For the poor in the Ivy League, a full ride isn't always what they imagined.

Parents Forum
281

@calmom I went to an Ivy. I have a kid who went to a different Ivy. Nobody I knew worked more than 15 hours a week. Work study at my kid’s college was 10 hours a week and it paid more than minimum wage.

I don’t doubt that your D put in more hours because she wanted to go to a concert or opt for an unpaid summer internship. (Some of the Ivies let you do an unpaid internship one summer, i.e., if you have a good unpaid internship they will waive the student contribution for that summer. It requires approval.) However, I think if she was working 20 hours a week she was a bit unusual.

Some of the attorneys in my old suite hired college kids part time. These weren’t work study jobs.The kids were local NYC kids living at home with their parents while attending college–one went to Barnard, BTW. Even those kids limited work to 15 hours a week.

282

I do not try to insinuate that you have a “shaky command of the facts” whenever my experience differs from yours, by virtue of the fact that people do have different experiences. I would appreciate it if you would make a habit of responding in kind.

I don’t doubt that high-ranked schools give good results often. That has been my experience as well. However, in my experience and in the research of a lot of companies that put effort into optimizing their recruiting, the result has always been that both pedigree-centric and anti-pedigree strategies don’t work all that well. A company that has the resources to do so well has to recruit at both, if they want a good share of the talent pool. There are obviously advantages (which are pretty well-covered by most) and disadvantages to elite grads (take [this contrary perspective](What are the Lifetime Advantages of Attending Top Colleges - #678 by Packers1 - Parents Forum - College Confidential Forums) for example).

Objective criteria alone don’t tell the full story, which is what I’ve been saying. Those are all important, certainly, but they also don’t tell the full story.

See, this is why I don’t like responding to you. It generally devolves into a game of pointless personal attacks.

Corporate recruiters have people who aren’t very good at recruiting. They also have some very expensive and very good people who are in fact VERY good at recruiting. They also have some expensive programs, like internships, that do make up for deficiencies in their ability to tell whether or not someone is actually a good employee. Some corporations are horrible at recruiting in general, and those generally are among those in perpetual decline (I’m sure that without example, you could figure out a least a few of those).

It’s a VERY objective criteria. You have a number. I have a number. We could go ask for verification from the school that we got that number at and they would objectively verify that the number is what it is. Perhaps what you mean is that it isn’t as good a criteria as you would hope it would be, in that things can be objective but that might not tell the full story, which is my point about why objectivity isn’t always the best. Transcripts are better, but decidedly subjective in their interpretation. Guess subjective factors play a role too, don’t they?

283

@TheGFG, Your son may be working in a field and for a company that cares a lot about pedigree? Some employers are more egalitarian and just want to find the best and brightest, wherever they may come from. One of my kids interned and then was hired by a science and engineering consulting firm. He was in an an 8 person team , graduates from Swarthmore, UVa, MSU, Harvey Mudd and Virginia Tech. They all got along and were friends outside of the office. The company recruited from a wide variety of schools . Intern classes of about 30 had kids from MIT, Yale, Cornell, UVa, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, etc.

284

“Objective criteria alone don’t tell the full story, which is what I’ve been saying. Those are all important, certainly, but they also don’t tell the full story.”

Neo, this IS the full story. Our shareholders wouldn’t tolerate us expanding our recruiting budget by a factor of 100 in order to send a team to visit every college in America. We are not a social services organization whose mission is to hunt down the most talented kid in Montana. The goal of a corporate recruiting team is to hire the best possible team (measured by retention, promotion, etc.) in the fastest possible/most cost effective way.

Is there a superstar at a community college in Iowa right now who would be fantastic for my training program? I am sure of it. Do we have the resources to interview 3,000 community college students in Iowa to find that gem? Sure, if we stopped investing in all the other corporate functions we need to do.

Kodak didn’t go belly up because it was bad at recruiting (it was actually pretty good at recruiting). Enron didn’t go belly up because it was bad at recruiting (unless you want to blame the hiring of a handful of venal and amoral senior people on their recruiting process).

You seem to have an agenda although i’m not sure what it is… companies should stop hiring new grads? Companies should interview a million college students in order to give the kid from University of New Haven the same opportunity as the kid from Yale?

Exactly what changes would you like to see? There is no monopoly on recruiting in America. Every company gets to figure out a process and a system that works for its needs. For every company that likes to hire at Swarthmore and Duke, there are ten companies that prefer Stonehill and Hofstra. This is only problematic if you are a kid at Hofstra who didn’t understand that by attending Hofstra you will have a different set of choices than you’d have had if you had gone to Duke- unless you have a lot of initiative and drive and can work the system (which happens. I’ve hired young grads from obscure Bible colleges who found my email address on a conference attendee list).

So go to Hofstra. But don’t sit around waiting for employer X who has not recruited at Hofstra in the last 20 years to magically appear at a jobs fair. You’ll have to make the magic happen all on your own.

that’s MY agenda, by the way. Parents and kids need to learn how the hiring market actually operates, not how they wished it operates. I counsel young grads all the time who have failed to launch and the degree of laziness? poor planning? ignorance? is really astonishing. One of them recently told me that she didn’t know why she didn’t have a job yet since she applied for five different things already and she’s only been home from college for a week.

Five? And it didn’t occur to you until AFTER graduation that you needed a plan for the rest of your life???

285

There does seem to be some antagonism against elite schools on this thread.

We are not low income but are receiving financial aid at Princeton and our experience has been very positive. I would be concerned if people got the message that they should not apply to these school because they are “full of rich people” and are “not my tribe”. It can be an amazing experience and some of the elite universities have done a great deal to provide a quality experience on campus for all who are there, regardless of income.

We have not provided our son any spending money for the year and he seems to have easily coved his regular needs from his on-campus job which he works at 3 hours a week and seems to earn $36 from. In order to get this job (in his own dining hall) all he had to do to get a job was to turn up to the meeting at the beginning of the year and say how many shifts he wanted. The work is pleasant and I don’t get the sense there is any stigma involved in it. With 60% of students at Princeton on some kind of financial aid working on campus is pretty common. He managed to fund a short trip to DC over thanksgiving from his earnings. He also went on a “retreat” with his improv group that required him to find $120 for his share of the house they rented plus food and he was able to cover this from his earnings.

His costs are pretty low. Most socialising happens on campus and clubs are subsidised or free. The local cinema provides students one free late night movie plus popcorn and soda) per week. The meal plan provides unlimited food (and 10 guest dinners per year which has coved the few visitors he has had). He has had two trips to New York which he did not have to pay for (one for a class which included dinner at the Harvard club with the professor and another with his residential college to visit a museum). There are trips to Broadway shows on offer from all the residential colleges (first time free, subsequent trips $25 which cover the bus and the entry to the show). There are lots of talks, special concerts, special dinners with speakers on campus and most cost nothing. The laundry machines are free and he seems to have access to plenty of free printing. His 5 day group hiking trip as part of the pre-orientation programme was fully covered by financial aid.

286

Seems like most of this list of schools is a list of schools that are commonly seen as (a) elite in engineering (GT, VT), (b) elite overall (Yale, Swarthmore, UVA), or (c) both (MIT, Cornell, Harvey Mudd).

In contrast, my observation in computing is that, while highly respected schools for CS (e.g. UCB, UIUC) are somewhat over-represented, there is representation from other schools (e.g. various CSUs (not just CPSLO), Arizona State, Alabama, Hawaii, SUNYs, Oregon, Florida, NC State), plus some from foreign universities and some with self-educated backgrounds (no bachelor’s degree or bachelor’s degree in an unrelated field).

287

Now what exactly does that have to do with objective vs. subjective criteria? You are arguing a strawman.

Companies that want to be successful recruit according to their ability. Multinational companies very much do send recruiters to lots of places in every state - vet career fairs, state schools, elite schools, etc. Companies whose resources are more constrained optimize accordingly based on their own resources. I never said otherwise, and in fact I specifically did say that companies that have the resources to do so cast a wide net. Which is true.

So what? Did I imply that recruiting is the only reason that a company can have poor fortunes? No, I’m pretty sure I didn’t. I simply noted that it’s one rather notable reason for prevalent decline.

…

As I said before:

I think I will make this my last response to you on the topic. This isn’t going anywhere, and it seems to be a war over misinterpretation of my points, mixed in with personal attacks, more than a genuine discussion.

288

Absolutely, it can be a positive experience and something that would be highly beneficial for anyone of any socioeconomic status. But don’t make it into something it’s not: it’s not a golden ticket to a magical chocolate factory that will make all your dreams come true and lift your family out of poverty, etc. These class issues do exist and it’s important to be aware of them if you do choose to attend an elite school from a poorer background.

Not every criticism is necessarily antagonistic. Even good things have elements that are worthy of criticism.

289

That’s an interesting point, @NeoDymium , in terms of the class issues. I came from a working class family and married into a highly educated , upper middle class family. My parents stressed education but I was the first in my family to get a four year degree. In contrast, my husband had/has doctors, engineers, professors everywhere in his family. I was initially uncomfortable and never liked the whole country club type of scene. I can imagine that some kids going to elites could be uncomfortable and am just curious @calmom, for instance , in terms of what made you pursue elite colleges to begin with that you apparently could not afford without financial aid? You do seem a little uncomfortable with some of the experiences your children had.

290

@sevmom… I attended public universities. I never “pursued” any elite colleges. My kids applied to and attended the schools they wanted to attend. They knew my financial limitations and that they could not expect me to pay more for private than the cost of an in-state public. I insisted that both kids apply to the in-state public both as admissions & financial safeties.

291

“I’m not sure if this was discussed upthread, but should the specific issue of working to send money home even be a concern of a university? Or perhaps who should this issue concern?”

I think this is a really tough question. It’s directly in the mission of the university to help every kid it admits to be successful at college, regardless of their family situation. But I don’t think the university can subsidize mom’s rent, even though that would help the kid stay in school. If the kid needs to work 20+ hours a week to send money home, all the school can do is minimize costs and make jobs available.

I’m not attached to HYPS’s policy of making the kids on full aid contribute a few thousand dollars a year. I probably wouldn’t ask them to contribute anything if I were in charge of the policy. On the other hand, the people who ARE in charge and make these decisions have way more experience and data than I have, and many of them attended on fin aid themselves, so they may know better than I do what’s best for these kids.

292

I don’t see anything wrong with kids being asked to contribute something for their education. Lots of kids work during the summers, take out loans. Only the truly wealthy don’t have to worry about college costs.

293

It’s reasonable to ask, but is it the best policy? I don’t know. If you’re giving someone a scholarship worth $57,000 a year for four years, do they really appreciate it more because they were asked to earn the last $3000 of the cost? Maybe some scholarship recipients can weigh in.

294

In athletics, they’ve found that the student needs some money in their pockets. In the past, the athletics would get cushy jobs in the summer, making much more than others working at a booster’s car dealership or painting houses. Then the NCAA stopped that and the athletes went from being overpaid to not even being able to work and having no money at all. Now it has swung again and the stipend is probably more money than most of them need to buy their coffees and travel back and forth. I think somewhere between the billed costs and the full COA is probably fair, but many are getting quite a bit more than pocket money now (up to about $12000 if they get a full Pell).

I don’t think expecting the students to earn their extra money is too much to ask, but I do think the billed costs should be covered, and that students should get to keep a certain amount of outside scholarships to pay for things that are truly the COA, like the cost of a computer, travel several times per year, an amount to cover the weeks when they can’t really work to get spending money (holidays, finals week). I don’t think any amounts the students send home should be included in the calculation. It’s really no different than those families who send $$ to relatives in other countries - very nice, but not the school’s obligation to consider it when calculating FA.

295

I always insisted on my kids having a job while in college. It was their stipulation in receiving an allowance from me. Both of my kids found jobs on campus that paid well as well as for resume building. They knew FA students who chose not to work. By working 10-15 hrs a week, my kids didn’t miss out on any social life and they were also able to maintain fairly high GPA.

Students who go to schools in a city like NYC have a lot of opportunity to earn top $$$ by tutoring, babysitting and even career building internships.

I don’t think only FA students have jobs. Just because someone has a part time job doesn’t necessary mean he/she is on FA.

296

Does “elite” mean private? “Paying for the Party” clearly shows that these issues exist at Indiana U–which I wouldn’t consider elite. They certainly exist at U Michigan, UVirginia, etc.

Additionally, there are only a small number of top schools which are need blind for internationals.U Michigan, an excellent public U, gives no financial aid whatsoever to international students. Harvard is need blind for internationals. With internationals exceeding 10% at many US colleges, both public and private, do you think the campus culture for US kids from poorer backgrounds is automatically better at state U?

I really don’t. While there are definitely clueless rich kids, I don’t think they all go to elite private colleges.

297

My daughter just finished her freshman year at Cornell. She lived in a suite with 6 other girls. 3 of those girls received full rides and not one of them had a job on campus. My daughter did not get that much aid. She knew it was going to cost us a lot of money for her to attend. She was willing to do whatever it took to go. My daughter always had a job, even in high school when she wasn’t playing sports. We told her she had to come up with 3000 dollars to attend and get a part time job on campus. She earned the money waitressing over the summer while her friends were at the beach and got a job working 10 hours a week on campus. The first day home for winter break, she picked up a shift at her old job and worked all through break. I think if you are going to get a free ride, then you need to contribute something. There is no reason why you cant get work study or work a few hours a week for pocket money.

298

Perhaps this was addressed a few pages ago, my apologies. While I realize “best practices” in financial aid suggests that the student needs to contribute some amount, as @Hanna noted above, the difficulty is that this puts limits on the student’s summer opportunities in terms of taking career-valuable, but unpaid, internships etc.

I did restaurant jobs every summer to earn for college tuition, back in the old days when earning $2000 a summer paid for 1/3 of your private school tuition (like I said, the dark ages). When I went to a top 3 law school, I realized many of my classmates had done unpaid internships with various non-profit and other groups during their college summers, and they had a far more substantial resume to help with the job search. It wasn’t horrible, and certainly a degree from a top law school opens up plenty of doors without having to rely on college internships. At the same time, I was not a credible candidate for some non-profits because I hadn’t shown my commitment through internships. Today, students who live at home and work to come up with the $2-3k student contribution miss those internship opportunities as well. I know many schools offer funded summer internship programs, but unless you are doing research with a prof on campus over the summer, the cost of living in a major metro area such as NY or DC is going to eat up most of that, leaving very little for the student contribution.

For me, it comes back to the importance of recognizing that there is a lot going on under the surface that financial aid students experience. It’s not life-shattering, but it is there. And the notion, expressed, either here or in another thread, that if you need financial aid, these wealthy schools will take care of everything, is simplistic and ignores the complexity of the issue.

299

My goodness. This was the issue for me back in 1978 when I went to Yale from my urban public high school. I didn’t vacation in Europe on holidays, go skiing in Aspen for winter break or anything of the sort. I didn’t do fancy non-paid internships over the summer either - I brought my butt home and worked in a summer camp or day care center.

Now my kid, who goes to Yale, has the luxury of doing these things based upon my sacrifice. Bottom line, my degree said the same as theirs, Yale. It gave me the inroads to their alumni network and the diploma opened doors to opportunities that I would not have gotten otherwise. This is a universal issue and today’s kids need to stop whining. If someone is giving you a free $240,000+ education, then take it and run. It is not their responsibility to provide for you the lifestyle of those around you. I guess when they start work, they will want the same lifestyle as the senior managers - oh wait, you don’t make that much money yet. So when they come back talking about their golf dates and vacations, are they going to feel bad then too? There are have and have nots in this world. Getting a free, or almost free, top tier education makes you a HAVE.

300

Cornell doesn’t give any, there’s a $5700 student contribution for even the poorest students and half of it is work-study - I just ran the NPC to double check.

For those kids with that minimum contribution who win outside scholarships of some kind, that will be applied to work study, so they will lose that. It may be possible for non-work study kids to get jobs on campus or in Ithaca but if they don’t, it’s generally because they won a scholarship from an outside organization to cover that amount.

There can be some Coke or Cooke or Gates or whatever outside scholarships with all costs covered.