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?
Poor students do get preferential admission and free rides at schools like Princeton. Some of them rise to the academic rigor while others don't. Same thing happens to legacy and sports admits as well.
Anonymous wrote:I bet the discrepancies are worse for FGLI kids at big state schools, where you’re on your own to handle everything and where everything is “pay to play” I.e. you can buy better meal plans, better housing (both more luxurious & closer to campus), have to pay to go to sporting events, greek life etc. JMU certainly isn’t giving kids grants to afford greek life in the way that Princeton gives kids grants to afford eating clubs.
At Harvard, EVERY first year is on an unlimited meal plan. There is no paying more or less to buy a different kind of meal plan.
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.
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?
Anonymous wrote: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.
You're comment is not the takeaway I see from OP's post
"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."
Oh, a 3.5 GPA from Stanford is so bad?
How dare Stanford risk sullying their academic reputation by allowing in such riff raff
![]()
+1 I don't understand how one draws that conclusion when the lowest income students are doing pretty damn well. Imagine if they didn't have to worry about work study, family obligations, and such like their higher household income peers.
Anonymous wrote:You feel bad for all the wrong reasons. It’s incredibly isolating to be first gen. No one back home gets it or can offer meaningful advice. Some of them are even trying to bring you down a notch. You’re painfully aware you’re not “one of” the elites who set the tone for your school. And you don’t understand how to leverage this big name school for the outcomes you know you’re supposed to.
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.
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.
It's funny you mention that. There's a part of the survey which corresponds to GPA for having high school honors (generally a public school thing, commonly seen on low income household applications) vs. not having any high school honors (generally a private school or extremely competitive public school thing, where they hesitate to rank students so that outcomes can be as good as possible...and something seen on higher income household applications).
The students with high school honors do noticeably worse than students who don't report having any.
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Kids from lower economic backgrounds have not had the benefit of private tutoring and elite HS rigor to prepare them for college hence the lower GPA. [If they're not prepared to be there, they shouldn't be there.]
They may not have been held to the same academic standards as an elite HS. They probably know cheating is not ok but if everyone you know does it in school, how to you really understand the impact? [If they are smart enough to be at Princeton, they are smart enough to know that cheating is absolutely unacceptable.]
For jobs, I think you need to take out the jobs that we’re gotten through connections. Lower income kids don’t have a pipeline into a high paying job interview.
[Few full-pay kids have this either. And the lack of connections is counterbalanced by the fact that many, many companies are eager to make diversity hires.]
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.
You're comment is not the takeaway I see from OP's post
"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."
Oh, a 3.5 GPA from Stanford is so bad?
How dare Stanford risk sullying their academic reputation by allowing in such riff raff
![]()
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.