Do you really need to do all this to get into a good college?

[Anonymous]

I am extremely worried about paying for college. My children are bright, but not exceptional, and one has a learning disability. We have a paid off mortgage and some assets, but we are loathe to dip deeply into our assets to pay for our childrens' college expenses. If we do, we will not have enough money to live on when we retire. DH does not have job stability, and I am in a very low-paying field.

So, what to do? Give up our nest egg so the children can attend a good college? Send them to large state schools, which would certainly not be appropriate for my LD child for a variety of reasons.

I'm hoping my children will get scholarships from some second-tier schools that really want them. They are athletes, varsity level and pretty good, but not extraordinary. I'm hoping this package of decent grades, excellent athletic abilities will get them a mostly free ride somewhere OK. I know two very wealthy families whose children have gotten free rides for the same reason. These families chose to save the $50K per year and send their kids to the "lesser" schools.

And yes, I am pushing my kids to get good grades because I don't want to be poor in my old age, and I don't want them to go to our community college either.

If the price of college had not rise so extraordinarily (what has risen in price over the past 30 years at the rate of college tuition -- anything??) we could afford to send our kids to college with very little help. Now, no way.

My parents were middle class, yet they paid for my Ivy education, mostly. I got a student loan, a small grant and a part-time job shelving books in the library. After four years, I had a small debt to pay off, but nothing like the staggering debt kids are loaded with today when they graduate. I don't want my kids to carry that burden, and I don't want to be poor in my retirement. So it's scholarships or community college for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it were so easy to do well based on failure, the kids in the slums would be doing the best, right? Kids today have enormous pressures that we didn't have before. They are not necessarily weak. I think it will only get better for kids and parents if everyone realizes that we need to raise more well balanced children and less one-dimensional ones. Unfortunately the colleges are hurting this effort by focusing on recruits that fit some niche of theirs instead of considering accomplished but still well balanced individuals like they used to.

I think you are not really understanding my meaning. My concern is that in the age of helicopter parenting on steroids, many kids are losing important soft skills such as critical thinking, self-determination and yes perseverance in the face of failure. I don't think failing makes you good at overcoming failure. Having families teach you emotional resilience is far more important.

[Anonymous]

Maybe we are not "doing all this" to get into a good college. Our DD is at Beauvoir and we are spending this money for her primary education for the life she will have there during those years-- not for something down the road. It's for the here and now, and college has nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

No it's not. I went to an average to good public school in New York (LI), and then went to a SUNY college, then a first tier non-Ivy law school and 8 years later am GC after spending 7 years at a law firm. Very happy.

[Anonymous]

It's for the here and now, and college has nothing to do with it.

That is the right attitude. Hope you mean it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it were so easy to do well based on failure, the kids in the slums would be doing the best, right? Kids today have enormous pressures that we didn't have before. They are not necessarily weak. I think it will only get better for kids and parents if everyone realizes that we need to raise more well balanced children and less one-dimensional ones. Unfortunately the colleges are hurting this effort by focusing on recruits that fit some niche of theirs instead of considering accomplished but still well balanced individuals like they used to.

I think you are not really understanding my meaning. My concern is that in the age of helicopter parenting on steroids, many kids are losing important soft skills such as critical thinking, self-determination and yes perseverance in the face of failure. I don't think failing makes you good at overcoming failure. Having families teach you emotional resilience is far more important.

Exactly. And it is silly to compare the kind of standing on your own feet lessons that a middle or upper middle class parent can choose to provide a child with the grinding lessons of living in abject poverty. Research is showing now that living in the constant state of stress associated with poverty actually compromises intellectual performance and can have lifelong impact. Giving my comfortable, well-fed and -clothed, and generally cossetted children the tools and freedom they need to learn to fight their own battles and persevere in the face of challenge (as opposed to hardship) is about character building. It should not be confused with the kind of hardship poor children must endure.

[Anonymous]

It's not Harvard or Yale, but GW gives really substantial financial aid to kids for a variety of reasons. I got a full tuition scholarship there for being a National Merit scholar. Granted, the room/board was still expensive, but full-tuition is pretty good and I got a great education and came out almost debt-free.

So don't necessarily be scared away by a high private school price tag - some very expensive schools charge certain (rich, often foreign) kids a lot to give great aid to those who need it.

[Anonymous]

9:52 - you might look into some smaller state schools for your LD kid- not all state schools are huge. Some of them might have a pretty small differential between in-state tuition and out-of-state tuition. A school like UMD-Frostburg will be smaller and more navigable than UMD-College Park, for example, and probably easier to get into.

[Anonymous]

11:40 and 18:19 I think you're missing my meaning as well. My point is that I don't think children these days are weak at all. If anything the "privileged" at least if you're going to include middle class children have more pressure and more responsibility than before. There are more "requirements" for graduating and going on to college. Colleges want children who excel at something. Fewer parents have the means to pay for college, living expenses, and other big ticket items like insurance and weddings down the road. Basically I believe the race to nowhere exists and involves a lot of pressure that children especially high schoolers are putting on themselves to achieve. I don't worry about my children experiencing academic failure. I think they'll get plenty. I worry about my children not having enough time to become a well rounded and well adjusted person. I was responding to the comments below. If early success in some field is what's most important to colleges, then yes I think the elementary school or whatever early learning school be it for art, music, or sports, is key just to be ready to excel by high school although I don't think it should be. I would prefer colleges consider children who devote time to all aspects of their life as opposed to just academics or specializing in one or two areas of interest.

I think it would be better to worry about whether my kid is going to be resilient and can overcome failure.

Really interesting, and a very good commentary on the extremely privileged, but rather weak, generation we're raising. Your last sentence is really the key to success for children, not what elementary school they go to. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it is now hell and it's nothing like what we went through when we applied to college or to grad school. The world has completely changed.

Is this really true? I applied to college in the late-1990s, and the Ivy admissions process was fierce then, as it is now. For better or worse, parents in my Ivy League hometown spent years worrying about their children's chances, sent them to SAT prep camps, wrote their kids essays for them, and on and on. There were books on the admissions process discussing how to get in at the "right school".

I didn't even bother with the Ivies (SATs were just not at the appropriate theshold) - but still had a great college experience, earned a doctorate in my field, and have a job I enjoy.

I think that people who make this statement are comparing college admissions to the 80's, not late 90's. I graduated high school in 90 and it was a totally different ball game than it is now.

[Anonymous]

I got into an Ivy in the late 90's and think it's much more competitive now. I only took 2 AP classes throughout high school.

[Anonymous]

$240,000 for an undergraduate education is too expensive for at least 95% of the population. Rankings have taken over our lives. With all the information, lists, and rankings for every aspect of our lives, the question we torture ourselves with is "Are we good enough?". Is this college good enough? Is this high school good enough? Is this neighborhood good enough? We have created a frenzy and with every aspect of our lives. We have so much opportunity in this country but yet we still feel we are missing out on something. I think there is plenty out there that is good enough. Happiness comes from being easily satisfied. A degree from an overpriced, overranked college will not lead to greater happiness.