Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

laughing lioness

College/ $ vent

Recommended Posts

Because none are applying in our department. Believe me, we'd love to accept American applicants, but we barely have any.

 

Are there not that many American students doing graduate work in physics?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there not that many American students doing graduate work in physics?

 

 

nope.

No time to search for the stats at APS specifically for physics, so wiki must suffice:

 

 

  • 55% of Ph.D. students in engineering in the United States are foreign born (2004).[3]
  • Between 1980 and 2000, the percentage of Ph.D. scientists and engineers employed in the United States who were born abroad has increased from 24% to 37%.[3]
  • 45% of Ph.D. physicists working in the United States are foreign born (2004).[3]
  • 80% of total post-doctoral chemical and materials engineering in the United States are foreign-born (1988).[4]
  • 33% of all U.S. Ph.D.s in science and engineering are now awarded to foreign born graduate students (2004).
  • 60% of the top science students and 65 percent of the top math students in the United States are the children of immigrants. In addition, foreign-born high school students make up 50 percent of the 2004 U.S.Math Olympiad’s top scorers, 38 percent of the U.S. Physics Team, and 25 percent of the Intel Science Talent Search finalists—the United States’ most prestigious awards for young scientists and mathematicians.[6]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stats, and I'm not surprised.  I'm inclined to believe this has something to do with the quality of math and science education in our country.  However, this thread has me wondering -- does it also have something to do with money?  Foreign students are well-qualified, I have no doubt.  But they also have to have a good amount of money to get here.  Just kind of thinking out loud.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stats, and I'm not surprised.  I'm inclined to believe this has something to do with the quality of math and science education in our country.  However, this thread has me wondering -- does it also have something to do with money?  Foreign students are well-qualified, I have no doubt.  But they also have to have a good amount of money to get here.  Just kind of thinking out loud.  

 

No, because they don't pay - in physics, grad students are paid by the department. Either free tuition plus a stipend, or a larger stipend that covers tuition.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nope.

No time to search for the stats at APS specifically for physics, so wiki must suffice:

Ok, so this may be for another thread, but are these stats what prompted a STEM approach in the first place? (Now back to your regularly scheduled thread..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, because they don't pay - in physics, grad students are paid by the department. Either free tuition plus a stipend, or a larger stipend that covers tuition.

 

 

Oh, wow!  I had no idea.  So, it is just the cr*ppy American education system, then.  Depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, wow!  I had no idea.  So, it is just the cr*ppy American education system, then.  Depressing.

Not exactly. An American would have a much higher opportunity cost than many foreign grad students. They'd have to live on a grad student stipend and post-docs for years instead of taking a $60,000/year job right after undergrad. Then there's the crap shoot of getting a tenure track position. A foreign student from a country with radically lower wages (oh, Venezuela, for example) has a different calculation to make.

 

Two of dh's university mechanical engineering friends ended up doing PhDs in the US. One is a tenured professor and one is an occasional adjunct/well paid consultant/primary parent. Dh and one other friend won scholarships to study energy economics and an MBA. All of this batch live in the US. Two other friends went to Italy to work. Only 2 out of 8 of the best ME students stayed in Venezuela. That's the global brain drain in action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez I wish we could just have thread in which we all can rant about the cost of education in the U.S. without other people trying to bring others down, whether its the high income parents bringing down the lower income (see: this thread) or the lower income bringing down the higher income (see: this thread). The cost of higher education just sucks all around in this country. Can we at least agree on that? :(

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders recently introduced a bill in Congress to make all public four year universities free with funding primarily coming from small transaction fees on various Wall Street transactions. Of course it won't go anywhere in this Congress, but it's interesting to contemplate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly. An American would have a much higher opportunity cost than many foreign grad students. They'd have to live on a grad student stipend and post-docs for years instead of taking a $60,000/year job right after undergrad. Then there's the crap shoot of getting a tenure track position. A foreign student from a country with radically lower wages (oh, Venezuela, for example) has a different calculation to make.

 

Two of dh's university mechanical engineering friends ended up doing PhDs in the US. One is a tenured professor and one is an occasional adjunct/well paid consultant/primary parent. Dh and one other friend won scholarships to study energy economics and an MBA. All of this batch live in the US. Two other friends went to Italy to work. Only 2 out of 8 of the best ME students stayed in Venezuela. That's the global brain drain in action.

The statistics in finance are similar to those in physics.  Yes, the opportunity cost of American students who want to pursue a PhD are probably different from that of an international student.  Also, international students who want to pursue a PhD in the US tend to concentrate in more mathematical fields.  If, for example, for many international students who are interested in a business field, finance, with relatively less English, is comparatively easier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders recently introduced a bill in Congress to make all public four year universities free with funding primarily coming from small transaction fees on various Wall Street transactions. Of course it won't go anywhere in this Congress, but it's interesting to contemplate.

I personally think it is a horrible idea. While I think college costs are out of control, making it free via federal $$ seems like a straight line to bureaucratic induced academic decline. I would like to see costs come down, but I equally do not want to see our colleges end up being simple extensions our k12 system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so this may be for another thread, but are these stats what prompted a STEM approach in the first place? (Now back to your regularly scheduled thread..."

 

FWIW, this has been going on for a long time. When I was in graduate school in computer science thirty years ago, two-thirds of the graduate students were foreign nationals. I was good friends with the chairman of the graduate program (a Swiss national married to an American that he met in graduate school), and he complained multiple times about the time they spent on visa issues that took away from his research. But he was philosophical about it.  The reality was that many of the American students applying weren't even close to what they expected in terms of GRE's, coming from good schools, references, research experience, etc. He himself came to the U.S. to do graduate work, and he met his wife and stayed.

 

When I decided to give up on my dissertation and just take my M.S., I was one of only two U.S.-born students on the platform among about 20 of us.  The other was my best bud in graduate school, another woman.  Among the PhD's, the only U.S.-born student receiving their degree that day was also a woman.

 

It's disappointing to think that the U.S. still hasn't made progress that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think it is a horrible idea. While I think college costs are out of control, making it free via federal $$ seems like a straight line to bureaucratic induced academic decline. I would like to see costs come down, but I equally do not want to see our colleges end up being simple extensions our k12 system.

 

There are so many reasons why this doesn't make sense right now.

 

When they were talking about free community college for all high school graduates with certain G.P.A and/or score cut-offs, the discussion on my faculty e-mail lists went so viral that I unsubscribed for about a month.

 

Federal programs already cover the community college costs for those with need.  The local studies have shown that students in that category struggle most with issues like transportation, child care, and work schedule issues.  In other words, far more than just tuition.

 

And the projected federal aid covering the tuition for more students would not cover the costs of actually providing them classes because state community college tuition is far less than what it really costs.  It's tight enough with many programs and the number of classes offered actually being less than what we offered before the downturn.  Having a big flood of students would overwhelm us.

 

I looked at my oldest's schedule several weeks ago, and half of the classes he registered for are already full at a community college where most registrations occur in August.  The state system doesn't allow a class to "make" now unless it is 80% full two weeks before classes start.  Last fall they were not able to get full-time loads for hundreds of students because of that sort of thing, and they are expecting it to be just as bad this fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I'm inclined to believe this has something to do with the quality of math and science education in our country.  

 

 

While he's not a physicist, my DH is an old-school electrical engineer and graduated when the requirements were far more stringent for an undergrad EE than they are today.  He and many of his colleges, both professional and academic, feel that students today don't want to go into fields like engineering and physics because they are rigorous and require a lot of hours of work.  Even talented engineering students have to put in a lot of hours, which, of course, leaves less time for partying and a social life.  I think perhaps foreign born students are more expecting and accepting of a difficult work load in college.  This is my opinion only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While he's not a physicist, my DH is an old-school electrical engineer and graduated when the requirements were far more stringent for an undergrad EE than they are today.  He and many of his colleges, both professional and academic, feel that students today don't want to go into fields like engineering and physics because they are rigorous and require a lot of hours of work.  Even talented engineering students have to put in a lot of hours, which, of course, leaves less time for partying and a social life.  I think perhaps foreign born students are more expecting and accepting of a difficult work load in college.  This is my opinion only.

 

Yes, I think that this is an issue as well.  It isn't just a curriculum issue.

 

At the local college where I teach, the majority of new students declare "pre-nursing."  But the nursing retention specialist tells me that the number who actually complete all of the pre-nursing requirements with the right grades and get to the interview stage is very, very small.  She says that most aren't prepared for the hours of studying and time in labs.  

 

Maybe they have other issues outside of school that make that difficult, but time has to be invested. One of my favorite students was a divorced homeschool mom who was living in her mother's basement with six children.  She drove a school bus.  And she's in nursing school now, but maturity and having a place to live and childcare were big factors for her IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

So, here's what triggered this- I call my alma mater- nice Christian college in the midwest- almost 40K a year. Merit $ is 11K. Rest is based on need. We won't get any. Friend from college, pastors family, probably never made over 30K, has retirement, benefits, braces for kids, vacation in Bahamas (yes, I'm serious), kid goes for free. Just seems more than a bit skewed imho. 

 

I hear your vent and read this thread with interest. However, what inspired you to start this thread may have very little to do with what people are talking about here. Your friend's children's free tuition may have less to do with the family income and much more to do with the fact that the children have a parent who is a pastor. 

 

Some schools offer free tuition for the children of pastors, (although often restricted to pastors' families within the same denomination as the college.) Some offer free tuition to any child of their employees, from administration and professors on down to the janitors. These are perks that some denominations and schools provide to the people they employ. Employers sometimes offer nice benefits to attract and keep good employees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son is a junior physics major at a small state university, but it's supposedly ranked high for physics. They begin with about 200 kids and graduate around 30, similar to the Naval Academy. Walt loves physics, but can't stand the profs.He makes top grades. Every semester more and more of his group leave and become math or another science major, and it's not low grades that drive them out. For him, a major disappointment is crazy teachers, rude and demeaning for no apparent reasons. Being able to teach well is only part of being a prof.One tenured, distinguished prof makes 2 kids dress in a squirrel hat each term and toss candy. Yes. Complaining does nothing. Poor, cold teachers really can make kids doubt their choices, believe me. I also think that as a kid gets in to higher level classes and is exposed to more specialized topics, they often find subjects that interest them even more than their original choice. Ds is experiencing this now, there are some mathematic courses that he's so excited about; physics as a career is seeming less interesting.

I don't think there's a lack of intelligent university students. I do think there are not enough jobs for those with science( not specifically physics) PhD's because there is a big increase in foreign work visas for those who can and will work for less. For those PhDs that want to become profs-- the openings are just not there in very large numbers.

There was a good program on PBS called PhDon't that explained a lot of the topics being discussed here.

I wonder how many foreign PhD physics candidates return to their home countries, too. Also-- maybe there aren't any American candidates at Regentrude's university because those with bachelors or masters in physics are finding employment without needing the doctorate? How many undergraduates in physics does your school have, Regentrude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think there are not enough jobs for those with science( not specifically physics) PhD's because there is a big increase in foreign work visas for those who can and will work for less. For those PhDs that want to become profs-- the openings are just not there in very large numbers.

 

But when an employer wants to hire a foreigner and begin work visa proceedings, the first step is the labor certification where the employer must demonstrate that no qualified American candidate has been found for the position, and certify that the foreign employee will obtain the same wages that would be paid to Americans. We have to jump through this hoop for every single hire.

 

Let's not even get started on faculty jobs. As I wrote before, in the last 15 years, we have not hired a single American. The few American candidates who apply don't even make the final round of interviews because they are less qualified.

 

I wonder how many foreign PhD physics candidates return to their home countries, too. Also-- maybe there aren't any American candidates at Regentrude's university because those with bachelors or masters in physics are finding employment without needing the doctorate? How many undergraduates in physics does your school have, Regentrude?

 

We have around 100 undergraduates in our department.

And yes, most of our foreign grad students return to their home countries after receiving their PhD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that. The unemployment rate for PhD scientists is 2.1% (2013), one third of the general unemployment rate in the 25years old or older cohort (6.3%)

 

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf14317/

 

But are they employed in Science?  Also, comparing PhD scientists unemployment to the general population doesn't seem right.  A better comparison would be to unemployment among those with advanced degrees.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But when an employer wants to hire a foreigner and begin work visa proceedings, the first step is the labor certification where the employer must demonstrate that no qualified American candidate has been found for the position, and certify that the foreign employee will obtain the same wages that would be paid to Americans. We have to jump through this hoop for every single hire.

 

Let's not even get started on faculty jobs. As I wrote before, in the last 15 years, we have not hired a single American. The few American candidates who apply don't even make the final round of interviews because they are less qualified.

 

 

We have around 100 undergraduates in our department.

And yes, most of our foreign grad students return to their home countries after receiving their PhD.

Do you have an idea why most return home? They come here, go to school for free, basically, then leave. Are there perhaps more jobs or better paying ones overseas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"But when an employer wants to hire a foreigner and begin work visa proceedings, the first step is the labor certification where the employer must demonstrate that no qualified American candidate has been found for the position, and certify that the foreign employee will obtain the same wages that would be paid to Americans. We have to jump through this hoop for every single hire."

 

I've seen programs on PBS Frontline or Dan Rather's show about this, too. I think it was concerning computer-science jobs. It's not actually that hard to bring foreign workers over according to the investigative report. Basically they can claim there are no qualified Americans and there isn't much follow up. The show detailed several Americans who were laid off and replaced with lower payed foreigners( if I remember correctly this was at Google headquarters). Then they interviewd the foreigners, who were pleased to be there, of course, but upset about the lesser pay, but were fully aware that complaining could get their visas revoked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But when an employer wants to hire a foreigner and begin work visa proceedings, the first step is the labor certification where the employer must demonstrate that no qualified American candidate has been found for the position, and certify that the foreign employee will obtain the same wages that would be paid to Americans. We have to jump through this hoop for every single hire.

 

Let's not even get started on faculty jobs. As I wrote before, in the last 15 years, we have not hired a single American. The few American candidates who apply don't even make the final round of interviews because they are less qualified.

 

 

We have around 100 undergraduates in our department.

And yes, most of our foreign grad students return to their home countries after receiving their PhD.

Is that 100 undergraduates total? How many do you graduate each year? I read recently that there are only 7000 physics undergraduates in the whole country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an idea why most return home? They come here, go to school for free, basically, then leave. Are there perhaps more jobs or better paying ones overseas?

 

First, keep in in mind it is VERY hard to immigrate to the US as a foreigner. You can't just stick around and job hunt. No job=no visa. If you don't have anything lined up right after grad school (or an advisor who keeps you on as a post doc for a while longer), you lose the right to stay. You can't work with a student visa, and in order to obtain a work visa, an employer needs to start the proceedings - you can't just apply for that yourself and then see whether you get a job.

 

Many of the foreign grad students had planned to go home from the beginning and just come for their education. Not everybody wants to stay in a different country; they have family back home, and ties to their cultures.

Also, many are not sufficiently qualified to be competetive for a position in academia in the US, but have no trouble getting hired for a faculty position back home - this is a very typical path. Just because a person is capable of receiving a PhD in physics does not make them qualified to obtain a position in academia in this country. Many of our foreign graduate students have gone on to teach back home.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that 100 undergraduates total? How many do you graduate each year?

 

Well, approximately a quarter of those, so around 20-25.

 

I read recently that there are only 7000 physics undergraduates in the whole country.

 

That is not correct. The number of Bachelors degrees per year awarded in physics is 7,000. (7,329 in 2012-13, to be precise).

 

http://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/rosters/physrost134.pdf

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in our state to sit for the PE you have to have an engineering undergrad...even if you took engineering post grad work, you still have to have that undergrad degree in engineering. I believe this is a fairly recent development.

 

So if you want a job using your PE license, you really need to get that degree. (there are jobs out there for non licensed engineers, but the payscale is better for licensed PEs)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that what most people believe is necessary for a middle-class lifestyle in terms of security: college savings, retirement savings, a rainy day fund, and a fixed-rate 20-year mortgage, is simply not attainable on the actual middle-class salary, or even a salary much, much higher than that. (See http://www.cheatsheet.com/personal-finance/how-do-you-know-when-youre-making-good-money.html/?a=viewall#ixzz3aR3gS1Fl).

 

Moreover, the real problem that people face is not a worse car (everyone's cars break down, and a Corolla is very cheap and highly reliable and cheap to fix, and is not as nice as that I saw many poorer people drive) or uglier house or whatever. It's insecurity. And insecurity goes all the way up to $120k or so particularly if you have four kids.

 

I know you think you could do SO MUCH with that cash, and it's true. You could. You have about 10 areas of your life society expects you to take care of securely. With $25k you can take care of maybe one or two--food and shelter. $35k gets you clothing and transport. $45k and you have day care. Okay, now where are we at? What else do we need? College savings, retirement savings, homeownership, a rainy day fund, and a proper education (music, language, sport) for the kids. Society tells us that we should be able to take care of those. That's what it means to be a responsible adult.

 

And those cost more than $50k or $75k or even $100k if you have a family of four, particularly if you've already had your rainy day!

 

So it's easy to say, "Oh, you're FINE."

 

But nobody feels fine until they have what they believe is a solid middle-class life for their kids, and that costs way more than the median salary in this country.

 

And then if the same people think that "need met" means scholarships (really it usually means more loans than any poor child should ever be burdened with), it feels unfair.

 

And the language is splitting hairs. What we really have in this country is a wage gap going all the way up and a seriously deficient social safety net and education and health system so everyone feels on the brink.

 

I really think the issue of security is huge.  Lower incomes, but sure that you will have stable access to a home, can save without it disappearing all of a sudden, medical care, is just hugely different than an unstable situation even if you are making good money right now.

 

I tend to think far fewer people need a university education and that would be better in many ways, but knowing that opportunities to learn a stable job or career will be there is an important part of that security.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not generally true - it depends entirely on the field. In many fields, an undergrad degree gets a good job. In others, not so much.

 

I think overall, there has been a startling amount of degree inflation. 

 

The question isn't so much can you get good job with such and such a program, but is what you learn in that program really a prerequisite for doing that kind of work and is it really the appropriate level to have the learning take place?

 

There are many jobs now which people need an undergraduate degree for - say, nursing - which a generation ago did not require a degree.  While there is some disagreement, there are real questions about whether the university graduates are really better equipped than the ones in the old system were - some argue that they are less well-equipped.  The programs  however are generally more expensive and can take longer to produce nurses (in fact in many places nursing students got paid for working in hospitals as students, aside from room and board.  You can imagine what a boon that would have been to students who had little money, and hospitals who needed staff.)

 

I could alternately give the example of my aunt, who with her nursing school training went into addictions counseling where she was very successful.  Today to get the same position here  normally requires a masters degree, but again it is pretty questionable whether that is a sensible use of people's time or money - the work isn't substantially different.

 

Journalism used to be largely people who were in some way self-educated, today most seem to have either diplomas or degrees.

 

My sister and husband - in computers and sciences respectively - are both in university programs now not because they really need them to grow in their work - they can do the work and know how to learn - but because in order to advance they need a higher level of qualification.

 

And on the other hand now some of the more entry level functions of these jobs are split off and have their own lower level programs, which have to be paid for too but have less possibility for vertical advancement. (unless people pay for another program.)

 

It all just seems so inefficient, and I can't help but think - of course a system so inefficient will be expensive.  I am all for university education for its own sake - that isn't meant to be efficient in a utilitarian sense - but that isn't what so many people are so worried about - they are worried about their kids getting jobs and what the cost is to qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stats, and I'm not surprised.  I'm inclined to believe this has something to do with the quality of math and science education in our country.  However, this thread has me wondering -- does it also have something to do with money?  Foreign students are well-qualified, I have no doubt.  But they also have to have a good amount of money to get here.  Just kind of thinking out loud.  

 

I'm in Canada, and university is cheaper here, but foreign students are being specifically sought out by many universities to make up the numbers they need.  Domestic students aren't applying in great numbers, but it is not because the students are not qualified.

 

The suggestion is that either they just don't have the money, they don't see that it is worth the money, or that they don't want that kind of training.  I suspect all three are part of the reason.

 

The thing for the universities is that they have so much infrastructure to keep up that they can't just get rid of, even if this idea that great swathes of the population ought to have a university degree turns out to be untrue, they have to somehow come up with the money to keep it u.  So - look for students who can pay more, or find a way to teach a lot of people very cheaply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By claiming your college age children as dependents on your taxes you are keeping them from qualifying from the financial aid they need and your EFC is higher. If they file independently and don't earn very much (or any) income then they will have a very low EFC and be able to get grants and loans. My own parents didn't realize this and ended up with an EFC far more than my education cost! As a result I didn't get any financial aid and they ended up paying for everything. When my husband and I got married our EFC was $0 so we both got enough money in grants to pay for our education. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By claiming your college age children as dependents on your taxes you are keeping them from qualifying from the financial aid they need and your EFC is higher. If they file independently and don't earn very much (or any) income then they will have a very low EFC and be able to get grants and loans. My own parents didn't realize this and ended up with an EFC far more than my education cost! As a result I didn't get any financial aid and they ended up paying for everything. When my husband and I got married our EFC was $0 so we both got enough money in grants to pay for our education.

Receiving independent status is more than just not being claimed on taxes. Being married does establish independent status.

 

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/fafsa-dependency.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Receiving independent status is more than just not being claimed on taxes. Being married does establish independent status.

 

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/fafsa-dependency.pdf

 

Bummer! I didn't realize all that was needed to qualify for independent status. I guess people should just join the military or get married young! lol jk But in our case we did both... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michelle Kretzschmar of DIY College Rankings is putting out an ebook on her favorite research tools.

 

It's free for a few days, then 3 bucks.  I haven't read the book yet, but her blog has lots of great tips on finding schools that are generous with aid.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Creating-College-Lists-Websites-Education-ebook/dp/B00XGZORBY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michelle Kretzschmar of DIY College Rankings is putting out an ebook on her favorite research tools.

 

It's free for a few days, then 3 bucks.  I haven't read the book yet, but her blog has lots of great tips on finding schools that are generous with aid.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Creating-College-Lists-Websites-Education-ebook/dp/B00XGZORBY

 

Thanks for posting! My dd just sent me the DIY link the other day, she'll be excited about the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"But when an employer wants to hire a foreigner and begin work visa proceedings, the first step is the labor certification where the employer must demonstrate that no qualified American candidate has been found for the position, and certify that the foreign employee will obtain the same wages that would be paid to Americans. We have to jump through this hoop for every single hire."

 

I've seen programs on PBS Frontline or Dan Rather's show about this, too. I think it was concerning computer-science jobs. It's not actually that hard to bring foreign workers over according to the investigative report. Basically they can claim there are no qualified Americans and there isn't much follow up. The show detailed several Americans who were laid off and replaced with lower payed foreigners( if I remember correctly this was at Google headquarters). Then they interviewd the foreigners, who were pleased to be there, of course, but upset about the lesser pay, but were fully aware that complaining could get their visas revoked.

 

At a former employer they would find the foreign worker first that they wanted to hire, take their resume and then write the job requirements to the resume.  They would get silly specific.  Then any American that applied was either over or under-qualified, or didn't have the right qualifications.  After that I learned to recognize those job postings and not bother.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At a former employer they would find the foreign worker first that they wanted to hire, take their resume and then write the job requirements to the resume.  They would get silly specific.  Then any American that applied was either over or under-qualified, or didn't have the right qualifications.  After that I learned to recognize those job postings and not bother.  

 

I agree. My former employers did this when hiring post-docs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At a former employer they would find the foreign worker first that they wanted to hire, take their resume and then write the job requirements to the resume. They would get silly specific. Then any American that applied was either over or under-qualified, or didn't have the right qualifications. After that I learned to recognize those job postings and not bother.

Several friends that work for a major US tech company say this dedinitely goes on where they work. Their company wants to hire who they consider best for the job and will do what is necessary to realize that goal.

 

In the case of US workers being replaced by foreigners and sometimes even forced to train their replacement, the reports I've read and seen seem to indicate this is more about either trying to pay lower wages and/or having employees that are much easier to control. In some cases, the hires are working insane hours for mediocre pay, but don't have the option of finding a different job in the US while on a H1-B visa.

 

During the latest round of immigration talk, I think there was finally some recognition that both of these practices do exist and can affect qualified US workers. The arguements previously were all about the lack of qualified US STEM grads, but shifted somewhat to the idea that foreigners are more likely to start new companies and thus ultimately create more jobs.

 

Studies I've read do show an economic benefit for everyone to having more highly educated and skilled people in the workforce and importing talent is an easy way to do that. But some of the abuses of the current system do need to be addressed to give qualified residents a fair shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am getting really scared!  DD is in 10th this year, going into 11th next year, so I am just starting to read some of the college threads... This is so complicated!  We are not going to qualify for any need based aid.  We do "okay", but not enough to pay the kind of numbers I'm seeing around. DD is amenable to going the 2:2 route, and going to a state college.  But one of the state colleges she likes only gives really good scholarships to freshmen, and if she does 2:2 she won't qualify for a lot of those.  

 

So when it comes time, do we apply to some of these state colleges "just to see what happens"?  She hasn't tested ACT /SAT yet, but if it correllates to school performance at all, I would guess she might be middle upper end.  Not "outstanding" but probably "above average".  Is that even worth trying to apply for?  Do just "above average" ever get scholarships when you are not need based?

 

I'm so confused...  :willy_nilly:

 

Yes they do! My ds is an above average student, who doesn't qualify for any need-based aid, and he was offered merit scholarships at all four state schools he applied to. He would have also received merit scholarships from the Christian colleges in our state. I don't know if he would have gotten anything from a private college. He didn't apply to any because we couldn't begin to afford it, and they usually don't offer his major.

 

If you look at the college's website, often state schools and Christian colleges will spell out scholarship monies offered based on test scores. That being said, it was our experience that college was going to cost us, after merit scholarships, between $15-$20,000 per year no matter if he went to a state school or a Christian college. One state school was $12,000 because ds's above average test scores made him a big fish at their school. But he isn't going to attend there because it was a poor academic match and weak in his major.

 

ETA:  We specifically looked at schools where ds would qualify for their honors program, to off-set the under-matching that allowed him to qualify for merit aid. And we live in the Midwest and ds wanted to stay in the Midwest so he applied to three in-state schools and one out-of-state school. His merit scholarships were based solely on his GPA and test scores and not geographic or racial diversity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She hasn't tested ACT /SAT yet, but if it correllates to school performance at all, I would guess she might be middle upper end.  Not "outstanding" but probably "above average".  Is that even worth trying to apply for?  Do just "above average" ever get scholarships when you are not need based?

 

 

Yes they do! My ds is an above average student, who doesn't qualify for any need-based aid, and he was offered merit scholarships at all four state schools he applied to. He would have also received merit scholarships from the Christian colleges in our state. I don't know if he would have gotten anything from a private college. He didn't apply to any because we couldn't begin to afford it, and they usually don't offer his major.

 

If you look at the college's website, often state schools and Christian colleges will spell out scholarship monies offered based on test scores. That being said, it was our experience that college was going to cost us, after merit scholarships, between $15-$20,000 per year no matter if he went to a state school or a Christian college. 

 

I have to agree with Mom2boys. Yes, non-superstar, just "above average" students can and do get decent merit-based aid.

 

My son is a decent student, when he cares enough to try or when (as in high school) he has someone (me) walking behind him and kicking him to stay on track. He's extremely bright, but essentially unmotivated when it comes to anything academic. He had a year of dual enrollment at the community college and a couple of CLEPs, but no APs. He ended high school with an unweighted GPA  just above 3.7, and his highest ACT score was 27.

 

The basic cost to attend one of our state universities (tuition + housing + meals, not counting books or "other expenses") runs about $15,000 a year. At the campus that would have made sense for him to attend as a performing arts major, his grades/scores would have qualified him for $2,000 per year in scholarship. Bright Futures, our statewide scholarship program, kicks in another $2,000-ish as long as he attends college in Florida. So, our out-of-pocket to have him attend a state university, which we used as a baseline for comparison to other options, would have been about $11,000 a year. That works out to a few thousand less than our official EFC. 

 

He ended up choosing not to apply to any of the state universities, because he felt so strongly that he wanted a smaller, more nurturing environment in which to learn. He applied to a slate of private colleges and universities both in-state and elsewhere, with the understanding that, if none of them came through with an appropriate combination of admission to the school and acceptance to his program(s) of choice and enough scholarship money to bring his annual cost of attendance to within a certain range, he would be committing himself to two years of community college before applying to transfer somewhere.

 

When the dust settled, he had roughly comparable offers from three schools: one medium-sized private in-state university with a program he loved, one small out-of-state college where he loved the vibe but wasn't sure about the location or the quality of the training he'd receive in his field, and one smallish campus of an out-of-state university that was sort of in-between the other two on most measures and whose main attraction was its proximity to New York City. All three offered aid packages  -- combining both academic and performance-based scholarships -- that brought our annual out-of-pocket expenses down to below our EFC and "close enough" to our baseline to make the cost manageable, especially if our son took out minimal student loans (a price he was willing to pay to attend the school of his choice). A fourth, also private, is close enough that he could have lived at home, which, combined with the academic scholarships offered, would have made it a financial contender, too.

 

Fortunately, he had already fallen in love with the in-state option before we got the final financial info from the various schools. He completed his freshman year there earlier this month and has been happy and thriving there. We all feel confident he landed in just the right place.

 

So, yes, "just above average" students can still do well with scholarships, as long as they apply strategically and pursue every opportunity to get those monies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as one looks for schools where one is in the top 25% (or sometimes more) of stats AND the school offers merit aid, kids can get scholarships.  

 

Look for US New's "Best Buy" schools too.  I know York College in PA is one of those.  Kids from our school get some merit offers from there with around 1600 on the SAT (all three sections) and graduates I know seem to have done well.

 

Susquehanna, Juniata, and McDaniel are all popular schools kids from my area tend to go to (beside our state schools).  There are others too.  Grove City is popular among Christians.  They have a lower sticker cost for those who are full pay and want a "better buy."

 

And again, don't forget Nova Southeastern in FL.  We liked them quite a bit on our visit and they are among those I would consider to be very good with aid.  Youngest is enjoying Eckerd.  Oldest enjoyed Covenant.

 

Find a school that matches the student.  My 1920 SAT guy wasn't going to get good (esp merit) aid from a top school, and he's also unlikely to get in or do well keeping up once there (since he doesn't have the best study/work ethic).  He's doing ok where he's at though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. After I discovered WTM I was happy my kids were 4 years apart. We could do the same 4-year history cycle, I wouldn't have two high schoolers at the same time, I'd get a break between college madness, etc. Then I started looking at financial aid and I realized it's going to affect us to not have two kids in college at the same time. Makes me want to give the oldest a couple of gap years....  :)

 

Me too! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have we discussed this article before. It is a couple of years old, but hits on several points in this thread:

 

Meet the High Priest of Runaway College Inflation (He Regrets Nothing)

 

I found it while researching for George Washington University where a good friend of Sailor Dude's was just accepted.

 

The fact that not only did he do this, but he's actually proud of it, is just... twisted.

 

 

 

The way Trachtenberg saw it, selling George Washington over the other schools was like selling one brand of vodka over another. Vodka, he points out, is a colorless, odorless liquid that varies little by maker. He realized the same was true among national private universities: It was as simple as raising the price and upgrading the packaging to create the illusion of quality. Trachtenberg gambled that prospective students would see costly tuition as a sign of quality, and he was right.

 

:banghead:  :banghead:  :banghead: :banghead:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I am pretty surprised at the figure given in the first part of the story, that the average American student accumulates an average of $24,300 of debt to earn their diploma.  That actually doesn't seem that bad to me.  That's basically a new car, and not even a really fancy new car, that's like a basic model Honda Accord.  I would surely think that a diploma would be worth the price of one car.  Am I missing something from that statistic?  I mean, of course, it would be awesome to get the degree without any debt, but I guess I thought that figure would be higher.  I think that isn't too unreasonable.  Am I wrong?  I really am open to someone changing my mind on that.  I was thinking it was much higher than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I am pretty surprised at the figure given in the first part of the story, that the average American student accumulates an average of $24,300 of debt to earn their diploma. That actually doesn't seem that bad to me. That's basically a new car, and not even a really fancy new car, that's like a basic model Honda Accord. I would surely think that a diploma would be worth the price of one car. Am I missing something from that statistic? I mean, of course, it would be awesome to get the degree without any debt, but I guess I thought that figure would be higher. I think that isn't too unreasonable. Am I wrong? I really am open to someone changing my mind on that. I was thinking it was much higher than that.

Students are only allowed to take out about 5500-7000/year in loans on their own. I think what they're leaving out is family/parental debt like Parent Plus loans, second mortgages, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus, some of us think $25,000 for a car is unreasonable also. ;-)

 

$25K is a lot if you can't find a job. And that's the average so a lot have more than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I am pretty surprised at the figure given in the first part of the story, that the average American student accumulates an average of $24,300 of debt to earn their diploma.  That actually doesn't seem that bad to me.  That's basically a new car, and not even a really fancy new car, that's like a basic model Honda Accord.  I would surely think that a diploma would be worth the price of one car.  Am I missing something from that statistic?  I mean, of course, it would be awesome to get the degree without any debt, but I guess I thought that figure would be higher.  I think that isn't too unreasonable.  Am I wrong?  I really am open to someone changing my mind on that.  I was thinking it was much higher than that.

 

 

Students are only allowed to take out about 5500-7000/year in loans on their own. I think what they're leaving out is family/parental debt like Parent Plus loans, second mortgages, etc...

 

Yes, the entire "student loan debt" # is completely an illusion.  B/c the federal gov't caps the actual amt that students can take out by themselves, that is the # quoted as the total student debt.  Completely bogus.  Parents or parents as cosigners are accumulating massive amts of debt.  A family's EFC has to be covered.  If you don't have thousands of dollars sitting in a 529 or some other acct to cover college costs, it either has to come from your annual income or LOANS.  (And while I do not have any real #s and am only guessing, I would suspect the majority of families are taking out parent loans to foot the bill.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I am pretty surprised at the figure given in the first part of the story, that the average American student accumulates an average of $24,300 of debt to earn their diploma.  That actually doesn't seem that bad to me.  That's basically a new car, and not even a really fancy new car, that's like a basic model Honda Accord.  I would surely think that a diploma would be worth the price of one car.  Am I missing something from that statistic?  I mean, of course, it would be awesome to get the degree without any debt, but I guess I thought that figure would be higher.  I think that isn't too unreasonable.  Am I wrong?  I really am open to someone changing my mind on that.  I was thinking it was much higher than that.

 

But the $24K only represents the student's debt — it's not even close to the full cost, and it doesn't include the parent's portion of debt. Four years of tuition/room/board at most public uni's is closer to $24K per year, so around $100K for 4 yrs, and at private schools the cost is $200-250K. So the question is more like "Is a diploma is worth the price of a small house?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the $24K only represents the student's debt — it's not even close to the full cost, and it doesn't include the parent's portion of debt. Four years of tuition/room/board at most public uni's is closer to $24K per year, so around $100K for 4 yrs, and at private schools the cost is $200-250K. So the question is more like "Is a diploma is worth the price of a small house?"

 

From a purely financial POV, the statistics answer the bolded question for the average clearly with "yes".

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/02/11/the-rising-cost-of-not-going-to-college/

 

The issue with averages is, of course: there are disciplines in which a college degree never shows any ROI - and then there are fields where graduates earn starting salaries of 60k+ and have easily recovered their investment in a  few short years.

As always, whether incurring large college debt is prudent and sensible financially depends entirely on the major.

 

What the experience and education (not the piece of paper) is worth to them aside from monetary gain has to be determined by each individual family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...