Should financial aid in private school be stricter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of schools devoting a lot of effort in fundraising for financial aid, and the importance of financial to support diversity and families in need.

However, when I see the families that are using financial aid I see only upper middle class families with several children, and not even top performers.

Shouldn’t fínancial aid be stricter (let’s say truly low income households) and perhaps the brightest or athletic chidlren from middle class families.

In its current form (at least in my children’s school) the financial aid looks pretty much like a giveaway for well off parents. Does anyone observe the same pattern?

Yes! They should be Stricker. Now families who are not US citizens , lived their live outside of Us, are coming to receive FA and then returning to home country.

So only FA to families born in the US? Even if the kids are legal residents?

US citizens? Yes!
Legal residents, green card and visa holders, and undocumented residents? No. Public school or pay the full tuition.

So kids born in the us, legal residents and citizens, with ilegal parents probably don’t deserve any FA because their parents might be deported, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of schools devoting a lot of effort in fundraising for financial aid, and the importance of financial to support diversity and families in need.

However, when I see the families that are using financial aid I see only upper middle class families with several children, and not even top performers.

Shouldn’t fínancial aid be stricter (let’s say truly low income households) and perhaps the brightest or athletic chidlren from middle class families.

In its current form (at least in my children’s school) the financial aid looks pretty much like a giveaway for well off parents. Does anyone observe the same pattern?

Yes! They should be Stricker. Now families who are not US citizens , lived their live outside of Us, are coming to receive FA and then returning to home country.

So only FA to families born in the US? Even if the kids are legal residents?

US citizens? Yes!
Legal residents, green card and visa holders, and undocumented residents? No. Public school or pay the full tuition.

It has nothing to be with deported. Example parent who are citizens of somewhere in Europe, or Asia and move for work bring their kids. They apply to private and reduce the FA given to US citizens children. WIS is noted for this. We have US parents taking out loans because they get reduced FA. We are not responsible for non- us citizens kids to pay private tuition.



So kids born in the us, legal residents and citizens, with ilegal parents probably don’t deserve any FA because their parents might be deported, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

I agree. I want my kids to build networks for success and that is not provided by low income families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of schools devoting a lot of effort in fundraising for financial aid, and the importance of financial to support diversity and families in need.

However, when I see the families that are using financial aid I see only upper middle class families with several children, and not even top performers.

Shouldn’t fínancial aid be stricter (let’s say truly low income households) and perhaps the brightest or athletic chidlren from middle class families.

In its current form (at least in my children’s school) the financial aid looks pretty much like a giveaway for well off parents. Does anyone observe the same pattern?

Yes! They should be Stricker. Now families who are not US citizens , lived their live outside of Us, are coming to receive FA and then returning to home country.

So only FA to families born in the US? Even if the kids are legal residents?

US citizens? Yes!
Legal residents, green card and visa holders, and undocumented residents? No. Public school or pay the full tuition.

It has nothing to be with deported. Example parent who are citizens of somewhere in Europe, or Asia and move for work bring their kids. They apply to private and reduce the FA given to US citizens children. WIS is noted for this. We have US parents taking out loans because they get reduced FA. We are not responsible for non- us citizens kids to pay private tuition.



So kids born in the us, legal residents and citizens, with ilegal parents probably don’t deserve any FA because their parents might be deported, right?

I got your point. But I guess us citizens can also move abroad. Is that acceptable but foreigners moving abroad not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

There are already a few low income families already receiving full aid in some schools with great success and none of the problems you mention. Can that be expanded to a few more low income families? I am sure it is possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

There are already a few low income families already receiving full aid in some schools with great success and none of the problems you mention. Can that be expanded to a few more low income families? I am sure it is possible.

What you consider “low income” might actually be middle class, but to you it looks low income because you’re umc/wealthy. If these have stable jobs and stable transportation and own a home or at least have stable housing, though they may look poor by your standards, they are not indeed poor. So that begs the question, what are people actually taking about when they say they want financial aid to go to poor kids. Because I just described what poverty actually looks like and you seem to be describing something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

There are already a few low income families already receiving full aid in some schools with great success and none of the problems you mention. Can that be expanded to a few more low income families? I am sure it is possible.

What you consider “low income” might actually be middle class, but to you it looks low income because you’re umc/wealthy. If these have stable jobs and stable transportation and own a home or at least have stable housing, though they may look poor by your standards, they are not indeed poor. So that begs the question, what are people actually taking about when they say they want financial aid to go to poor kids. Because I just described what poverty actually looks like and you seem to be describing something else.

If you own your house, own 1 or 2 cars, and can travel on holidays even domestically every year you are clearly middle class.

Low income might rent, might have a car and might not be able to travel every year.

The point I was trying to mention is that I see a lot of the former and almost none of the latter. The problem is that there are a lot of middle class people that that have a super tight budget and Don’t receive any financial aid. In that case how to decide which middle class should deserve financial aid. I think it’s easier to just focus on full financial aid to lower income families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

There are already a few low income families already receiving full aid in some schools with great success and none of the problems you mention. Can that be expanded to a few more low income families? I am sure it is possible.

What you consider “low income” might actually be middle class, but to you it looks low income because you’re umc/wealthy. If these have stable jobs and stable transportation and own a home or at least have stable housing, though they may look poor by your standards, they are not indeed poor. So that begs the question, what are people actually taking about when they say they want financial aid to go to poor kids. Because I just described what poverty actually looks like and you seem to be describing something else.

If you own your house, own 1 or 2 cars, and can travel on holidays even domestically every year you are clearly middle class.

Low income might rent, might have a car and might not be able to travel every year.

The point I was trying to mention is that I see a lot of the former and almost none of the latter. The problem is that there are a lot of middle class people that that have a super tight budget and Don’t receive any financial aid. In that case how to decide which middle class should deserve financial aid. I think it’s easier to just focus on full financial aid to lower income families.

You seem to be talking about the lower end of the middle class, which is a huge category anyway. We probably need to be specific because people just throw out terms like financial aid should be going to poor kids with clearly no sense of what that even means. If we’re talking about which middle class families need aid the most, I think the reality is a lot of middle class families on any part of the spectrum would be shut out of private school without some level of aid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really complicated issue that most people of means really don’t understand. Public school is set up and resourced to provide a social safety net that poor kids need. Things like free breakfast and lunch, free after care, school funded interventions for special needs that arise, free transportation, childcare during some breaks, free summer camp etc.

I’ve seen first hand through family members how much of a struggle it is to place a truly poor kid in an expensive private school. Most schools do not give full aid, and even in cases where a school gives 99% aid, a truly poor family will struggle to pay that 1% b/c they can barely keep the lights on. And that’s before they even can think about covering all those other services that I mentioned public schools provide.

That’s not to say a poor kid cannot benefit from a private school education, but it’s a lot more complicated than people on this thread realize and if a school is going to take that on, it’s a much bigger commitment than just providing tuition.

beyond financials, truly poor families are also going to be more likely to have other social issues like unstable housing that might impact the child’s ability to get to school. The parents are less likely to be highly educated and may not be able to help provide academic support themselves and at the same time, they also don’t have the resources to pay for tutors.

People with means in private school have no idea the level of support the public school system provides to poor kids. It’s above and beyond what private schools provide.

I understand that, but you are generalizing that poor families won’t be able to cope with private schools. Certainly some might not. But I truly believe that talented hardworking kids not only could benefit from financial at private schools but also could be a very positive addition to the community. Most families in dc do live in a bubbly and are not really interested in interacting with people outside the bubble. In response to your point. You can get poor kids that are a mismatch for the school, but it is the responsibility of the admission office to get a good match. Might it be hard to recruit kids from low income families ? Yes. Then school should work harder to get them.

What is the school/school community getting out of all this work to bring in more poor students? I live in DC, I can interact with poor kids anytime. Why should I subsidize their tuition at my children’s private school?

Well, isn’t that the concept of diversity and inclusion championed by all private schools? Maybe is just façade.

Have you considered that there are limits to the level of economic diversity private schools can afford? Providing financial aid for a LMC (but relatively stable) family with a high achieving student? Sure. Providing aid for a family at risk of homelessness is another story. Once again, what is the school community getting out of having students from the latter group?

I understand that you have a preference for a members of the community. I am UMC and donate money for financial aid. The question is if it’s acceptable a system that provides financial aid to UMC families with good salaries. Or you start to prioritize low income families. This is nothing crazy. It’s what many Ivy League universities do.

I tend to think you don’t understand real poverty. A college is an insulated environment. When Ivies provide aid, they’re also providing housing, food, healthcare and stability. That’s a situation with a greater likelihood of success and not a model a private day school can replicate.

There are already a few low income families already receiving full aid in some schools with great success and none of the problems you mention. Can that be expanded to a few more low income families? I am sure it is possible.

What you consider “low income” might actually be middle class, but to you it looks low income because you’re umc/wealthy. If these have stable jobs and stable transportation and own a home or at least have stable housing, though they may look poor by your standards, they are not indeed poor. So that begs the question, what are people actually taking about when they say they want financial aid to go to poor kids. Because I just described what poverty actually looks like and you seem to be describing something else.

If you own your house, own 1 or 2 cars, and can travel on holidays even domestically every year you are clearly middle class.

Low income might rent, might have a car and might not be able to travel every year.

The point I was trying to mention is that I see a lot of the former and almost none of the latter. The problem is that there are a lot of middle class people that that have a super tight budget and Don’t receive any financial aid. In that case how to decide which middle class should deserve financial aid. I think it’s easier to just focus on full financial aid to lower income families.

You seem to be talking about the lower end of the middle class, which is a huge category anyway. We probably need to be specific because people just throw out terms like financial aid should be going to poor kids with clearly no sense of what that even means. If we’re talking about which middle class families need aid the most, I think the reality is a lot of middle class families on any part of the spectrum would be shut out of private school without some level of aid.

Financial aid is limited. How do you prioritize? I think private schools should benefit by giving financial aid just to the smartest kids based on real financial needs. If most of the middle class families do not receive financial aid, they have resources to choose a cheaper private school or move to a better school district. I think aid right now is given to upper middle class families that cannot afford expensive private schools, but I am wondering if it’s a good use of the money. Still think that financial aid should be prioritized to Lower income families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of schools devoting a lot of effort in fundraising for financial aid, and the importance of financial to support diversity and families in need.

However, when I see the families that are using financial aid I see only upper middle class families with several children, and not even top performers.

Shouldn’t fínancial aid be stricter (let’s say truly low income households) and perhaps the brightest or athletic chidlren from middle class families.

In its current form (at least in my children’s school) the financial aid looks pretty much like a giveaway for well off parents. Does anyone observe the same pattern?

Yes! They should be Stricker. Now families who are not US citizens , lived their live outside of Us, are coming to receive FA and then returning to home country.

So only FA to families born in the US? Even if the kids are legal residents?

US citizens? Yes!
Legal residents, green card and visa holders, and undocumented residents? No. Public school or pay the full tuition.

It has nothing to be with deported. Example parent who are citizens of somewhere in Europe, or Asia and move for work bring their kids. They apply to private and reduce the FA given to US citizens children. WIS is noted for this. We have US parents taking out loans because they get reduced FA. We are not responsible for non- us citizens kids to pay private tuition.



So kids born in the us, legal residents and citizens, with ilegal parents probably don’t deserve any FA because their parents might be deported, right?

How about families from Europe or Asia that move here for work, but don’t become US citizens or green card holders, but whose kids are born in the US? These people buy houses and have all the intention to stay for ever? Would they be deserving enough for you?

[Anonymous]

These threads continue to prove that DCUM has no idea what poverty actually looks like. What everyone is describing as “poor” are actually lower middle class families who prioritize private education so they limit vacations, drive old cars, use public transit, etc. They need FA to close the gap and make private school a possibility.

I grew up poor. I never went on vacation until I went to WV with a boyfriend in high school to visit his family. Vacations aren’t something poor ppl don’t do some years. It something they can’t afford to do ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These threads continue to prove that DCUM has no idea what poverty actually looks like. What everyone is describing as “poor” are actually lower middle class families who prioritize private education so they limit vacations, drive old cars, use public transit, etc. They need FA to close the gap and make private school a possibility.

I grew up poor. I never went on vacation until I went to WV with a boyfriend in high school to visit his family. Vacations aren’t something poor ppl don’t do some years. It something they can’t afford to do ever.

yep. What does DCUM think is an actual income that is poor enough to deserve aid?
Can you all provide numbers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These threads continue to prove that DCUM has no idea what poverty actually looks like. What everyone is describing as “poor” are actually lower middle class families who prioritize private education so they limit vacations, drive old cars, use public transit, etc. They need FA to close the gap and make private school a possibility.

I grew up poor. I never went on vacation until I went to WV with a boyfriend in high school to visit his family. Vacations aren’t something poor ppl don’t do some years. It something they can’t afford to do ever.

But posters here don’t even want lower middle income families in their schools and less low income. That’s my point. Move to a financial aid system prioritizing low income families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These threads continue to prove that DCUM has no idea what poverty actually looks like. What everyone is describing as “poor” are actually lower middle class families who prioritize private education so they limit vacations, drive old cars, use public transit, etc. They need FA to close the gap and make private school a possibility.

I grew up poor. I never went on vacation until I went to WV with a boyfriend in high school to visit his family. Vacations aren’t something poor ppl don’t do some years. It something they can’t afford to do ever.

But posters here don’t even want lower middle income families in their schools and less low income. That’s my point. Move to a financial aid system prioritizing low income families.

You’re looking to create what’s described as a barbell effect simply to make yourself feel good. This has been studied and is generally not considered a desirable outcome.