Should financial aid in private school be stricter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's true that most low income families do not understand the process or that FA is even available for schools like this. There has to be an in somewhere that lets them know.

I've worked in the independent school world. It's not just making families aware of the opportunities. For many low income families, they know the schools, and they have no interest in sending their kids to places they view as white, wealthy, and elitist. They don't want to be tokens so school parents can brag about how their school is inclusive and diverse while also complaining about how they're low class, ghetto, uninvolved, takers, and worse.

Those families aren't going to be comfortable attending the annual grade level parents gathering at some wealthy family's home. The schools are rarely equipped to support those kids as they struggle to navigate a completely different culture and set of expectations, nor are they equipped to deal with the very real material and emotional needs of low-income students.

And so families don't apply, by and large. They might have an academic rock star, but they're not going to bother applying to privates because that is not a world they want to be in. You can spend all the money you want on targeted social media, as buys, mailers, even attending community events. It won't move the needle. You can dangle full scholarships and they aren't going to send their kids to elite schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that most low income families do not understand the process or that FA is even available for schools like this. There has to be an in somewhere that lets them know.

Or schools that are actually serious about attracting kids from these families could do more effective outreach.

Most schools don't say they value this. They say they value rounded student bodies, and most do.... they just chop of the bottom 10-20% of society to make the rest round. If you look closely they aren't hiding this fact. I asked some direct questions about this at campus visits and they are actually quite open and honest about it. Some admin directors are a bit sheepish, but most have solid responses when asked directly.

That’s what I said upthread. The schools are just talking but they know the families don’t want more than a token poor kid here and there. That’s why no effective outreach. That’s why no poor kids in your kids class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the top graduates at Sidwell, etc are partial financial aid, middle to upper middle class kids who are admitted in high school for their academic strength and interests and their ability to get into top colleges. They are subsidized by the full-pay lifers. The school needs these academic powerhouse kids who can get spots in Ivies, etc. These families can't pay $55K/year (and if asked, would instead go to Blair or TJ or Walls, etc) but they are able to pay $30k or $35K.

I agree with that principle. What I see in my DC school is financial aid to to UMC that are not the top performers in academics or athletics. So not sure about the fairness of the FA criteria.

Always funny to see how much posters value athletics.

I value more socioeconomic diversity, which is lacking in my DC private school.

How do you know? Kids don't "look poor" enough?

My family is a FA family. I was a first gen college student and spouse was a military brat. We have solidly MC jobs. We can't afford the horse lessons, European trips, or au pairs and cleaners that classmates have. But we do take domestic vacations, own a home, and pay for music lessons. Kid has new shoes. There's nothing you would see in the carpool line, other than an older model car, that would tell you our situation.

I am not talking about you, but about my kids school. No low income families. I come from a low income family and I know about this.

But there are people like me in every school.

As a family that receives FA, I often feel these threads about "stricter" FA are looking for performative poverty from kids who nonetheless act (and test) like rich kids in the classroom. If you wanted actual SES diversity, public school is right there - but accommodating a huge array of tough family situations is exactly why our public school cannot provide the same education that our private school can. If it was easy to do both, we'd just have better public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's true that most low income families do not understand the process or that FA is even available for schools like this. There has to be an in somewhere that lets them know.

I've worked in the independent school world. It's not just making families aware of the opportunities. For many low income families, they know the schools, and they have no interest in sending their kids to places they view as white, wealthy, and elitist. They don't want to be tokens so school parents can brag about how their school is inclusive and diverse while also complaining about how they're low class, ghetto, uninvolved, takers, and worse.

Those families aren't going to be comfortable attending the annual grade level parents gathering at some wealthy family's home. The schools are rarely equipped to support those kids as they struggle to navigate a completely different culture and set of expectations, nor are they equipped to deal with the very real material and emotional needs of low-income students.

And so families don't apply, by and large. They might have an academic rock star, but they're not going to bother applying to privates because that is not a world they want to be in. You can spend all the money you want on targeted social media, as buys, mailers, even attending community events. It won't move the needle. You can dangle full scholarships and they aren't going to send their kids to elite schools.

I think this might be inaccurate. I think private schools give extremely few full tuition grants, that’s the main reason. They might prefer to give 50 percent aid to slightly richer families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Agree with your assessment …. About your posts . This is what you initially posted :

“ It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.”

Yes, that was intentional

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the top graduates at Sidwell, etc are partial financial aid, middle to upper middle class kids who are admitted in high school for their academic strength and interests and their ability to get into top colleges. They are subsidized by the full-pay lifers. The school needs these academic powerhouse kids who can get spots in Ivies, etc. These families can't pay $55K/year (and if asked, would instead go to Blair or TJ or Walls, etc) but they are able to pay $30k or $35K.

I agree with that principle. What I see in my DC school is financial aid to to UMC that are not the top performers in academics or athletics. So not sure about the fairness of the FA criteria.

Always funny to see how much posters value athletics.

I value more socioeconomic diversity, which is lacking in my DC private school.

How do you know? Kids don't "look poor" enough?

My family is a FA family. I was a first gen college student and spouse was a military brat. We have solidly MC jobs. We can't afford the horse lessons, European trips, or au pairs and cleaners that classmates have. But we do take domestic vacations, own a home, and pay for music lessons. Kid has new shoes. There's nothing you would see in the carpool line, other than an older model car, that would tell you our situation.

I am not talking about you, but about my kids school. No low income families. I come from a low income family and I know about this.

But there are people like me in every school.

As a family that receives FA, I often feel these threads about "stricter" FA are looking for performative poverty from kids who nonetheless act (and test) like rich kids in the classroom. If you wanted actual SES diversity, public school is right there - but accommodating a huge array of tough family situations is exactly why our public school cannot provide the same education that our private school can. If it was easy to do both, we'd just have better public schools.

Yes, schools might have families like you but not like mine. We don’t go on vacation every year we don’t own a home and cannot afford music lessons. Maybe more financial aid should be given to low income families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Agree with your assessment …. About your posts . This is what you initially posted :

“ It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.”

Yes, that was intentional

Another Karen in the thread ☝️

[Anonymous]

When private schools publish their $ and % on how much FA they give, do those numbers include the discounts on tuition they give to children of teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When private schools publish their $ and % on how much FA they give, do those numbers include the discounts on tuition they give to children of teachers?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of the top graduates at Sidwell, etc are partial financial aid, middle to upper middle class kids who are admitted in high school for their academic strength and interests and their ability to get into top colleges. They are subsidized by the full-pay lifers. The school needs these academic powerhouse kids who can get spots in Ivies, etc. These families can't pay $55K/year (and if asked, would instead go to Blair or TJ or Walls, etc) but they are able to pay $30k or $35K.

I agree with that principle. What I see in my DC school is financial aid to to UMC that are not the top performers in academics or athletics. So not sure about the fairness of the FA criteria.

Always funny to see how much posters value athletics.

I value more socioeconomic diversity, which is lacking in my DC private school.

How do you know? Kids don't "look poor" enough?

My family is a FA family. I was a first gen college student and spouse was a military brat. We have solidly MC jobs. We can't afford the horse lessons, European trips, or au pairs and cleaners that classmates have. But we do take domestic vacations, own a home, and pay for music lessons. Kid has new shoes. There's nothing you would see in the carpool line, other than an older model car, that would tell you our situation.

I am not talking about you, but about my kids school. No low income families. I come from a low income family and I know about this.

But there are people like me in every school.

As a family that receives FA, I often feel these threads about "stricter" FA are looking for performative poverty from kids who nonetheless act (and test) like rich kids in the classroom. If you wanted actual SES diversity, public school is right there - but accommodating a huge array of tough family situations is exactly why our public school cannot provide the same education that our private school can. If it was easy to do both, we'd just have better public schools.

Yes, schools might have families like you but not like mine. We don’t go on vacation every year we don’t own a home and cannot afford music lessons. Maybe more financial aid should be given to low income families?

Do you receive FA?
I don't understand how there are no families like yours, if you are there. You think you are the only one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Forgot to add - but you are the poor, low IQ person trying to understand how financial aid works to get her inferior kids into private school to possibly better their despot lives.

Now - does that addition make you more or less likely to see my point of view?

That's how psychology works outside of AI tools. Humans have emotions and we cannot get away from that.

Please let us know to which school your kid goes so families that need financial aid do not apply there.

Of course! Why wouldn't I divulge this info. Google "expensive private schools" then assume I have a kid at each of these schools. You're welcome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Forgot to add - but you are the poor, low IQ person trying to understand how financial aid works to get her inferior kids into private school to possibly better their despot lives.

Now - does that addition make you more or less likely to see my point of view?

That's how psychology works outside of AI tools. Humans have emotions and we cannot get away from that.

DCUM Karen ☝️

Lemme guess - your anti bigotry and pro feminism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Agree with your assessment …. About your posts . This is what you initially posted :

“ It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.”

Yes, that was intentional

Another Karen in the thread ☝️

And another woman who tears other women down using pejorative words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Forgot to add - but you are the poor, low IQ person trying to understand how financial aid works to get her inferior kids into private school to possibly better their despot lives.

Now - does that addition make you more or less likely to see my point of view?

That's how psychology works outside of AI tools. Humans have emotions and we cannot get away from that.

Please let us know to which school your kid goes so families that need financial aid do not apply there.

Of course! Why wouldn't I divulge this info. Google "expensive private schools" then assume I have a kid at each of these schools. You're welcome!

Those schools promote inclusion. I can tell didn’t work very well with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of defensiveness here. I’m with you OP. I’d much rather my school give scholarships to truly low income children who need a chance in life vs UMC families that want private but can’t afford it.

Most, if not everyone, would agree with this. If you don’t think your school is doing this, bring it up to your school’s board. If they don’t fix it, stop donating or start your own scholarship targeting the exact groups you want to help.

OP is nosy and making assumptions about people’s financial aid and income statuses. She probably doesn’t even donate to her school.

I only know for sure a few kids that get financial aid. All of them have parents that work at the school. These parents are definitely invested in their kids and the school. They are middle class and they wouldn't be able to afford the $80k+ to see their 2+ kids there. Some of these are our favorite teachers so offering financial aid as an employment perk is fine with me. Actually, I'd rather have this than truly low income kids whose parents are uninvolved in the school because they work 2 jobs and have alcoholism - my daughter was friends with a girl like this at our school and we very much tried to be that support system. Fast forward to highschool and the girl failed out, her mother died or liver failure, and last I heard she's the 'entrepreneur' selling drugs. Five years of financial aid wasted in my opinion.

The main issue with this post is that it makes sweeping generalizations about low-income families, reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Here are the key problems:

1. Associating Low-Income Status with Parental Neglect and Addiction
The post implies that truly low-income parents are generally uninvolved in their children’s education because they work multiple jobs and struggle with alcoholism.
While some families face hardships, not all low-income parents are uninvolved, nor do they all struggle with addiction. Many work hard to support their children’s education.

2. Suggesting That Financial Aid for Low-Income Students Is a "Waste"
The post frames financial aid as only worthwhile if the student succeeds, rather than as an opportunity for those who wouldn’t otherwise afford private school.
The idea that a student "failed out" and their mother’s death led them to selling drugs suggests a lack of empathy for systemic issues rather than recognizing the challenges some students face.

3. Favoritism Toward Middle-Class Families Over Low-Income Families
The poster prefers financial aid to go to middle-class teachers rather than low-income families, based on personal comfort with teachers.
This reinforces elitism—that financial aid should benefit those who "fit in" rather than those with the greatest financial need.

4. Insensitive Language & Judgmental Tone
Describing someone as an “entrepreneur” selling drugs trivializes their struggles.
The phrase “five years of financial aid wasted” is particularly problematic because it suggests that struggling students don’t deserve help unless they meet a certain outcome.

While concerns about school culture and parental involvement are valid, this post comes across as classist and lacking compassion. It assumes that financial aid should only go to students with stable families, ignoring that financial aid exists to give disadvantaged kids a chance, not just to reward those with ideal circumstances.

It's lived experience. Bias develops through lived experience. You could benefit from a basic psychology course. And yes, people here write about lived experience.

BTW - 'entrepreneur' I the term the kids in HS use. Perhaps you should get familiar with this before your kids get there.

Thanks for the AI response though. It shows your inability to think and form a real opinion.

The AI is so people become a bit more aware about how elitist and racist are. I really like the AI interpretation of posts like yours. Maybe you should also check so you are a bit more aware of how an awful person you are.

Right.... because calling people "awful" will produce kind egalitarian people. Do you even see the irony or are you too stupid for that too?

Oh sorry. There is a typo.

Yes, we should exclude low income families from financial aid. You are a beautiful person and you are right.

How about just understanding the way psychology works and what people say publicly and anonymously.... and the natural resistance to change, especially when you insult them.

Forgot to add - but you are the poor, low IQ person trying to understand how financial aid works to get her inferior kids into private school to possibly better their despot lives.

Now - does that addition make you more or less likely to see my point of view?

That's how psychology works outside of AI tools. Humans have emotions and we cannot get away from that.

DCUM Karen ☝️

Lemme guess - your anti bigotry and pro feminism?

No. Just anti Karen’s.