posted before, I never saw it then.

 

Community colleges are a great asset to our country IMO.

 

I can easily say that and still not feel they are the best path for everyone.  No single path is the best path for everyone.

[8filltheheart]

What kind of job does she have?

 She is a COTA (Certified Occupational Therapist Assistant).   She is employed full-time with full benefits and 120 personal hours time  off.  

[madteaparty]

Free is cheaper than CC, so why do so many poor kids end up at CC? How many admitted students actually get the income-based free ride at these schools?

DH and I were discussing the Stanford announcement which is similar to one from Harvard a few years ago and be said the real shock would be an ivy or similar declaring that they commit to *admit* a certain percentage of kids in the category discussed (parental income of whatever magical number they deem middle class or lower). Like, 30% of our class will have parental income of 125 and lower*. A quota for economic diversity. Because sorry, the one anecdote that can be put on a billboard does not warm the heart, but only succeeds in turning into "Hail Mary" application fees for those that have not a chance in hell.

* my kid would not qualify. Neither does he have life giving passions or talents. My interest in all this is purely anthropological.

[Jen in NY]

DH and I were discussing the Stanford announcement which is similar to one from Harvard a few years ago and be said the real shock would be an ivy or similar declaring that they commit to *admit* a certain percentage of kids in the category discussed (parental income of whatever magical number they deem middle class or lower). Like, 30% of our class will have parental income of 125 and lower*. A quota for economic diversity. Because sorry, the one anecdote that can be put on a billboard does not warm the heart, but only succeeds in turning into "Hail Mary" application fees for those that have not a chance in hell.

* my kid would not qualify. Neither does he have life giving passions or talents. My interest in all this is purely anthropological.

 

Repost from above:

 

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools

 

Stanford already admits about 16% of their students from families that make less than about $20,000/year.

 

ETA: doing a little digging, it looks like about 50% of Stanford students qualify for finaid of some kind. About 60% of those folks make less than $100,000/year (and would thereby be awarded free tuition.) So what's that..... beep beep boop beep beep boop beep..... it's about 30% of the undergrad population going free tuition at least.... and some of those totally full ride. Back of the envelope, though. I am sure there are actual stats somewhere. :) I'll keep looking.

 

Unless Hoggirl knows the deal already and can fill us in... :)

[SarahW]

No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying life isn't fair and those with more impoverished backgrounds tend to also have less strong academic backgrounds. That is more like statistical reality and universities do give allowances for that, but they don't overlook less academically prepared. If test scores are avg, admission is unlikely regardless of background.

 

And some poor kids have excellent test scores, and never think to apply to such schools because their social circle (family, relatives, and acquaintances) never mention such schools, and if they do they tell the kids that such schools are "too expensive" or "worthless."

 

I know what my mother's response would have been if someone told her that with our test scores and our income level my brother and I had a shot to go to Big College (not Ivy or top tier, any college) with 100% aid. Her first thought would have been "what's the catch?" followed with "CC or Little State is just fine" (none of which offered good courses in which my brother or I were interested), with a good dose of "if my kids go there they'll turn into godless liberals!"

 

Sure, it's not fair that that's what I was up against, but I don't think my situation is a statistical anomaly. Goodness, my grandfather was an actual coal miner from the extremely unincorporated hills of WV. I'm one generation removed from being the mythical person of a NYT Op-Ed. Maybe I should have been smart enough to spin that into an essay for an Ivy app, eh? Look, I'm not mad, I'm just frustrated by all the talk around this issue about "grit" and blah blah blah about one kid who got lucky breaks and the general wringing of hands about diversity in education.

 

This reminds me of Douthat's discussion of Harvard's touted "diversity" of each class in his sorta-memoir. The diversity is only superficial, the black kid, the Indian kid, the Ohio kid, the NE prep school kid. It's BS, they're all pretty much the same. Economic diversity was nearly non-existent, as was social and intra-American cultural diversity. There's sections of America that are totally oblivious to the other (unintentionally or intentionally) and it's really too much to ask a teen to both see and overcome that all on their own. Sure, there's a few that do, but I would argue that in their cases events conspired to cause them to cross that hurdle without them being even aware of it.

 

No, life isn't fair. Colleges judge worth by what they perceive as being worthwhile. If you lack the social and economic capita to "accidentally" be what they are looking for, you'll need to consider if you can generate that. That takes work, and yes, normally parental support and involvement.

[Teachin'Mine]

I'm really not sure how anyone could spin this as anything other than good news.  Stanford is an uber reach for just about any student.  This is just good news all around because out of those students who do get admitted, and I don't think that this really changes anything regarding the chance of being admitted, except possibly making the admissions pool a bit larger, more will be able to have it as an affordable choice.  This will affect the middle class range which is the group everyone says gets short changed on college affordability. 

 

[Jen in NY]

((( Sarah))) Your kids are lucky to have someone that is interested enough in their education to look for the possibilities for them now. (Whether they want to go to college or not. :) )

 

The story about your grandfather reminded me of a family anecdote of ours.

 

My father's father was a NYC bus driver who did not graduate from high school. He and my grandma got married at 17 and 16 respectively, and proceeded to have my dad 9 months later.... and my uncle ten months after that... and 6 more kids altogether ... mostly in a 3 room apt in the Bronx. (Not three bedroom.... three rooms, lol.) My grandfather told all 8 of them that they were going to go to college or learn a trade and pay for it themselves. My dad started working at 17 and put himself through college, while living at home with his parents and his 7 siblings... the last of which was born his sophomore year in college. (Now if that ain't the makings of some great ivy league essay, I don't know what is. At least they had moved upstairs to a slightly larger apt by then.) Some of his brothers and sisters went to college... the rest became electricians. All have been gainfully employed their entire lives. My dad worked his way up in his company and eventually they sent him to Columbia for his MBA. (Bus driver to ivy league in one generation. Hot dog.) He graduated the year I graduated from high school. I think the thing that made it possible was exactly what The Well Trained Mind is about... a classical education. They went to Jesuit schools and read widely, learned math, memorized latin, and were taught good writing skills. Their parents were not well educated but they were smart people and they cared. They paid attention and made sure the kids did their work and got on them if they didn't. In short ... they valued education... just like everyone on this board.

 

I really believe that it's still possible to be a well educated person in this society and that it still counts for something... even if it isn't as easy to put yourself through school anymore... even if the middle class is getting squeezed... even if it all sucks and we are all going to you know where in a you know what. It's still worth teaching our kids well. They will figure out how to put the education to the best use they can when the time is ripe... college or no college. What else can we do besides that?

 

(((hugs))) again.

[8filltheheart]

And some poor kids have excellent test scores, and never think to apply to such schools because their social circle (family, relatives, and acquaintances) never mention such schools, and if they do they tell the kids that such schools are "too expensive" or "worthless."

 

I know what my mother's response would have been if someone told her that with our test scores and our income level my brother and I had a shot to go to Big College (not Ivy or top tier, any college) with 100% aid. Her first thought would have been "what's the catch?" followed with "CC or Little State is just fine" (none of which offered good courses in which my brother or I were interested), with a good dose of "if my kids go there they'll turn into godless liberals!"

 

Sure, it's not fair that that's what I was up against, but I don't think my situation is a statistical anomaly. Goodness, my grandfather was an actual coal miner from the extremely unincorporated hills of WV. I'm one generation removed from being the mythical person of a NYT Op-Ed. Maybe I should have been smart enough to spin that into an essay for an Ivy app, eh? Look, I'm not mad, I'm just frustrated by all the talk around this issue about "grit" and blah blah blah about one kid who got lucky breaks and the general wringing of hands about diversity in education.

 

This reminds me of Douthat's discussion of Harvard's touted "diversity" of each class in his sorta-memoir. The diversity is only superficial, the black kid, the Indian kid, the Ohio kid, the NE prep school kid. It's BS, they're all pretty much the same. Economic diversity was nearly non-existent, as was social and intra-American cultural diversity. There's sections of America that are totally oblivious to the other (unintentionally or intentionally) and it's really too much to ask a teen to both see and overcome that all on their own. Sure, there's a few that do, but I would argue that in their cases events conspired to cause them to cross that hurdle without them being even aware of it.

 

No, life isn't fair. Colleges judge worth by what they perceive as being worthwhile. If you lack the social and economic capita to "accidentally" be what they are looking for, you'll need to consider if you can generate that. That takes work, and yes, normally parental support and involvement.

I'm not sure why you have directed your posts toward me. I am simply posting the scenario of college admissions you begin to recognize as you go through the process. (It isn't as if I have anything to do with it. ;) ) Like I stated earlier, it is what it is. I guess I could be upset that my kids can't go to top schools bc we can't afford them, but I just don't think it is worth the energy. It doesn't change the fact that we can't afford it or that most of my kids just aren't the caliber of student they are looking for any way.

 

And,honestly, with today's employment numbers, I think our COTA grad is probably wiser than many college students bc she has a great job with long term job security. (Elderly patients requiring OT are only increasing in number.)

 

And again, the likelihood of anyone being admitted to Stanford is very low. More energy could be steered toward looking at high merit $$ scholarships at lower ranked schools attempting to recruit top students. they tend to have lower admission standards and ECs really don't matter. If a student is strong enough academically to be competitive for a top school, they are competitive for scholarships at lower ranked schools. (And this is the land in which we dwell as a family.)

[Laura Corin]

Sure, it's not fair that that's what I was up against, but I don't think my situation is a statistical anomaly. Goodness, my grandfather was an actual coal miner from the extremely unincorporated hills of WV. I'm one generation removed from being the mythical person of a NYT Op-Ed. Maybe I should have been smart enough to spin that into an essay for an Ivy app, eh? Look, I'm not mad, I'm just frustrated by all the talk around this issue about "grit" and blah blah blah about one kid who got lucky breaks and the general wringing of hands about diversity in education.

 

 

I'm thinking that your story is actually the norm through history, and that we should (not a moral 'should' but an expectations 'should') be looking at several generations to make the move from miner to Stanford.

 

In my family: my great-grandfather was a cobbler - he had a small shop and supported his family, and could read, write and calculate.  My grandfather went to a sub-university teacher training college, and ended up as the headmaster of a school for non-academic boys who were destined for trades (under the educational system of the time).  His sons went to the other school in the town, which you had to take an exam to enter.  Of the four of them: one became an RAF pilot and then pilot trainer; one went to Oxford and ended up running prestigious drama schools in the UK and the US; one went to the Royal College of Music to study the French Horn, then worked for the BBC as a producer; one became a photographer.  The next generation (allowing for issues of health/other misfortunes) is solidly middle to upper-middle class.

[creekland]

 If a student is strong enough academically to be competitive for a top school, they are competitive for scholarships at lower ranked schools. (And this is the land in which we dwell as a family.)

 

This is important to note.  Middle son had the stats for a Top Anything college - to be competitive for admissions - but I'm not positive he had the ECs AND most top schools don't give merit aid.  Our income varies.  I wanted at least part of a college bill covered by merit aid so we wouldn't be on the hook for full pay if we had a good year.  Therefore, our search was mainly limited to good need-based schools that also give merit aid.  I've no regrets at not playing the "Top School" dance, but I also don't hold anything against those who want to try it.

 

I'm thinking that your story is actually the norm through history, and that we should (not a moral 'should' but an expectations 'should') be looking at several generations to make the move from miner to Stanford.

 

It doesn't have to take that long here.  Hubby's father was a tobacco foreman.  Hubby was the first in his family to go to  4 year school and it was a Top 15 Civil Engineering school (OOS public for him).  My grandparents were farmers/factory workers pending which side.  My parents were teachers - the first in both of their families to attend 4 year schools.  I attended the same OOS public hubby attended.  My kids are all going to private schools, but I'd have been ok if they had preferred public.  What matters to us is fit for each of them.

 

We still have quite a few first gen college students from our school.  Where they go depends upon their stats and desires.  Not many around here want to go to Stanford even if they could.  

[snowbeltmom]

Odds are almost always better with ED. 

 

 

The odds are definitely better in the ED round, but that statistic is misleading.  The odds are better in the ED round because many of the kids in the ED round fall into one of the special admit categories - legacy or athlete.  

 

In order to use the legacy card, many schools require the student to apply ED. 

 

It is very common for athletes to commit to an Ivy or Stanford months before the start of senior year.    The athletes have already gone through a pre-read with admissions and been given their financial aid numbers.  In order to ensure acceptance, they must apply ED, but that is just a formality as their acceptance is already a foregone conclusion.

 

So while the odds may look better if one applies ED, the "hooked" applicants are the reason for higher acceptance percentage in the ED round vs the Regular round.

[8filltheheart]

I'm thinking that your story is actually the norm through history, and that we should (not a moral 'should' but an expectations 'should') be looking at several generations to make the move from miner to Stanford..

. My multi-quote isn't working, but I wanted to quote Creekland, too.

 

I agree. Last night I had written a different post and deleted it. My mom had an 8th grade education. Her family's home burned down and they had nothing left. All of the children were expected to work to support the family. My dad a high school one. As parents they knew nothing about college and very little about high school. They pretty much ignored what we did, except they told us education was important. As kids we were on autopilot and expected to move out at 18.

 

I applied to colleges on my own. Paid for it on my own. My parents had no idea what I took in high school or where I applied to college.

 

I have a brother who is an orthodontist. So from 8th grade factory worker to orthodontist in one generation.

 

Our kids are in a radically different world. Our involvement as parents and our guidance is unlike anything I experienced. But working during high school and summers to pay for college isn't feasible anymore without serious effort to find an affordable path. I think today's kids are in a worse position in many respects. It does take tremendous effort to research realistic options. Kids without good guidance are in a tough spot.

[Granny_Weatherwax]

We tried the one generation jump - from nothing to Ivy - for DS and it didn't work.  DS is the first male in either family to take the tests (PSAT, ACT, SAT, SAT IIs) and apply to selective or highly selective schools.  My dad had an 8th grade education and lied about his age to enroll in the military at 16.  He was a career enlisted man and became an OTR trucker upon his retirement.  He was intelligent but, due to the backwoods MO lifestyle of his family, education wasn't a priority.  My brother, also intelligent, rebelled against everything and is struggling to find his way.  He has started and dropped out of multiple tech schools and community colleges. Other males have either been self-taught auto mechanics or enlisted in the military.  Only one has made it to the middle class.  We always referred to him as the rich uncle.

 

On my husband's side - every male within 5 generations has been in the same transportation industry.  While 90% have graduated from high school, none have gone to college.  There has never been a need.

 

I was the first to go to college but was unable to break away from the social constraints (and dysfunction) of families who do not regard education as important, especially for females.

 

DS has the stats, has the ECs, has what we thought was a decent hook, and comes from a family who definitely meets the Stanford/Harvard/Princeton criteria for free tuition. Six years ago we met the criteria for a full ride. Playing the game didn't work for him. I believe it's because even though I tried my best, I didn't fully understand the rules.  I think it also didn't help living in IL.  Although our zip code is nowhere near Chicago, I truly believe having so many Chicagoland applicants apply to the highly selective schools was a hindrance.

 

 

[creekland]

Kids without good guidance are in a tough spot.

 

This is always true.  Even the driven kids who figure things out on their own get guidance from somewhere - even if it's on the net.  They may find their own guidance counselors, but they still have them.

 

This is a huge reason why I watch kids at school to see who has the ability and drive... and make sure there's some guidance.  Our school tries the same thing.

 

And on here, we share thoughts for many different paths.  I know cupcake and crockpot threads are fun :lol: , but the true gem of our Hive is our collective knowledge and experience.

 

And going with that... parents/students can try for these top schools which offer great money if they get in, but have a Plan B.  One can do everything right and still not get the golden ticket.  These schools are called Lottery Schools for a reason.  Unless you're the offspring of someone famous (I suspect Obama's children could use an Ivy school as a safety if their stats are reasonably good), then we also need to be realistic about life - including finances. 

 

Life is not always fair, but the earth keeps rotating and our days keep coming.  We need to know what we're going to do with them.

 

And many, many, many times Plan B turns out to be a good choice.  I went to my Plan B school (got accepted to Duke, but couldn't afford it, so went to VA Tech).  I not only enjoyed my time, I got a good education and met hubby.  In hindsight, VT would have been my first choice due to all I loved about it.

[wapiti]

Guidance is a huge concern, with the difficulty being that there's no one-size-fits-all approach.  My guess is that there are many needles in haystacks out there, kids with high ability and maybe even drive, but no culture valuing education, let alone good guidance.  We support various organizations that work with economically-disadvantaged kids to encourage education, though that only goes so far.

 

So while the odds may look better if one applies ED, the "hooked" applicants are the reason for higher acceptance percentage in the ED round vs the Regular round.

 

Thank you for explaining this.  It makes me wonder what the real, non-athlete acceptance rates might be - is the "real" rate the RD rate?

[Grantmom]

So then if ED does have a higher acceptance rate, should you apply ED to your number 1 choice for a reach school?  Or should you apply ED to your number 1 choice where you know you will be happy, but may be more closely matched (but you still never know, since it sounds like there are so many rules and game changing things that can happen in the application process)?

 

[EmilyK]

On the activities issue, I've met with several local families lately, and the ones that had kids with amazing activities that got into great schools with merit aid, none of them were ones that required parent money.

 

Yes, there can be an activity like an instrument that requires time and money. But these were all kids that did a ton of volunteering and then it dovetailed with the things they did at their school. Admittedly, it helped that they were all at a local public high school with lots of activity options. And we live in a place with a lot of public transportation, so no one was driving their kids to all their activities in high school unless they wanted to.

 

What did strike me is that it helped a ton to have an involved parent who was researching and coaching the kid through the opportunities. So these families didn't have a lot of money, but their educational and social background was essential in knowing how to figure it out.

 

That said, it seemed clear in talking to folks who knew about admissions, that even better than being a volunteer or leadership whiz-kid, was a kid who was a first generation college seeker or an underrepresented minority. So that did give me some hope that it wasn't just limited to folks who knew the ropes because of their own background.

[Laura Corin]

 

It doesn't have to take that long here.  Hubby's father was a tobacco foreman.  Hubby was the first in his family to go to  4 year school and it was a Top 15 Civil Engineering school (OOS public for him).  My grandparents were farmers/factory workers pending which side.  My parents were teachers - the first in both of their families to attend 4 year schools.  I attended the same OOS public hubby attended.  My kids are all going to private schools, but I'd have been ok if they had preferred public.  What matters to us is fit for each of them.

 

 

Oh - it can happen faster here too.  Faster is just less common than over a couple of generations.  As the social mobility statistics for the US are very similar to those for the UK, I would expect the slower version to be more common in the US too.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

So then if ED does have a higher acceptance rate, should you apply ED to your number 1 choice for a reach school?  Or should you apply ED to your number 1 choice where you know you will be happy, but may be more closely matched (but you still never know, since it sounds like there are so many rules and game changing things that can happen in the application process)?

 

I'd choose my ED school carefully.  You will have a decision before you have any results of merit or need based aid.  At least that is how it was explained to me.

 

So--what happens if you apply ED to a school and they can't meet either your "demonstrated" need or your personal need based on your finances (rather than the FAFSA)?  Are you released from your obligation to attend or stuck with that school?

 

My oldest is nervous enough about this that she is thinking she won't apply anywhere under a binding ED only non-binding, EA or RD conditions.

[Jen in NY]

If you are absolutely positive that your student has a favorite school, and it is very likely (according to net price calculators and/or other research on your part) that you will be able to afford it, and  you are willing to forgo the opportunity to see any other possible offers of merit/financial aid, yes, it may tip things very slightly in your dc's favor.

 

Yes, If you can prove that it would be a financial hardship, you can decline the offer.

 

My dd#1 was very sure of her choice, and the money looked fairly good. She applied ED and was accepted. It was a good financial fit so we went with it.

 

Now, having gone through the RD experience with my second daughter, I feel certain that dd#1 would have been at least eligible for the same couple of full ride scholarships my dd#2 was encouraged to apply for (but didn't end up winning in the end). Dd#2 was accepted to her sister's school in the RD pool, and got to see all the merit aid/finaid offers from everywhere else, too.

 

Who knows what would have happened? But that's one example of the type of thing you need to live without knowing if you go ED.

 

Article about ED

[Granny_Weatherwax]

DS and I visited a top 20 LAC.  This school was in his top 3.  The admin who had lunch with us and saw DS's obvious enjoyment and excitement of the school was encouraging DS to apply to ED.  As soon as we brought up finances(this school offers no merit aid), the admin told DS to wait and apply RD.  She further explained that in the years she had worked for the school they had only allowed one person to withdraw from the binding Early Decision due to finances. One!

[8filltheheart]

DS and I visited a top 20 LAC.  This school was in his top 3.  The admin who had lunch with us and saw DS's obvious enjoyment and excitement of the school was encouraging DS to apply to ED.  As soon as we brought up finances(this school offers no merit aid), the admin told DS to wait and apply RD.  She further explained that in the years she had worked for the school they had only allowed one person to withdraw from the binding Early Decision due to finances. One!

 

I think this highlights the importance of understanding that financial perspectives from the familial side vs. university side might be at odds.  If your EFC based on NPC and FAFSA are higher than you as a family are able to actually pay, do NOT apply ED.  You won't necessarily be released simply b/c your family feels like the #s are not in line with what you want to pay.  Not only that, but you might have ruined your chances at good financial fits.

 

The harsh reality is that admission is meaningless if you can't afford to pay.

[Chanley]

But a lot of it started with the parent signing them up when they were little.  For example, signing your 3 year old up for dance and the kid stuck with it a long time.  What 3 year old doesn't say they want to dance?  Many of them do.  I credit the kid mostly with sticking with it, but the parent often encourages them, keeps paying for it, and keeps carting them there.  Then when the kid says they hate dance after some years, the parent bribes them to stick with it or heavily encourages or makes them.  Not saying this is always the case.  And you can't decide at 14 you suddenly want to take ballet lessons.  Not impossible, but not likely.  There may be zero opportunities for a late start even for non competitive fun dance classes.

 

 

I am one of those parents who had a kid that wanted to dance. Refused to accept anything else but dance. She started by memorizing choreography from a broadway video show that we had (it was advertised on Barney) at 3 or 4 years old. Dance was never ever on my radar and I even discouraged it because I thought that the local dance studio sexualized little kids with some of the "shuckin' and jivin'" that I would see at community performances. I enrolled her in gymnastics and she wanted to know where the music was and when they would dance. So I tried a homeschool theater class an hour away. Same deal, "when will we dance".  Finally, at 7 I enrolled her in dance. There was no stopping her. 2 years later she was on the competitive dance team and I am shelling out what is almost an in state college tuition for this kid to dance. She is only happy when she is dancing. Some kids, you cannot stop. We have made HUGE sacrifices to afford this AND keep me at home with them. 

 

Sometimes when a kid has a passion, you cannot hold them back. They will find a way regardless of the situation. 

[SeaConquest]

Did anyone else see this today? I thought I would share in light of the discussion re "passion."

 

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/our-push-for-passion-and-why-it-harms-kids/ 

 

A snip:

 

When children can’t find their elusive passions, yet feel compelled to proclaim one, they grab onto an interest, label it a passion and buy the requisite instrument or equipment. This is not a harmless charade, because fake passions crowd out real ones. When you are busy playing on the lacrosse field six days a week because in seventh grade you liked going to practices with your friends and your coach once mentioned you might have some talent, you may never discover that computer graphic design is your calling. When you take every opportunity to play piano daily in a band, orchestra and private lessons, you could easily miss the once-in-a-lifetime joy of being a member of a field hockey team. Pseudo passions can eat up our days and lay waste to any chance of finding a real ones.

[Teachin'Mine]

Yup.  That's why passions should be kid led.  I think it's our job as parents to give them opportunities to try various things, but latching a hold of something they love is up to them.

[FaithManor]

Guidance is a huge concern, with the difficulty being that there's no one-size-fits-all approach.  My guess is that there are many needles in haystacks out there, kids with high ability and maybe even drive, but no culture valuing education, let alone good guidance.  We support various organizations that work with economically-disadvantaged kids to encourage education, though that only goes so far.

 

For education level, my dh's family went from 2nd grade to a top-tier law school in one generation, thanks to a cultural value of education, very high ability and drive/hard work (and both private and taxpayer scholarships).  My job is the next generation.  The ability is there, we discuss and demonstrate the value of education in our daily lives, and we have guidance at the ready.  You can lead a horse to water, but I worry about the next part - will they have the drive to do the hard work.  Dh, of course, worries about tuition; he never paid a dime of tuition for himself and is about to pay six-fold.  That explains the conversation we had yesterday - he wants to see the drive too.

 

 

Thank you for explaining this.  It makes me wonder what the real, non-athlete acceptance rates might be - is the "real" rate the RD rate?

I was that child. Began begging for piano lessons at 3, and when mum and dad bought a piano the following year, promptly made it impossible to sleep for several nights while I insisted on playing around on it to the wee hours of the morning. My grandmother who'd have about five years of lessons as a child and read intermediate music somewhat decently worked with me so my parents didn't lose their ever loving minds until I turned 5 and then they found a wonderful piano teacher who was willing to take me.

 

Seriously, it was bad. There was never a family vacation from that point forward that could take place in an area that did not have a university or piano dealership where I could arrange to practice while on vacation. Really. It was not a tiger mom thing. I WANTED it, demanded it, and as soon as I was old enough, arranged for it myself. I studied music theory in the car, and mom had to force me to engage in family activities because I would have live, breathed, and eaten music until I wasted away! LOL, I credit my parents so much for forcing me to be a fairly well rounded individual because left to my own devices, I would have been an absolute Amadeus kind of freak! Thankfully, unlike the Wolfgang's parents and sister who had to play harpsichord on alternating shifts for his entire infancy and toddler hood or he could not sleep, I was a decent baby! :lol:

[LMV]

I was that child. Began begging for piano lessons at 3, and when mum and dad bought a piano the following year, promptly made it impossible to sleep for several nights while I insisted on playing around on it to the wee hours of the morning. My grandmother who'd have about five years of lessons as a child and read intermediate music somewhat decently worked with me so my parents didn't lose their ever loving minds until I turned 5 and then they found a wonderful piano teacher who was willing to take me.

 

Seriously, it was bad. There was never a family vacation from that point forward that could take place in an area that did not have a university or piano dealership where I could arrange to practice while on vacation. Really. It was not a tiger mom thing. I WANTED it, demanded it, and as soon as I was old enough, arranged for it myself. I studied music theory in the car, and mom had to force me to engage in family activities because I would have live, breathed, and eaten music until I wasted away! LOL, I credit my parents so much for forcing me to be a fairly well rounded individual because left to my own devices, I would have been an absolute Amadeus kind of freak! Thankfully, unlike the Wolfgang's parents and sister who had to play harpsichord on alternating shifts for his entire infancy and toddler hood or he could not sleep, I was a decent baby! :lol:

 

You might be describing our DD2.  Of course she is still two so it is a little early to tell and she was entranced with the piano before she could speak in full sentences to really beg for anything.  My husband is musically gifted and those genes clearly passed to our eldest daughter so this could certainly be her gift and passion or the interest may fade.  I guess we just kind of follow her lead and make her clean her room and at eat her vegetables as we go.

[LMV]

Did anyone else see this today? I thought I would share in light of the discussion re "passion."

 

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/our-push-for-passion-and-why-it-harms-kids/ 

 

A snip:

 

When children can’t find their elusive passions, yet feel compelled to proclaim one, they grab onto an interest, label it a passion and buy the requisite instrument or equipment. This is not a harmless charade, because fake passions crowd out real ones. When you are busy playing on the lacrosse field six days a week because in seventh grade you liked going to practices with your friends and your coach once mentioned you might have some talent, you may never discover that computer graphic design is your calling. When you take every opportunity to play piano daily in a band, orchestra and private lessons, you could easily miss the once-in-a-lifetime joy of being a member of a field hockey team. Pseudo passions can eat up our days and lay waste to any chance of finding a real ones.

 

This is interesting to me because although our eldest daughter is currently a scholarshipped D1 athlete playing one of her childhood sports she took a medically required break from athletics during the late middle school years. That break put her in a position to go places with her music that I don't think would have been possible if she had continued at the highest level with her sport continuously.  When she was able to go back to her sport she had to be a little creative to continue with both but they were both important to her so she did. [Having a gifted IEP that allowed a hybrid approach with our local high school and our home school certainly made this easier but we fell into this approach because she was looking at outside of the box solutions and we and her school administrators were trying not impede forward progress.] Ironically, I believe that for her science/medicine are her passions above either sport or music and she selected her college based on their molecular biology and biochemistry departments. Although she still plays music (and managed to place into a jazz composition course usually reserved for majors to fulfill a general education requirement) she has decided at this point that there just aren't enough hours in the day to be involved in any kind of ensemble and I think this is wise.  At another point in her life I could see this changing.

[Woodland Mist Academy]

Most of us would probably benefit from periodically asking ourselves why we do what we do. I imagine undiscovered passions and talents are hidden in many of us. Alas, there is only so much time...

[creekland]

I was that child. Began begging for piano lessons at 3, and when mum and dad bought a piano the following year, promptly made it impossible to sleep for several nights while I insisted on playing around on it to the wee hours of the morning. My grandmother who'd have about five years of lessons as a child and read intermediate music somewhat decently worked with me so my parents didn't lose their ever loving minds until I turned 5 and then they found a wonderful piano teacher who was willing to take me.

 

I'm thinking the fact that I used to wake up to train my horse before school - all the way through the darkest winter months even when it was below zero - might put me in that category too.  ;)  (My dad installed lights for me after he saw how serious I was.)  Then I'd work with one or two after school.

 

It was a wonderful part of childhood and teenage years.

 

None of my boys had anywhere near that sort of passion for equines and while they helped us with our pony farm since it's a family deal, I never once pushed them into competitive riding.  It's just not their thing.  If it had been, it would have been awesome (sigh).

[FaithManor]

Sniff, sniff Creekland, I'd come work on your pony farm. I love horses and loved my equestrian lessons. Unfortunately, it was an unsustainable time commitment for me with three boys in high school, a daughter getting married, etc. I had to sell my beloved American Paint with her gorgeous markings. It was like selling my best friend! Frankly, there is no better wake up call in the morning than "horse kisses". She was very precious to me.

 

We have a county commissioner here who grew up showing horses in 4-H and when the county was looking at budget cuts and thought about putting the extension office in a very bad bind, he put his foot down and said, "For the love of a horse, I never, ever got in the kind of trouble that many of my classmates in school did. If we can't fund an organization that provides so much positive experience for the children in our county, then why in hell did we take this job?" They left our funding untouched. Good man!!

 

Anyway, that was off topic, but I just had to say horse passion is good thing for kids!