Legendofandrey

I'm from an average middle class family, we moved to America from Europe bout 12 years ago, so we've had to literally make something out of nothing.
I can't take any stinking SAT prep courses, I can't enroll in those really cool sounding National Leadership yadda-yadda societies (We all got those in the mail, right?), and I can't take any sweet courses at my community college because,simply put, My family doesn't have any extra cash lying around.

People bring up the argument that "if you get a job, you could do these things."
But all of the money I earn from my job is going into a car (Which I really need), School Fees, and college.

So tell me:

Doesn't it seem like all of these great application boosters out there are directed towards people with money, and in return when they apply to college, they'll look better than the kids who can't afford these programs?

I'm just slightly frustrated at the fact that the kids who can afford these kinds of things, have a better shot at going to college than people like me.

swimcatsmom

Many students don't take expensive SAT prep course. My daughter did some self prep for the ACT using prep books which are not too expensive. They did help bring her scores up.

The national leadership yadda yadda societies are meaningless in college applications because the admissions people know that anyone that can pay for them can go to them. They are not application boosters at all. Adcoms are not stupid.

AeroEngineer3141

Those expensive SAT prep courses don't work. Most of the money you pay go into fees for proctored exams.

All the prestigious summer programs are free (RSI, TASP, etc.). National Leadership "" "" is only for the experience. Their not really going to help that much in college admissions.


Remember that grades and rigor of classes, followed by ECs, are still the most important factors in admissions.

Coño

And to actually answer your question: yes, it is for the rich. It's a well known thing.

enderkin

Those with money can get better educations in better schools with better teachers. They can spend more time on extracurricular activities and volunteering and interesting internships because they don't need to spend all their time on work or family. They can spend time on SAT practice. They can get the tutor or the course. The cards are always in favor of the wealthier. It is true.

As a trivial point, you can get a high score (over 2100 at least) if you memorize the rules of grammar, understand basic algebra/geometry, can interpret passages for their tone, diction, and syntax, and have a strong grasp of the test format and type of questions. You do not need courses to do that--you need time, commitment, and a crapload of SAT prep books (which are usually available at a local library)

Those who can juggle both familial commitments while maintaining decent grades and SATs are seen in a better light than regular applicants--they have a compelling argument for admission. But those are pretty rare--those who can work with a deck stacked against them are hard to come by. Adcoms know that real work is hard.

roses&clovers

I go to a private school and getting in has to do with what you offer the school

a lower class student who is brilliant offers their intelligence and helps with making my school have a good academic reputation

an upper class student can get in from money or intelligence. if you have both you're more likely to get in because you offer the school more

people always look down on students who pay their way in, but without them there would be no money for scholarships, fabulous teachers, and renovations. without donations tuition would probably be 100k a year and there would be no scholarships

Taggart

-shrugshrugshrug- --> no?

I go to a highly ranked public high school. My parents and I immigrated to Canada when I was seven, and to the US when I was ten. We finally bought a house when I was in the middle of my freshman year. I took a pretty cool and inexpensive SAT prep class summer between my sophomore and junior year, but aside from that, it's not like my parents paid my way into anything.

My stats may not have been the best (heh, most of that was my fault, laziness and all), but it was good enough to get me into Dartmouth and Northwestern, with the latter giving me both financial aid and a scholarship, and the former matching that.

I mean, one of my better friends is going to Harvard (she is, undoubtedly, one of the most intelligent people I've met), and her parents don't make as much as mine do. Everything she's done has been by her own merits. Another acquaintance in school got into MIT and CalTech, the former on a full ride. Education is what you make out of it. Unless you're well below the poverty line, I don't think there are any excuses.

Coño

That's pretty ridiculous when you compare the opportunities of someone with a famiy making $100k+ to someone with a family making <$50k.

Taggart

Maybe I'm just ridiculously intelligent then, because 50,000 was how much my parents made for most of my life.

Harvard girl's parents made about that much when she got into Harvard. MIT girl's parents make significantly less than that.

Hence why I don't think there's any excuse.

I get that there's a difference in opportunities, but I also feel that something like the SATs is nothing to not do well on without prep classes.

brillar

I think that it is more difficult for lower income students to look good, but it is still possible. You just might have to work a little harder.

Sure, a wealthy person could afford a tutor, a private college counselor, extra classes at the community college, as many AP tests as possible, applying to more schools, the SAT prep classes, blah blah blah.

A poorer person will have to get a SAT review book instead, go without those community college classes, limit the number of AP tests, and while all that is happening it might be incredibly hard for them to get transportation to and from ECs because their parents might be working 2 jobs and aren't around. Or maybe they'll just work to help their family instead of doing all those extra ECs or all that extra homework from AP classes.

Hopefully colleges are understanding of those differences... some of them are, some of them aren't... But then, MUCH of life is easier for the wealthier...

momkaes

Our oldest went to college when we were upper poor. Had to start at a two year state school and did well, went on to a four year state school, then earned a masters at a state school. Now she has a good job, a beautiful home and loves what she does. She worked two or three jobs in the summer, worked every break and holiday and had loans when she was done. She got some federal and state grants also because of our income level. Just to clarify what I mean by poor, we owned one car even though we dont have public transportation, our wardrobe was thrift store and lawn sale, didn't have cable and a fancy night out was the local fast food place once every two months. It was not easy, but was worth the struggle. To answer your question, most people can get an education it is just more difficult if you are poor. Can anyone go to a private college? No but not everyone can afford a rolex or BMW either.

scuba723

My parents would have paid for summer programs, tutors, SAT prep courses, community college classes, or anything else I would have asked for... if I had asked. We're not fabulously wealthy by any means, but it would have been doable -- and I turned all of it down.

I studied for the SAT with a copy of "Up Your Score: The Underground Guide to the SAT" checked out from the library. I took a rigorous load full of AP courses, and managed to work in an internship at a law firm. I worked my ass off -- 50 to 60 hour weeks -- during the summer, and put in additional time on weekends during the school year. If I had trouble with a class, I stayed after school and asked my teacher for help, or sucked it up and taught myself. I found extracurriculars which allowed me to take on leadership positions and make a meaningful difference, and never spent a dime on any of them.

Absolutely, more opportunities exist for the wealthy, but most of us aren't wealthy, and most of us do just fine. I applied and was accepted to an excellent public university, and that is where I will be attending. I don't believe in carrying significant debt upon graduating from undergraduate studies, so I didn't even bother applying to more expensive privates.

In the long run, hard work and dedication stands out above all else.

Coño

Please, $50k is hardly something to say you overcame.

When I see more than 1 person every few years coming out of Compton where I am from and going to Harvard, I will be convinced that money doesn't make a difference.

fiona

Are you talking about college or are you talking about Harvard? The VAST majority of kids get into college without SAT prep classes or fancy private schools or "leadership" camps. Want to go to Harvard? Then you had better be plenty smart and work plenty hard. And even then it is a crap shoot. Lots of these rich kids DON'T get into their elite schools - there is no sure thing. (Haven't we been reading their posts for the last month?) My advice: quit worrying about what "rich kids" have and make the most of what you have. Whatever YOU achieve you will come by "honestly," through your own perserverence and character (and not Daddy's checkbook!) Good luck to you!

Taggart

Oh, but see, we're just using 50k as a baseline because you made it one. It not being something to overcome is exactly why I said, "Education is what you make out of it. Unless you're well below the poverty line, I don't think there are any excuses."

Anyway, I also did say, "Unless you're well below the poverty line, I don't think there are any excuses."

Okay. Here's where I go "***?" because really -- how many people do you think gets into Harvard?