<p>Well, it’s not as if they only give the full pay kids a chance to review their professor. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>It’s a bad premise. You should just say you are sorry and continue on.</p>
<p>I never implied that only full-freighters resorted to use the TT status of a professor as leverage…</p>
<p>Full-freighter entitlement is a sparse problem at best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Student reviews are done before the students get their final grades, so how would the students know if they were getting a poor grade? It’s true that easier graders generally have higher evaluations than tough graders, but it’s also true that one student’s bad review can’t outweigh hundreds of other good or average reviews that have been submitted over the years as a candidate is evaluated for tenure. One or two disgruntled students can’t get someone fired or denied tenure. That’s just not realistic. Also, changing final grades after the fact is not an easy process for the professor. The grade change request requires a rationale and has to go through multiple levels of review; it’s sometimes denied. It’s not as if the professor can just call up the registrar next semester and change the grade.</p>
<p>Since many schools use merit aid to compete for more desirable students, I would think they would have more leverage (Take your scholarship and shove it!) than full pay students who are lucky they even were accepted.</p>
<p>@Catria: About a dozen American CCers have posted that this concept is unheard of. Yet you still believe it based on what a Canadian community college instructor told you?</p>
<p>Fine, perhaps I am better off returning on the chances board…</p>
<p>Catria, what do you really want to know? I’m not sure I understand the purpose of this thread.</p>
<p>“full-freighter entitlement” = a label in search of a problem.</p>
<p>I seriously doubt professors are privy to how much each student in their classroom is paying out of pocket to attend. I have never heard of a professor upping a grade based on the out of pocket cost by a student.</p>
<p>Actually, I would think it’s the scholarship students who have a special shine, at least when it comes to grades. “Scholarship entitlement”, if it exists (which I doubt), would balance out “full-freight entitlement”, if it exists (which I doubt). Net zero effect, if they exist.</p>
<p>I’m pretty cynical about how people use money, but I have to tell you, I’ve never heard of such a thing. I wouldn’t be surprised if you could find an instance somewhere, but I would be if you found that it was measurably widespread.</p>
<p>From the OP:
"Full-freighter entitlement is a sparse problem at best. "</p>
<p>Is this what you were trying to figure out with this thread? Frankly, I have missed the point of this question and find the entire premise to be offensive!</p>
<p>What I could see happening is some preference given to a large donor’s child, because no one wants to tick off his parents. However, there just aren’t that many of them out there who could be recognized as such by college employees for this to be a problem.</p>
<p>At my LAC, there were 3 or 4 campus structures named after a particular family–including the field house. One of the donor’s sons attended at the same time I did. Rumor has it that his Dad had given the money for a social dorm on campus after the older brother was not accepted as a pledge at any fraternity. Students got to live in this social dorm by way of the typical dorm lottery system. So you might want to live there, but if your number isn’t high enough and all the rooms were already taken, you were out of luck. Rumor again had it that the donor stipulated that his other son be entitled to live there regardless.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone got worked up over that minor thing, and I never heard any allegations of the kid getting better grades.</p>
<p>We never had anything like that at D’s college or our kids’ private K-12 school. But I will say, big donors to the K-12 school did use their leverage. Not for grades, and I did see the school stand up to them on this. But other stuff.</p>
<p>Catria, I think it’s time to acknowledge you made up a silly idea.</p>
<p>I’ve been in CC about 10 years and us old vets can predict the topics that will reappear every year … but this is the first time we’ve heard this thesis … and absent anything resembling evidence it doesn’t hold water for me.</p>
<p>Okay… I will bite a little. I know parents who are so obnoxious that they might TRY to use this line with college administration. But I doubt it gets them any leverage, only an eye roll at the other end of the email or phone.</p>
<p>I will acknowledge that it was too exotic a thesis to be true…</p>
<p>I just think there is not enough leverage there. While a big donor to the college may have leverage (hence some legacy admissions for kids of big donors), when it comes to day to day running of a college, I just don’t think it is enough of a financial difference in the overall size of the college budget to provide any weight.</p>
<p>And what is the parent going to do if they don’t get what they want (assuming it is the full pay parent trying to exert the leverage) … have their kid transfer? Really?</p>
<p>Why these sorts of questions? And, beware chancing unless you have some real experience with admissions. It just feeds a lot of hs kids offering their supposed stats and a few single lines about their ECs.</p>