I feel bad for low-income/first-gen students at elite schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It really means many of them were academically less qualified to get into Princeton in the first place. They took advantage of the rest of the applicants, got a free ride (FA and more), and now they're asking for more free rides?

Your comment indicates that you have no understanding of what it means to be from a family where no one has gone to college and there is no money for anything but necessities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a senior survey at Princeton which had a breakdown for GPA across income levels, first-gen status, etc: https://projects.dailyprincetonian.com/senior-survey-2022/academics.html

50% of first-gen students had a 3.6 GPA or higher, compared to 69% of non-first gen students.

The lowest income students by family household (below 40K) at Princeton had an average GPA of a 3.5, while the highest income students had a 3.72.

32% of the lowest income students reported cheating on an assignment or exam, compared to 21% of students overall.

Only 49% of students on financial aid reported having a job lined up for graduation, compared to 62% of those not on FA. Expected income for those on FA was 84K one year after graduating, compared to 124K for those not on FA. Students on all household income levels below 125K reported expected earnings under 84K, while all those over that level reported at least 115K.

These are considerable gaps. If higher ed is supposed to be the great equalizer, why are Princeton grads seeing such discrepancies corresponding with their background?

These "discrepancies" demonstrate what should be extremely obvious to everyone, which is that the "elite" schools are admitting low-income / first-gen students who are not academically qualified, and are doing so for ideological reasons.

Totally agree! It’s just feel-good window-dressing by those “elite” universities. Has AA/DEI helped minority communities? Remember that AA started in the 1960’s. A disastrous failure after 60 years of social experiments.

You’re free to send your kids to Hillsdale, Liberty, Oral Roberts, Bob Jones or Grove City. No AA there. Not seeing much AA occurring at Longwood or Radford, either.

[Anonymous]

Oh those poor poor kids. I guess the school shoulda let your rich brat instead?

[Anonymous]

I teach in a Title 1 school and the rigor and workload is definitely lacking. Teachers are basically begging students to show up and hand in any work. If one of my high fliers went to a top school, the workload would crush them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they go to those schools and major in useless stuff, then good luck.
Of course it's better than majoring in useless stuff at a mediocre school, however it has more to do with major.

Who has the luxury of useless degrees?
I was first gen and went into engineering and did fine, even though a different science might have been my first pick if money was no object. I knew I had to have a career track right out of undergrad.

What you may not know about being poor is that you don't pick up merchandise unless you already know the price of it. I knew the other degrees were not in my budget.

Lots of lesser prepared kids get weeded out of “useful” majors like engineering, biology, computer science, physics & statistics. Even nursing (although Princeton doesn’t offer that).

Simple reason: Because those URM kids who were admitted only because of AA/DEI can’t handle STEM. In liberal arts they can fudge. They may even be given a free pass if they can’t write grammatically correct sentences. (Not suggesting that ANY liberal arts professors should EVER do that!) But in STEM there is no way to fudge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a Title 1 school and the rigor and workload is definitely lacking. Teachers are basically begging students to show up and hand in any work. If one of my high fliers went to a top school, the workload would crush them.

I went from a 60% FARMs public high school (that I took 6 AP classes at) to a T30 state flagship. No issues re: workload. I do come from a middle/upper middle class family, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really means many of them were academically less qualified to get into Princeton in the first place. They took advantage of the rest of the applicants, got a free ride (FA and more), and now they're asking for more free rides?

Your comment indicates that you have no understanding of what it means to be from a family where no one has gone to college and there is no money for anything but necessities.

I do understand. But where does it end in terms of giving them free rides?

[Anonymous]

Poorer people struggle no matter where they are and no matter the situation.

It's nice OP that you feel sympathy for them, but if those have something that the vast majority of kids, even from middle class families don't have -- name brand prestigious college education which will open a lot more doors than say, UMD.

However, I do think that kids who were admitted based on factors other than academics (like athletes or DEI) will struggle academically. They must've known that there won't be grade inflation, turn in assignment late and get full credit, and test corrections in college, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t go to Princeton, but I was a first gen student and Pell grant recipient at a private college in the mid 00s. It was hard. One huge difference in my experience vs my wealthier peers was internships. I had to work during college, often 2-3 jobs, so I couldn’t take unpaid internships because I needed money for tuition, room and board, food, etc. The lack of experience made it much more difficult to get a job, especially during a recession.

+1 similar experience to you. I had no college life or made any friends there because I was working full-time and going to school full-time. I know my grades suffered because I worked so much! I spent time studying, but looking back on it I don’t think it was quality time. When I when I wasn’t working and wasn’t in class, then I was studying. They went my social life!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really means many of them were academically less qualified to get into Princeton in the first place. They took advantage of the rest of the applicants, got a free ride (FA and more), and now they're asking for more free rides?

Your comment indicates that you have no understanding of what it means to be from a family where no one has gone to college and there is no money for anything but necessities.

I do understand. But where does it end in terms of giving them free rides?

+1 👍

Princeton is not a government welfare office. It’s not meals-on-wheels. It’s not Salvation Army. Got it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they go to those schools and major in useless stuff, then good luck.
Of course it's better than majoring in useless stuff at a mediocre school, however it has more to do with major.

Who has the luxury of useless degrees?
I was first gen and went into engineering and did fine, even though a different science might have been my first pick if money was no object. I knew I had to have a career track right out of undergrad.

What you may not know about being poor is that you don't pick up merchandise unless you already know the price of it. I knew the other degrees were not in my budget.

Lots of lesser prepared kids get weeded out of “useful” majors like engineering, biology, computer science, physics & statistics. Even nursing (although Princeton doesn’t offer that).

Simple reason: Because those URM kids who were admitted only because of AA/DEI can’t handle STEM. In liberal arts they can fudge. They may even be given a free pass if they can’t write grammatically correct sentences. (Not suggesting that ANY liberal arts professors should EVER do that!) But in STEM there is no way to fudge.

+1 a DEI type student in my DC's math class got into an ivy. DC says this kid struggles a lot in the math class, and that they are going to flame out in the math classes there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t go to Princeton, but I was a first gen student and Pell grant recipient at a private college in the mid 00s. It was hard. One huge difference in my experience vs my wealthier peers was internships. I had to work during college, often 2-3 jobs, so I couldn’t take unpaid internships because I needed money for tuition, room and board, food, etc. The lack of experience made it much more difficult to get a job, especially during a recession.

+1 similar experience to you. I had no college life or made any friends there because I was working full-time and going to school full-time. I know my grades suffered because I worked so much! I spent time studying, but looking back on it I don’t think it was quality time. When I when I wasn’t working and wasn’t in class, then I was studying. They went my social life!

heck, I went to a no-name state u and did the same. I was either working or in class, and my grades suffered for it. The first year, I didn't work much, and got straight As. The more I worked, the worse my grades got. But, I didn't want to take out loans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a Title 1 school and the rigor and workload is definitely lacking. Teachers are basically begging students to show up and hand in any work. If one of my high fliers went to a top school, the workload would crush them.

So we should punish the kids who do well because no one (including you) can be bothered to educate them? This is the beauty of the UT system- they acknowledge that some high schools and high school teachers are worthless, but they don't punish the kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a senior survey at Princeton which had a breakdown for GPA across income levels, first-gen status, etc: https://projects.dailyprincetonian.com/senior-survey-2022/academics.html

50% of first-gen students had a 3.6 GPA or higher, compared to 69% of non-first gen students.

The lowest income students by family household (below 40K) at Princeton had an average GPA of a 3.5, while the highest income students had a 3.72.

32% of the lowest income students reported cheating on an assignment or exam, compared to 21% of students overall.

Only 49% of students on financial aid reported having a job lined up for graduation, compared to 62% of those not on FA. Expected income for those on FA was 84K one year after graduating, compared to 124K for those not on FA. Students on all household income levels below 125K reported expected earnings under 84K, while all those over that level reported at least 115K.

These are considerable gaps. If higher ed is supposed to be the great equalizer, why are Princeton grads seeing such discrepancies corresponding with their background?

You’re an abusive, manipulative troll with bad motives, and no interest whatsoever in the well-being of kids on financial aid, and you should feel bad about yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach in a Title 1 school and the rigor and workload is definitely lacking. Teachers are basically begging students to show up and hand in any work. If one of my high fliers went to a top school, the workload would crush them.

Sigh, yes, I know.
It crushed me in my first semester, but I'm not a tin can. I scrambled to find what resources I could and graduated with a decent GPA (tough to make up fully for 1st sem.) Did well in my upper level classes and ended up in some good employment positions due to input from some of my professors. I'm scrappy and I'll bet some of your kids are too.