A different sort of ranking

xiggi
Thu, 19 May 2005 10:50:46 +0000

Thank you, Carolyn for pointing out that there are many ways to look at published numbers to develop individual rankings. The key word being individual! The ONLY value of the US News report is that they simplify the task to find all the numbers. Once the numbers are listed, it is easy to toss out the elements that ONE considers ludicrous and keep what is important.

In this case, graduation rates in four years may be important for some students. Further, for some, high graduation rates indicate a level “education excellence”, but for some it also indicates a serious issue of grade inflation - a term that seem to have been invented at the Seven Sisters! The reality is that it is easier to graduate from many prestigious schools than to “get in”. Thus, everyone ought to weigh the different criteria. In equating graduation rates to education excellence, one should notice that schools such as Caltech or Cornell Engineering won’t ever show up in the higher levels of graduation lists. Why would the best of the best be penalized for maintaining high standards and grading integrity be penalized and schools with profound aversions for anything lower than a B be rewarded? That is something to ponder.

As far, as the correlation with income level, once more with hit the difference between correlation and causality. If we believe the theories advanced by some, there is a direct realtion between SAT scores, GPA and income … so it would be almost expected that students who entered schools in the lowest quartile would be among the graduation victims.

Also, it is quite disingenuous to imply that ONLY the Pell grantees hhave to worry about working to earn money. Actually, as fas as EDUCATION expenses, the situation is easier for people with very low EFC. There is an abundance of scholarships or school policies that will convert most loans and work study into full grants. On the other hand, many students of low and middle class families are in a real pickle to comply with the terms of the finaid package that contain summer eraning expectations, work study AND ALSO need to cover the part of their EFC that parents cannot contribute.

The argument that some of the poorest students need to send money home is entirely irrelevant to a discussion of financing HIGHER education. Simply stated, it is NOT the role of financial aid nor the role of the government to repackage a welfare assistance into the form of education funding.

When reading the lamentations of middle class families that have not prepared very well for the growing college expensesm, we are very quick to point out that attending very expensive shools is not an ENTITLEMENT. Why would there be two weigh and two measures. The reliaty is that if the trend of rising tuition and expenses is not curbed back to levels espousing inflation, the most expensive schools will become populated by the very rich … and the very poor in quasi-exclusivity.

I am not diminishing AT ALL the fact that the road to higher education is very difficult for low income families. However, many of the hurdles they have to overcome are not germane to education financing per se.

The neighboor’s grass is indeed always greener.