It'll be interesting to see if this has an effect on other high-priced colleges:
Harvard eliminates tuition for some
Wed Mar 10, 9:40 AM ET
Peter Brown did not come to Harvard University to move boxes.
Yet the 22-year-old sociology and Portuguese literature major from Oklahoma has been spending up to 18 hours a week moving boxes and doing other odd jobs to pay his $280 monthly tuition bill. Beginning next fall, however, Brown will be able to devote more time to his studies, because Harvard will not charge students whose parents, like Brown's mother, make less than $40,000 a year.
The new aid program, announced late last month by Harvard President Lawrence Summers, has sent shock waves through the Ivy League and the rest of the nation's colleges, where big tuition increases have become an annual event.
Summers cited new research that shows there are 25 times as many students from the top-income quarter as the bottom at the nation's 146 most selective public and private schools.
Along with eliminating the average $2,300 expected contribution from low-income students' families, Harvard also announced that students whose parents earn from $40,000 to $60,000 will receive a substantial increase in aid.
Tuition, room, board and fees at Harvard cost $37,928 this year.
Brown, a junior, said he and other students have been paying their parents' share of tuition because they didn't want to ask them for money.
Harvard also plans to more aggressively recruit low-income students, making sure they know they can afford to attend college. Low-income families often overestimate the cost of attending a university, new federal research shows.
"Too often, outstanding students from families of modest means do not believe that college is an option for them, much less an Ivy League university," Summers said at the recent meeting of the American Council on Education in Miami, according to a transcript published by Harvard. "Our doors have long been open to talented students regardless of financial need, but many students simply do not know or believe this. We are determined to change both the perception and the reality."
After decades of efforts to make campuses racially diverse, a push is on to include more low-income students as well, said Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive policy institute in Washington. Kahlenberg edited "America's Untapped Resource: Low-Income Students in Higher Education," the book that contained much of the research cited by Summers.
"What Summers is doing is really inspiring," said Kahlenberg. "Someone needed to take the leadership role on this question of economic inequality."
Just 7 percent of Harvard undergraduates represent the lowest quarter of American household incomes, and 16 percent are from the bottom half. Almost three-quarters have parents whose earnings are in the top quarter. Those numbers are even worse on average at the top 146 colleges: only 3 percent of students are from the bottom quarter, and 10 percent are from the bottom half, according to "America's Untapped Resource."
The gap between rich and poor students has grown because as college costs have increased dramatically, government and philanthropic aid programs have shifted from helping students in need to students of merit, said Brian Fitzgerald, staff director of the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance, which advises Congress.
Not many schools can afford to give low-income students a full ride like Harvard can, so the Advisory Committee is calling on Congress to shift student aid back to low-income students, Fitzgerald said. Federal Pell Grants, which helped low-income students pay for about 40 percent of the cost of attending a private college in the mid-1970s but now cover about 15 percent, should be increased "as much as possible," he said.
The Harvard decision will likely influence negotiations in Congress as the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is debated, Fitzgerald said. The maximum Pell Grant is $4,050.
In his recent speech, Summers tried to dispel the notion that low-income students are less qualified than others. Affluent students attend schools that offer extra-curricular activities that burnish resumes and can afford SAT prep courses that help boost their scores--opportunities often unavailable to low-income students, he said.
As for Brown, the Harvard student says his experience of just scraping by at college led him to change career goals.
"I wanted to be a millionaire, and I didn't care how I did it," Brown said. "It sounds maudlin, but this has changed me. Now I'd be happy directing a financial-aid program."
I sure as hell hope that starts a tuition lowering trend among universities. I'm tired of tuition jumping 50-60 bucks per credit every year. I can barely pay for books and support myself working full time, much less tuition and I don't even go to an ivy league.
Yeah, I like this story, and hope it becomes a trend. The fact that 10 or so major schools control the top lawyer and business jobs is not a pro-democracy thing. Lincoln studied law on the side and then took the bar, you can't do that afaik anymore, you have to attend a law school. If money controls access to the best schools, then its a step for oligarchy.
I just priced law schools, Pitt was 39+k a year, Local here in Georgia, GSU is 33+k a year. No law school for me any time soon.
That's great that they're doing it, but a large percent of their students have parents who can afford it. So, this will off set them taking a 'loss' with other students.
They are putting a program kinda like this at Texas A&M but you have to make less than 40k a year and your parents have to have not gone to college.
Personally, I think it is wrong. These students should have to take out financial aid just like everyone else. I already have accumulated 30k in debt which I will have to pay back. It is not right for someone to get a free ride just because they make less money than you do.
..and guess who gets to pay for these kids getting in a free ride?? MY increased fees..Yay!
If it was merit based I could understand but these race based and socio-economic based scholarships are for the birds.
I feel there is a need for socio-economic based scholarships. Simply, we need to encourage families who have never sent someone to college to begin the tradition; the expectation that each child recieves a college degree education.
When I was 1st lvl we walked from Freeport to Erudin - yes, they didn't have boats back then so we really had to walk through all that ocean - in a snowstorm while being attacked by HGs and were completely lost. Damned spoiled newbies today get 200 sense heading, a backpack and bandages. Hell, when I was a newbie we couldn't even afford bandages till we were 20th lvl! The game is being dumbed down too much, I think they should make it hard again so those snotty little lowbies can know how to have to play it like a man.
Colorado state system raised fees about 15% last year and are currently considering a 40% increase. In-state tuition is $4,020 to $5,081, compared with $20,345 to $22,506 for out-of-state Add that on top of a horrible skewed instate/out of state, its pretty ugly.
Quote:If it was merit based I could understand but these race based and socio-economic based scholarships are for the birds.
a) this is at Harvard. I don't know how much more merit-based you think it needs to be. (edit: Just reread and saw the A&M thing. this may not apply to your school )
b) I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that college financial aid shouldn't be means tested. That's got to win for the absurd statement of the day.
Clearly the family who earns a million dollars a year shouldn't get a scholarship, right? The family who earns 100k a year gets some, the family who earns 50k a year gets more, and the family who earns <40k gets a lot more. How could anyone possibly disagree with that? There is a limited pool of financial aid resources. The way it can do the most good is by giving more to people who need it more and less to people who need it less. Edited by: Llabak Tharr at: 3/10/04 3:31 pm
Peeping, that program is just a front for them to RAISE tuition.
How many students here have parents that earn under 40k and aren't second, third, fourth gen. aggies themselves.
On the other hand, I think I qualify for that program.
It's because they're sick of the 4th generation Harvards, when instead they could have much more intelligent and smarter students who would probably enhance the school and have not been able to go in the past.
It's a well calculated move on Harvards part. Harvard has very high requirements to get in. Meeting those high requirements requires a high amount of success in highschool.
Guess what that correlates very positively? Ding ding ding, what is high Socio-Economic Status?
Harvard gets the boon of charity AND a very small lost in income.
I'm not saying that it's isn't a good move on their part, nor am I saying other schools shouldn't take on a similar stance, but I can really envision some high ranking Harvard financial admin saying something along the lines of "Let the poor come if they're smart enough, because we all know they're not"
Umm, the article already gives number on how many students are affected, and Harvard is well above the median:Quote:Just 7 percent of Harvard undergraduates represent the lowest quarter of American household incomes, and 16 percent are from the bottom half. Almost three-quarters have parents whose earnings are in the top quarter. Those numbers are even worse on average at the top 146 colleges: only 3 percent of students are from the bottom quarter, and 10 percent are from the bottom half, according to "America's Untapped Resource."
Quote:Peeping, that program is just a front for them to RAISE tuition.
How many students here have parents that earn under 40k and aren't second, third, fourth gen. aggies themselves.
On the other hand, I think I qualify for that program.
If I remember correctly, 500 of this years freshman class would have recieved this scholarship.
500x5000x4= 10 mill
Dont forget about the increase of qualifers because its free money and it could be up 15-20mil. Now that may mean that over a long period of time that cost will decrease but that does not help me now that education at aTm will probably go up around 500 dollars for me this semester (no football tickets this year i dont think /cry).
Quote: Clearly the family who earns a million dollars a year shouldn't get a scholarship, right? The family who earns 100k a year gets some, the family who earns 50k a year gets more, and the family who earns <40k gets a lot more. How could anyone possibly disagree with that? There is a limited pool of financial aid resources. The way it can do the most good is by giving more to people who need it more and less to people who need it less.
I do not think you understand financial aid, because that is how it works. What I was trying to get at with my post is that there is no reason to lower standards and or lower tuition for students in poverty when they can take out loans just like everyone else. If someone is rich enough to pay out of pocket so be it but they shouldnt be at a disadvantage because of it.
Being a full-time married student only making around 5k per year and my wife also being a student we are able to get around 10k a year in grants not to mention 20k in loans per year.
That should be help enough for students in poverty whose parents make less than 40k. There is no reason to pay for their education when they can take out loans just like everyone else. Edited by: Peeping at: 3/10/04 9:54 pm
Sorry, I do'nt buy that. Student loans essentially lower the cost of tuition (in real terms) for people because the loans are made at below-market rates. Gee, when I think of all that money that they're spending by not loaning at 12%....well that's money that could have been used for my education. It's not my fault that we were able to pay cash for my tuition. Make those slobs borrow their money from the banks or put it on credit cards. And you got grants? Don't those essentially lower tuition too? That's hardly fair.
Now that I think of it, A&M is a state school, right? Which means that its tuition is subsidized by my tax dollars! I went to a private school, so I didn't get any of that neat funding to lower my tuition. WTF? If we hadn't paid those taxes that helped fund that school, I could have used that money for myself! What a ripoff!
Sorry, may be tough straits for you and your wife, but that's not going to convince me that a means-based scholarship system is at all suboptimal for society. Gig 'em.
"What I was trying to get at with my post is that there is no reason to lower standards[...]"
Where in that article did you gather that Harvard is lowering standards of acceptance? Not to claim the status of a "real professional" in any one endeavor has been a small price to pay for the many benefits and pleasures of trespassing. ~Leo Lionni
If it does, the next order on the agenda is the middle class.
Growing up in a household of 6, with my parent's combined income being in the 70-80k range, it was hard as hell to afford anything. You don't qualify for any worthwhile scholarships, so your only recourse is student loans and to work your ass off every free second.
I love that lower income families may be getting a break. That rocks. However, while it may be hard to believe, middle class students also have a tough as hell time affording college.
I know my options were severely limited by finances too, and I'm still paying off student loans, and will be for years.
Quote:Sorry, I do'nt buy that. Student loans essentially lower the cost of tuition (in real terms) for people because the loans are made at below-market rates. Gee, when I think of all that money that they're spending by not loaning at 12%....well that's money that could have been used for my education. It's not my fault that we were able to pay cash for my tuition. Make those slobs borrow their money from the banks or put it on credit cards. And you got grants? Don't those essentially lower tuition too? That's hardly fair.
Now that I think of it, A&M is a state school, right? Which means that its tuition is subsidized by my tax dollars! I went to a private school, so I didn't get any of that neat funding to lower my tuition. WTF? If we hadn't paid those taxes that helped fund that school, I could have used that money for myself! What a ripoff!
Sorry, may be tough straits for you and your wife, but that's not going to convince me that a means-based scholarship system is at all suboptimal for society. Gig 'em.
Sure it is wrong. Why do you think people in poverty continue to be in poverty? Because there is no reason to move up when the state is paying for all your material wants while you sit at home watching Opera.
I have kids at a school where I observe at..who are 15 years old and telling each other how they cant wait to get pregnant so that they can start getting child support. To them 4 fathers giving child support equals a full-time job so they dont have to work. These same kids are BRAGGING about getting foodstamps.
No way in hell do I give these kids a scholarship when someone who has been working harder gets to take out 40k worth of loans so that they can make something of themselves.
Meddik hits the nail on the head though, at least that is why A&M is doing the economic scholarships.
Quote:Where in that article did you gather that Harvard is lowering standards of acceptance?
I never said Harvard was lowering standards though I beleive that many schools have and will to appease minority leaders.
