Should financial aid in private school be stricter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People with ability to pay who game the system are not a reason to ban middle class families who cannot afford full pay from financial aid.

And most "poor" families don't even bother applying - would you? There's a lot of incidental costs involved with private school - the uniforms, aftercare, hot lunches, special lunches, the billion special outfits day, like hey wear your favorite football jersey this week, baseball next week, fave green pants, orange shirt, colonial costume, etc etc. The classist vibe. I don't think DD's grade has any poor families at all.

Yes we have to subsidize middle class families so they can cover their incidentals like the bmw, trips to Europe, the mortgage, etc etc

If this is the way you feel, why the heck are you participating in a system clearly against your values?! You're a total hypocrite!

That’s exactly my point. You should erase inclusion from your vocabulary if you want to be a bit more honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our income is in the 350k range in Chevy Chase. We own our (small) home, drive old not fancy cars, and have modest savings for retirement/college as part of our investment portfolio. We do not qualify for aid at our school. I wish we did because given the cost of living here (and college expenses on the horizon), private is a stretch. That’s a choice we make and feel good about spending our money this way. I don’t really know who gets what at our school but I trust the administration to make decisions for our community (that’s not groupthink btw) and I do know there are a couple of full scholarships set aside for families who need that. Mostly the FA (as I understand it from talking with the friends who are on the board) is small amounts to many families.

Good for you! That’s how people should be in private schools. I guess financial aid varies from school to school, but in my kids school I see very few low income families. So if financial aid is very limited why do we have subsidize families like yours that can totally pay for school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a one-size-fits-all situation. In the Cleveland area, a family earning $136K a year would almost never qualify for aid from a Catholic high school—that’s considered upper-middle class there. Tuition is probably around $11K to $25K, and homes are far more affordable; you can buy a nice house for $200K or less.

In contrast, in the D.C. area, $136K is more of a middle-class income. Catholic high school tuition can run anywhere from $20K to $40K, and a modest townhouse might cost $350K or more. If a family earns $136K, has one kid, lives in a $350K townhouse, and the school charges $27K in tuition, I’d absolutely want them to receive aid. It’s all relative to cost of living.

I agree with your statement. Let me tell you what is the issue with an example with a concrete school and publicly available data (so parents from private schools don’t go bananas).

In Maret only 34 percent of the financial aid goes to families with income of 150k or less. So your example falls in that category which I think it’s fair. I don’t feel comfortable, specially with the 34 percent of financial aid that goes to families earning 250k or more. And that’s why I raise the issue if financial aid could be a bit stricter. I personally think that it should stop at an income grater than 150k.

If a really nice family with 4 kids earns 300k, you don't think they should get a break on tuition? Tuition at Maret is about 50k. With 4 kid they would pay 200k in after tax money. There is zero possibility of them being able to afford the school. Personally, I think larger families add to the cultural fabric of the school and increase diversity. Not everyone needs to come from a UMC family with 2 parents, 2 kids and a dog. Larger families, are part of the diversity.

What would happen if that family goes to public schools or decide to go to a cheaper religious private school. Absolutely nothing wrong. So the question is why schools should subsidize them. Why a household with 4 kids is more important than a household with 1 kid? Not entirely clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our income is in the 350k range in Chevy Chase. We own our (small) home, drive old not fancy cars, and have modest savings for retirement/college as part of our investment portfolio. We do not qualify for aid at our school. I wish we did because given the cost of living here (and college expenses on the horizon), private is a stretch. That’s a choice we make and feel good about spending our money this way. I don’t really know who gets what at our school but I trust the administration to make decisions for our community (that’s not groupthink btw) and I do know there are a couple of full scholarships set aside for families who need that. Mostly the FA (as I understand it from talking with the friends who are on the board) is small amounts to many families.

Your income is at least 220k greater than mine. We are one of the families getting aid (I don't know if it is "small") at my kid's school. We are switching to public next year. We love the school, but can no longer sacrifice as much as needed to make it happen.

[Anonymous]

Exactly - you make lifestyle choices as needed to be able to afford what you want ie your kids in private school. You are not expecting other people to make that possible for you while still living in some of the most expensive dive neighborhoods in Bethesda/Chevy Chase and spending weeks on expensive vacations every summer. Landon doesn’t disclose the info that Maret does as far as I can tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Independent school’s bring in who they want. They aren’t getting scammed.

Yes. The only one scammed are middle income families subsidizing other middle income families through financial aid.

Nope, we all know what we are doing.

Well you know. But wouldnt hurt to say that financial aid is not really philanthropy. School are subsidizing well off families and excluding Low income families by design. Then somehow the image of inclusion that want to portray gets a bit tainted, right?

Inclusion is a strange concept. It normally doesn't "include" everyone by design. Take, for example, a huge corporation that advocates for a very inclusive environment. They won't hire uneducated people, yet they say they are inclusive. A school that is "inclusive" is similar- they include people who add to a rounded environment, designed and decided by themselves. Why do they have to "include" people that fall outside their own design?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a one-size-fits-all situation. In the Cleveland area, a family earning $136K a year would almost never qualify for aid from a Catholic high school—that’s considered upper-middle class there. Tuition is probably around $11K to $25K, and homes are far more affordable; you can buy a nice house for $200K or less.

In contrast, in the D.C. area, $136K is more of a middle-class income. Catholic high school tuition can run anywhere from $20K to $40K, and a modest townhouse might cost $350K or more. If a family earns $136K, has one kid, lives in a $350K townhouse, and the school charges $27K in tuition, I’d absolutely want them to receive aid. It’s all relative to cost of living.

What do others think of this comment I think it’s idiotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Independent school’s bring in who they want. They aren’t getting scammed.

Yes. The only one scammed are middle income families subsidizing other middle income families through financial aid.

Nope, we all know what we are doing.

Well you know. But wouldnt hurt to say that financial aid is not really philanthropy. School are subsidizing well off families and excluding Low income families by design. Then somehow the image of inclusion that want to portray gets a bit tainted, right?

Financial aid: it does what is says on the tin, aids finances. It does not say philanthropy. Philanthropy is when someone donates money to a cause. That cause could be to aid finances of others, it could also be to save wildflowers in Antarctica or to fly rich people to the moon. The donor decides if they want to donate; the institution defines the cause and money allocation.

As stated above "inclusion" is defined by the institution, not by you.

If you don't like it, don't participate. (I don't like cucumbers, so I don't eat them. See how easy that is?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Independent school’s bring in who they want. They aren’t getting scammed.

Yes. The only one scammed are middle income families subsidizing other middle income families through financial aid.

Nope, we all know what we are doing.

Well you know. But wouldnt hurt to say that financial aid is not really philanthropy. School are subsidizing well off families and excluding Low income families by design. Then somehow the image of inclusion that want to portray gets a bit tainted, right?

Inclusion is a strange concept. It normally doesn't "include" everyone by design. Take, for example, a huge corporation that advocates for a very inclusive environment. They won't hire uneducated people, yet they say they are inclusive. A school that is "inclusive" is similar- they include people who add to a rounded environment, designed and decided by themselves. Why do they have to "include" people that fall outside their own design?

You should add a footnote in your school brochure for inclusion : “we refer to inclusion as the capacity to include upper income class families that we like”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Independent school’s bring in who they want. They aren’t getting scammed.

Yes. The only one scammed are middle income families subsidizing other middle income families through financial aid.

Nope, we all know what we are doing.

Well you know. But wouldnt hurt to say that financial aid is not really philanthropy. School are subsidizing well off families and excluding Low income families by design. Then somehow the image of inclusion that want to portray gets a bit tainted, right?

Financial aid: it does what is says on the tin, aids finances. It does not say philanthropy. Philanthropy is when someone donates money to a cause. That cause could be to aid finances of others, it could also be to save wildflowers in Antarctica or to fly rich people to the moon. The donor decides if they want to donate; the institution defines the cause and money allocation.

As stated above "inclusion" is defined by the institution, not by you.

If you don't like it, don't participate. (I don't like cucumbers, so I don't eat them. See how easy that is?)

If you actually disclose the household income of families receiving aid do you think people will be equally enthusiastic about it? Maybe you. Not sure about the middle class guys that pay full tuition. Why disclosure becomes such a difficult concept?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys are arguing about aid in schools that even with aid middle class families can’t afford. Most kids in this area attend inadequate, underfunded schools, due to how expensive it is to live here humble yourselves.

Yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is something else.

It’s very revealing about how parents think about inclusion. And how upper middle class families feel entitled to financial aid.

They are not entitled. They are the intended recipients. This is what we donate the money for. The donors and the financial aid offices give it to them on purpose.

Good example of an entitled parent ☝️.

How so? Because I donate to fund financial aid? I prefer that it goes to wealthy families because they have earned it more. Move on with your life.

Send me the link to your school brochure. Where it says inclusive I will suggest to replace it with elitist.

You need to understand their definition of inclusion. All girls schools only include girls - are they exclusive? Soccer teams only include soccer players - are they inclusive?

[Anonymous]

Anyone accepting financial aid at private schools is accepting donations. They are receiving philanthropy. It is expected that they are trying to get themselves back on solid financial footing so they can get off aid.

They should be actively trying to turn their life around so they no longer need charity.

Also, they should try to give back every cent that they received in financial aid to give another kid the same opportunity they had.

Donors are generous because they expect recipients to work towards paying their bills independently and to give back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is something else.

It’s very revealing about how parents think about inclusion. And how upper middle class families feel entitled to financial aid.

Let's get real: This thread is a poster child of the seething elitism that permeates at least the striver subculture in NOVA. They want to be the lords of their newfound elite fiefdom, didn't you hear they "made it" y'all, and they are obnoxiously rude to anybody they perceive as earning less HHI than them, like middle class parents, and wish to trash and exclude them like a school bully. It's very high school. But, they post a meme once a year about caring for the poors or whatever is fashionable to try to cloak the stench of their bully poo - like spraying secret deodorant on pits without showering a month. Nope, you still stink as a human being.

I think you’re misunderstanding - if FA was more strict, actual low income families wouldn’t be affected because they would still qualify. So saying that FA should be stricter isn’t about keeping actual low income families out of schools. The people who would be affected by more strict FA are the ones who are questionably receiving it - which based on how badly some of you don’t want this topic explored must be a lot of people on here.

I didn't say low income. I said middle class.

The troll who started this troll thread is a common elitist type who bullies middle class parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is something else.

It’s very revealing about how parents think about inclusion. And how upper middle class families feel entitled to financial aid.

Let's get real: This thread is a poster child of the seething elitism that permeates at least the striver subculture in NOVA. They want to be the lords of their newfound elite fiefdom, didn't you hear they "made it" y'all, and they are obnoxiously rude to anybody they perceive as earning less HHI than them, like middle class parents, and wish to trash and exclude them like a school bully. It's very high school. But, they post a meme once a year about caring for the poors or whatever is fashionable to try to cloak the stench of their bully poo - like spraying secret deodorant on pits without showering a month. Nope, you still stink as a human being.

I think you’re misunderstanding - if FA was more strict, actual low income families wouldn’t be affected because they would still qualify. So saying that FA should be stricter isn’t about keeping actual low income families out of schools. The people who would be affected by more strict FA are the ones who are questionably receiving it - which based on how badly some of you don’t want this topic explored must be a lot of people on here.

I didn't say low income. I said middle class.

The troll who started this troll thread is a common elitist type who bullies middle class parents.

This troll is unbelievable. He thinks that financial aid should be for low income kids and not for homeowners like us that live in expensive areas of dc. What on earth is this guy thinking?