Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think PP focuses on affordability, which is different from economic diversity. I'm not too concerned about how others finance their DC education, but I'd like my upper middle class child to have exposure to children from a range of SES backgrounds. Few children in the DMV bubble have encountered working class children.

So as long as the poors are around to provide a diverse environment for your child, you don't give a shit how they got there or whether they have bankrupted their futures with gigantic student loans? Jesus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laughing out loud at DCUM moms discussing economic diversity. How many of you have ever lived in an area with a white working class? The DMV is a true bubble where there are virtually no manufacturing jobs and no traditional working class. There are government employees, but even those jobs are largely demographically segregated. This isn't the real world folks and you are probably doing well to make sure that your little cupcakes are ensconced in nice safe private schools and SLACs where there don't have to encounter the real middle and lower classes. The shock might be too great.

Are you under the impression that everyone here was born and raised in Potomac? There are plenty of people here who are well acquainted with middle and lower class people. Many of us call them "family."

Anonymous wrote:Laughing out loud at DCUM moms discussing economic diversity. How many of you have ever lived in an area with a white working class? The DMV is a true bubble where there are virtually no manufacturing jobs and no traditional working class. There are government employees, but even those jobs are largely demographically segregated. This isn't the real world folks and you are probably doing well to make sure that your little cupcakes are ensconced in nice safe private schools and SLACs where there don't have to encounter the real middle and lower classes. The shock might be too great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's difficult to interpret these data, because the top schools are much more likely than others to meet 100% of the need of students from lower income families. So, e.g., only 14% of students at Yale are poor enough to qualify for Pell grants, but since Yale meets 100% need, all of them will be getting substantial financial aid. Students from families making under $30,000 will pay an average $7800 per year to go to Yale. By comparison, 22% of the students at NYU qualify for Pell Grants, but NYU doesn't meet full need, so the average price paid per year for students from families with income under $30,000 is $27,000--an OUTRAGEOUS amount of money that is almost certainly being financed with loans. You can see that by clicking the "net price" tab here:

http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=new+york+university&s=all&id=193900

So I dunno, is NYU doing these poor students any big favor?

Low-income students at Ivies still take the Pell. Elite schools that offer to meet 100% of demonstrated need on the FAFSA without loans add Pells, SEOGs, and any state grants for which a student is eligible into their calculations. So, yes Pells are a good indicator of how many low-income students a school accepts.

Sorry top PP, I reread what you wrote and realized I misinterpreted, you were saying that Yale accepts fewer Pell eligible students, but makes sure the school is affordable. I do think you make a good point.

I work with low-income college-bound students, and it's horrible to see a student with a family income of $18,000 get into a school with a financial aid offer that leaves an over $20,000 gap. And, it's really hard to have that conversation with families that no, taking a PLUS loan that is more than the family's income is not a good idea.

Anonymous wrote:I think PP focuses on affordability, which is different from economic diversity. I'm not too concerned about how others finance their DC education, but I'd like my upper middle class child to have exposure to children from a range of SES backgrounds. Few children in the DMV bubble have encountered working class children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you really want economic diversity going to a slightly lower ranked state school would be your best bet. For example, About 80% of Temple Univ students get financial aid. The student population is not excessively wealthy.

Separate, but equal, eh? or is it "let them eat cake?"

Anonymous wrote:If you really want economic diversity going to a slightly lower ranked state school would be your best bet. For example, About 80% of Temple Univ students get financial aid. The student population is not excessively wealthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's difficult to interpret these data, because the top schools are much more likely than others to meet 100% of the need of students from lower income families. So, e.g., only 14% of students at Yale are poor enough to qualify for Pell grants, but since Yale meets 100% need, all of them will be getting substantial financial aid. Students from families making under $30,000 will pay an average $7800 per year to go to Yale. By comparison, 22% of the students at NYU qualify for Pell Grants, but NYU doesn't meet full need, so the average price paid per year for students from families with income under $30,000 is $27,000--an OUTRAGEOUS amount of money that is almost certainly being financed with loans. You can see that by clicking the "net price" tab here:

http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=new+york+university&s=all&id=193900

So I dunno, is NYU doing these poor students any big favor?

Low-income students at Ivies still take the Pell. Elite schools that offer to meet 100% of demonstrated need on the FAFSA without loans add Pells, SEOGs, and any state grants for which a student is eligible into their calculations. So, yes Pells are a good indicator of how many low-income students a school accepts.

Both schools actually give quite a bit away, but no one is clamoring for economic diversity at these schools so it is not a priority - yet.

Harvard and Yale didn't get endowments of 32 and 20 billion respectively by giving money away.