I've just returned from an informal session with some students participating in a mentoring program sponsored and run by 100 Black Men of Chicago. They work with African American high school boys on topics from academics to health; I was asked to do a college presentation and work individually with some of their seniors. And I have to say how inspired I am after that session.
About ten students were there (including one girl, the sister of one of the boys), with six seniors and the rest from other classes. The seniors by and large had actually done most of their applications and some had even heard back from the colleges they had applied to! I was pleasantly surprised to learn that they'd really done their homework. The biggest issue I ended up illuminating for them was college costs: Most said they'd been told by their teachers that going out of state for college would cost them more than staying in state. I quickly put that myth to rest and did an impromptu college financial aid presentation, which visibly relieved not only the students but also the mentors.
The range of aspiration varied but I could tell that with enough lead time any one of the boys there could probably do well enough in high school to attend a decent college. The most prepared had actually visited Pepperdine, and knew a great deal about the process. But all the seniors except one had at least put in an application. And they seemed not to be very stressed about it.
The other concept I wish I'd had more time to talk about is "fit." The sister who was there said she'd gotten several full ride scholarship offers as well as some partial scholarships. I said that was great but that she should be sure to go to a school that met her needs, not just one that was free. I think she took that to heart because I saw her writing information down and going through the "compare colleges" pages of the College Board site that I'd steered her to.
One reason I'm so inspired by this Saturday morning meeting is that it was good to see kids and their mentors focused on college and trying to make a difference in their lives. I was impressed by the men in the room and felt that they were putting a lot of themselves out there for the good of the next generation. I confess that I don't see middle class and prosperous African American adult males in groups very often, so I was humbled and full of admiration at the same time. I realized how provincial I am despite my best intentions, but I was greeted and thanked warmly, given plenty of time to do my presentation and share in the men's desire to do something right with and for these boys.
Another reason for my excitement is the wonderful contrast between working with this group and working with the families of my former employer. The freshness and eagerness of the African American boys I saw today stood in such contrast to the constipated dreams of the parents I once worked with. These were parents for whom having to go to Tufts instead of Brown was a major tragedy; for whom not getting into a "name" school was simply "unacceptable" and a failure (of mine, not their child's); for whom any little twig of advantage had to be grabbed to give someone already supremely privileged another "edge" into Valhalla.
It's such a relief to be out of that niggardly, grasping, contentious, and status-anxious world. It feels so immensely better to be devoting my time and talents to students and parents who can really use my help and who actually appreciate it, who believe that hard work really does matter, not just who you know or how you construct yourself according to some nasty "How to Get Into College Book." I think that the kids I work with now are more authentic and actually more desirable in many ways, despite academic lacunae, and that with the right support an inspiration early enough they could do just as well as the overbred scions of the crafty elite. Let's not forget that George Bush drank and C'd his way through Yale; I'd put up any of the kids I've met in the last year against him and feel confident they could do better at running a country, never mind four years in college.
I haven't looked back at my former school with anything much more than pity since I left (not voluntarily but willingly). The endless agonizing over iotas of meaning in instructions and points on tests, the ceaseless strategizing that finally erodes any traces of interesting character traits, the fierce determination to "win" at any cost, and the sad Bataan death march that is high school for these students, even one that purports to give them so much (that's another story), left me feeling sorry for them and pity for their parents. But in the end there was no real help for them--they all wanted what they wanted and refused to accept less than that, despite the fact that they received more than they deserved in the first place. I'm glad to be with kids and adults who see the world head on and are willing to take it as it comes, rather than always trying to find a way around it; I'm glad to see the spark in a young African American boy's face when you tell him he can indeed go to college. I live for that now and feel like it's what I should have been doing before.
It takes time to learn these things--but better late than never.
Showing posts with label financial aid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label financial aid. Show all posts
October 18, 2008
April 16, 2008
Is Free Tuition Really Free?
I know you shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth (and surely there's a 21st century version of that around somewhere...), and I support colleges' and universities' using more of their endowments to ease the financial burden on families with low incomes. In fact, I work with first-generation and underserved students, so anything that eases their way to college I support. But I wonder about the implications of a "free" college education: By not asking a student or family to make any financial commitment to a college education, how will that change the dynamic between them and the college or university? And how will it affect the way a student values that education?
I've worked with the Daniel Murphy Foundation here in Chicago for a number of years. They help talented 8th graders from needy families attend private schools here and elsewhere by providing a scholarship and by getting the host schools to kick in most of the resrt of the tuition. But no matter how financially needy the family is, they are asked to contribute something to their child's education. This seems proper to me because it asks the family to back up its generalized support of its son or daughter with hard cold cash, a measure of its commitment. It's a commonplace that we value most what we pay for, and I think that applies here, too.
One might say that disadvantaged families are already in enough of an economic bind but I'm not talking about asking for anything that the family can't handle. The DMSF pegs its request of the family to income and families are able to pay it. It's not about the money; it's about the commitment. Since most of the colleges and universities eliminating loans and so on are in the elite crowd, perhaps their status automatically generates commitment from the families, but I think if someone comes up to you and hands you a diamond for free, you're going to wonder about whether it's stolen or a cubic zirconium. Without a price tag it's hard to gauge the value of the item. And I don't think it's unfair to ask students to shoulder some kind of debt if they really want the kind of education that a college can give. Again, not anything crushing (save that for law school or med school) but enough to keep their eyes on the academic prize.
My other reservation about the rush to give away the store is that it only benefits a handful of students at a time and only at the very point of entry to college. All that money might be better used to strengthen the educational prospects of more students from disadvantaged backgrounds sooner, so there might be a greater number of first generation and underserved students in the application pool. Right now, colleges' and universities' largesse is passive, not active: It rewards those who have made it through the American educational system but hasn't actively affected it. In a sense it validates a Darwinian process of survival of the fittest instead of attacking many of the inequities of the system at their root.
The economic might of the Harvards, Yales, Amhersts, and so on might be better used to inject life and hope into needy schools starting at 9th grade or even earlier, helping them build strong foundations for their students as they prepare for college. By taking a more active role in education, by considering themselves part of a K-16 educational continuum rather than the beneficiaries of the results of "educational selection," colleges and universities might have a much greater and more significant effect on the education of America's least served but not undertalented students. So two cheers for spending more of their endowments, but a third cheer in reserve for when colleges and universities really take up the task of improving American education where it needs it the most.
I've worked with the Daniel Murphy Foundation here in Chicago for a number of years. They help talented 8th graders from needy families attend private schools here and elsewhere by providing a scholarship and by getting the host schools to kick in most of the resrt of the tuition. But no matter how financially needy the family is, they are asked to contribute something to their child's education. This seems proper to me because it asks the family to back up its generalized support of its son or daughter with hard cold cash, a measure of its commitment. It's a commonplace that we value most what we pay for, and I think that applies here, too.
One might say that disadvantaged families are already in enough of an economic bind but I'm not talking about asking for anything that the family can't handle. The DMSF pegs its request of the family to income and families are able to pay it. It's not about the money; it's about the commitment. Since most of the colleges and universities eliminating loans and so on are in the elite crowd, perhaps their status automatically generates commitment from the families, but I think if someone comes up to you and hands you a diamond for free, you're going to wonder about whether it's stolen or a cubic zirconium. Without a price tag it's hard to gauge the value of the item. And I don't think it's unfair to ask students to shoulder some kind of debt if they really want the kind of education that a college can give. Again, not anything crushing (save that for law school or med school) but enough to keep their eyes on the academic prize.
My other reservation about the rush to give away the store is that it only benefits a handful of students at a time and only at the very point of entry to college. All that money might be better used to strengthen the educational prospects of more students from disadvantaged backgrounds sooner, so there might be a greater number of first generation and underserved students in the application pool. Right now, colleges' and universities' largesse is passive, not active: It rewards those who have made it through the American educational system but hasn't actively affected it. In a sense it validates a Darwinian process of survival of the fittest instead of attacking many of the inequities of the system at their root.
The economic might of the Harvards, Yales, Amhersts, and so on might be better used to inject life and hope into needy schools starting at 9th grade or even earlier, helping them build strong foundations for their students as they prepare for college. By taking a more active role in education, by considering themselves part of a K-16 educational continuum rather than the beneficiaries of the results of "educational selection," colleges and universities might have a much greater and more significant effect on the education of America's least served but not undertalented students. So two cheers for spending more of their endowments, but a third cheer in reserve for when colleges and universities really take up the task of improving American education where it needs it the most.
October 31, 2007
Who Gets to Have Financial Aid?
I admit at the outset of this post that I do not have children. However, I do have a niece in 5th grade and a nephew in kindergarten. Several years ago I created a 529 account for their college tuitions with Wells Fargo. I put in a small sum each month through payroll deduction and have had the satisfaction of seeing that amount grow significantly. The 529 program even has an automatic adjustment: it goes for riskier (and therefore more profitable) ventures early on, then, as the child gets closer to college, it becomes more conservative to maintain the buying power of the account. I've been thrilled to be their benefactor, not to mention watch the money grow.
As a college counselor I've always been more than a bit taken aback when middle and upper middle class parents, people who should know better, ask, when their high school senior children are in my office talking about college, "Where are we going to get the money?" There's no denying that college is expensive, with several schools recently breaking the $50K mark. College costs a lot. But I have to ask these parents (in my head, usually), "You've had this child for 17 years, did you not see this coming??" Many of the parents I've worked with over the last few years have advanced degrees, many generations of college-going in the family, and even experience teaching in colleges and universities, so surely they had some idea that their children would need tuition money when they turned 18.
It's fairly ridiculous to see a prosperous adult sputtering over the cost of college as though it were an unforeseen event like an auto accident. I feel sorry for those people. I have even heard some parents who HAVE saved for college lamenting that they'll now have to use Joanie's college fund for, well, COLLEGE! (I'm not making this up...)
I also wonder whether, as with many things, financial aid, which is supposed to be sort of a stopgap measure to help people, has turned into its opposite, a reward for not planning ahead. Families who could have saved but didn't throw themselves on the mercy of colleges and ask for help. When they get it, others see how easy it is and figure they don't have to do too much to get the prize. I realize this is overstating the case, of course: Plenty of middle-class families struggle to pay their bills and keep up with day-to-day expenses, having little margin for long-term saving. But I'm not talking about those families. I'm talking about families who earn plenty and should know better. (I've also noticed that college reps talk about FA as if it's all gift money, de-emphasizing the loan part as if students or families shouldn't have to take ANY financial responsibility for their educations. This seems fair for students from low-income families, but not for those who could have planned better. Colleges should have the courage to say, "You may not be able to afford us." And THAT, of course, goes against the ideal of equal access even as it might appeal to the "up by your own bootstraps" myth.)
With the increasing focus on recruiting first generation and minority students, I'd like to make a suggestion that might help colleges make their financial aid budgets go a little farther. It would require more financial accountability from families instead of relying on a snapshot of recent income and so on and would reward those who have planned ahead instead of those who "forgot." (Steve Martin used to do a bit where he said, "You'll never have to pay taxes again if you remember two little words when the IRS comes for you--'I...FORGOT.'")
Aside from the FAFSA and CSS and any other forms, colleges should also require proof that a family has planned in some way for college over a decent period of time. I'd say from a child's birth but perhaps that's too draconian, so let's say from middle school. It wouldn't have to be a lot, but it should represent the parents' commitment to the child's future. (Remember, it's one they know is coming, like retirement.) Perhaps for parents who have 401(k) accounts some of this can be credited to the child's college, although the 529 programs seem perfectly adequate.
I'm not suggesting that this kind of long term college saving should equal the total cost of college, but it should represent a reasonable percentage of a family's income over time and, as I've said, demonstrate a significant commitment to the eventual cost of college.
This program would certainly require more paperwork for everyone, at least at first, but if the requirement were simplified to be "every child should have a 529 account or similar" in his or her background (given a certain level of income and education) then it could be simpler. Using this requirement as a yardstick, it's probable that a good number of families would not qualify for financial aid at some institutions. Therefore not only would the colleges have more money to give to those who really deserve it, they would also have more spaces to fill with qualified minority students because the undeserving (those who didn't plan) would not be able to afford the tab.
With the need to "fill beds" paramount, this kind of proposal is probably dead in the water for most colleges. However, if they adopted the idea and agreed not to begin applying it for another six years or so, they'd give people time to adjust and think ahead. Big announcements could be made, and along with information about classes and so on they could send out suggestions about long-term saving for college. Each college could decide for itself what a reasonable financial commitment over time could be (although competition might drive that expectation too low unless there was an overall agreement about a floor of some kind) and each could be flexible, especially in the first few years. Ultimately, people would get used to the idea, and, not incidentally, the savings rate in the U.S. might rise somewhat from its current miserable single-digit amount.
I don't know how a joint announcement through NACAC or ACE or whoever would go over with anti-trust people, but it seems to me this proposal isn't about setting levels of FA but about repositioning schools in relation to their applicants and families in a way that might make everyone more responsible. I think this idea is worth debating so the vast amounts now spent on financial aid can be rewards for those who really saved and genuine help for those who really need it.
As a college counselor I've always been more than a bit taken aback when middle and upper middle class parents, people who should know better, ask, when their high school senior children are in my office talking about college, "Where are we going to get the money?" There's no denying that college is expensive, with several schools recently breaking the $50K mark. College costs a lot. But I have to ask these parents (in my head, usually), "You've had this child for 17 years, did you not see this coming??" Many of the parents I've worked with over the last few years have advanced degrees, many generations of college-going in the family, and even experience teaching in colleges and universities, so surely they had some idea that their children would need tuition money when they turned 18.
It's fairly ridiculous to see a prosperous adult sputtering over the cost of college as though it were an unforeseen event like an auto accident. I feel sorry for those people. I have even heard some parents who HAVE saved for college lamenting that they'll now have to use Joanie's college fund for, well, COLLEGE! (I'm not making this up...)
I also wonder whether, as with many things, financial aid, which is supposed to be sort of a stopgap measure to help people, has turned into its opposite, a reward for not planning ahead. Families who could have saved but didn't throw themselves on the mercy of colleges and ask for help. When they get it, others see how easy it is and figure they don't have to do too much to get the prize. I realize this is overstating the case, of course: Plenty of middle-class families struggle to pay their bills and keep up with day-to-day expenses, having little margin for long-term saving. But I'm not talking about those families. I'm talking about families who earn plenty and should know better. (I've also noticed that college reps talk about FA as if it's all gift money, de-emphasizing the loan part as if students or families shouldn't have to take ANY financial responsibility for their educations. This seems fair for students from low-income families, but not for those who could have planned better. Colleges should have the courage to say, "You may not be able to afford us." And THAT, of course, goes against the ideal of equal access even as it might appeal to the "up by your own bootstraps" myth.)
With the increasing focus on recruiting first generation and minority students, I'd like to make a suggestion that might help colleges make their financial aid budgets go a little farther. It would require more financial accountability from families instead of relying on a snapshot of recent income and so on and would reward those who have planned ahead instead of those who "forgot." (Steve Martin used to do a bit where he said, "You'll never have to pay taxes again if you remember two little words when the IRS comes for you--'I...FORGOT.'")
Aside from the FAFSA and CSS and any other forms, colleges should also require proof that a family has planned in some way for college over a decent period of time. I'd say from a child's birth but perhaps that's too draconian, so let's say from middle school. It wouldn't have to be a lot, but it should represent the parents' commitment to the child's future. (Remember, it's one they know is coming, like retirement.) Perhaps for parents who have 401(k) accounts some of this can be credited to the child's college, although the 529 programs seem perfectly adequate.
I'm not suggesting that this kind of long term college saving should equal the total cost of college, but it should represent a reasonable percentage of a family's income over time and, as I've said, demonstrate a significant commitment to the eventual cost of college.
This program would certainly require more paperwork for everyone, at least at first, but if the requirement were simplified to be "every child should have a 529 account or similar" in his or her background (given a certain level of income and education) then it could be simpler. Using this requirement as a yardstick, it's probable that a good number of families would not qualify for financial aid at some institutions. Therefore not only would the colleges have more money to give to those who really deserve it, they would also have more spaces to fill with qualified minority students because the undeserving (those who didn't plan) would not be able to afford the tab.
With the need to "fill beds" paramount, this kind of proposal is probably dead in the water for most colleges. However, if they adopted the idea and agreed not to begin applying it for another six years or so, they'd give people time to adjust and think ahead. Big announcements could be made, and along with information about classes and so on they could send out suggestions about long-term saving for college. Each college could decide for itself what a reasonable financial commitment over time could be (although competition might drive that expectation too low unless there was an overall agreement about a floor of some kind) and each could be flexible, especially in the first few years. Ultimately, people would get used to the idea, and, not incidentally, the savings rate in the U.S. might rise somewhat from its current miserable single-digit amount.
I don't know how a joint announcement through NACAC or ACE or whoever would go over with anti-trust people, but it seems to me this proposal isn't about setting levels of FA but about repositioning schools in relation to their applicants and families in a way that might make everyone more responsible. I think this idea is worth debating so the vast amounts now spent on financial aid can be rewards for those who really saved and genuine help for those who really need it.
April 27, 2007
Time and Money
With decisions in and choices being made, questions about financial aid come up. My students (their parents, really) get the FA letters and for some they come as a shock. As expensive as college is it really can be daunting when the cold hard numbers stare you in the face. Although I don't deal too often with FA questions (and don't really have the expertise to untangle some of the complexities), I do at times have parents who are unhappy with the FA they get and protest that they can't afford the EFC. I help as much as I can, mostly by suggesting that they call the FA office to make sure it's taken everything into account. Sometimes that makes a difference, sometimes not. Sometimes parents get angry at the amount they're expected to pay, even when the FA package is substantial. I've even heard parents say that they'll have to dip into the college fund they set up for their child because the FA package is "inadequate." (I, of course, think that that's what a college fund is for, but perhaps I'm being naive.)
Now, I'm not a parent so perhaps I'm being a bit too hard on them when I ask (here, rhetorically), "Did you not see this coming?" Perhaps college isn't the first thing on parents' minds when a child is born, but the calendar doesn't lie: Eighteen years after birth college arrives. I know it can be a struggle to save significant amounts, but it still seems that some effort should be made as soon as possible after birth. For the last several years I've contributed to a 529 account for my niece and nephew. Putting in only $50.00/month each, I've managed to accumulate a substantial amount for their educations over the last few years. My niece is in fifth grade, my nephew is in kindergarten. I also gave the account numbers to my brother and their grandmothers, who also contribute from time to time. It's been a good investment and the nice thing is I control it so it can only be used for their educations (it's tax-free as long as they use it for that). I know that at least they'll have a good head start financially when they reach that magic number and they're off to U of Whatever or Anywhere College.
I know it's tough and I know the costs go up every year. Still, I wish parents would plan ahead about this one element of their child's lives. Even if it doesn't cover the full cost eventually, financial planning is still an important commitment to make early on.
Now, I'm not a parent so perhaps I'm being a bit too hard on them when I ask (here, rhetorically), "Did you not see this coming?" Perhaps college isn't the first thing on parents' minds when a child is born, but the calendar doesn't lie: Eighteen years after birth college arrives. I know it can be a struggle to save significant amounts, but it still seems that some effort should be made as soon as possible after birth. For the last several years I've contributed to a 529 account for my niece and nephew. Putting in only $50.00/month each, I've managed to accumulate a substantial amount for their educations over the last few years. My niece is in fifth grade, my nephew is in kindergarten. I also gave the account numbers to my brother and their grandmothers, who also contribute from time to time. It's been a good investment and the nice thing is I control it so it can only be used for their educations (it's tax-free as long as they use it for that). I know that at least they'll have a good head start financially when they reach that magic number and they're off to U of Whatever or Anywhere College.
I know it's tough and I know the costs go up every year. Still, I wish parents would plan ahead about this one element of their child's lives. Even if it doesn't cover the full cost eventually, financial planning is still an important commitment to make early on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)