Anonymous wrote:A lot of these comments are written from the perspective of the "haves." I'll give the perspective of the "have nots."
I grew up lower middle class, but my parents sacrificed and sent me to the most elite private in the city. Even as a second grader, I remember not wanting to have kids over to my house for a birthday party. There was less place to play, less toys and my backyard backed up to a highway.
It only gets worse as you get older. I got to do enrichment activities at the local public library over break or go camping while my friends went to their beach houses, on skiing trips or exotic vacations. Even though we wore uniforms, my shoes were always the "wrong" brand. In high school, all those kids got new cars. I would be embarrassed when boys picked me up for dates. I had to do work-study and get my scholarships renewed to continue to attend the school.
That said, I still had a lot of friends and did fine socially. But don't think for a second that this stuff doesn't matter because it does. Or that kids don't compare, even at a young age.
My parents fought and debated frequently whether to put me in public school. Most of this happened after they thought I was asleep at night, but I heard anyways.
I'm immensely grateful for my education and I do not fault my parents for trying to give me the best. And yes, I realized all the way through that my family had more than 85 percent of the world. My parents made me volunteer at soup kitchens and in Appalachia to provide perspective.
We are considering private for our daughter. It's top on my list that whatever we choose, the school will be economically and racially diverse, with a high percentage of FA students.
How does that work? Where would the school get its funds for FA if it's filled with FA families?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Jealousy? Those full pay parents chose to "scrap by" to increase admission chances for the educational opportunities they value for their kids. I don't think you're very realistic. Anyone can apply but it's not a lottery. You should have bothered to read the thread. May be the fancy degrees and the critical thinking they should have instilled would have clicked in.
Unrealistic about what exactly? Of course I know FA is not a lottery system, it is based on need. The school or degree someone has does not determine need. Need is based on actual income and expenses. For anyone to assume that the type of degree or school one went to determines your need only suggests they have not been paying attention to the financial market. There are many people with fancy degrees from fancy schools that are struggling to get by. I do not begrudge anyone who is scrapping by to pay for their child's tuition, but perhaps they too should be applying for FA instead of viewing it as a government handout they are ashamed to accept. Seems to me that is what is driving most of these comments. Those scrapping by don't want the wealthy full pays to look down on them, yet they freight at night over whether they really fit in or their kid is going to feel their middle class lifestyle is actually akin to poverty.
What's most disturbing about this thread is most of what I have read seems to go completely against the ideal of most IS we have toured. The have tons of donors who are don't have children currently enrolled in the school who donate millions of dollars so the school can offer FA to attract people from all walks of life (what do you think would be a better use of the donors money since THAT IS THE EXACT REASON THEY DONATE IT...I mean where should the million plus dollars slated for FA be redirected?) They all speak of equality for all, social justice for all, equal access to education for ALL regardless of income level (not degree or school attended), yet they seem to admit a significant amount of people who don't hold those core values. Or maybe you all are the exception to the rule and just have the loudest voice because those who are committed to the values don't spend their time looking for posts to unleash their misplaced anger on. Maybe you should move your kids to schools that do not offer FA (some exist) and then you won't have to worry about it.
Here I thought IS where mostly progressive liberal minded people...clearly not.
Our family is part of a private school and I am bemused that people think that there are tons of donors throwing millions of dollars at schools. I would say ideals are upheld to best ability but there's just not that much money between FA and the faculty and capital improvements that make those schools attractive to you. Local private schools don't have the endowments that colleges like the IVY's have. And what endowments exist have been impacted by the economy just as people's finances have been. Personally I have no issues with FA for kids the school determines they want regardless of the parent's jobs or degrees. Full pay parents are saying that the tuition increases have become close to unaffordable for them. Those are the same people that also were contributing to FA so the well is shallower now. In this economy there is a very real conflict between FA and a lid on tuition costs for everyone. It doesn't mean they don't hold the core values. Don't you think they are smart enough to apply for financial aid for themselves if they thought it would do any good? Our yearly tuition has more than doubled since joining the school. Where is all this FA money going to come from when the parents you suggest move to public, have to do so? That million + you refer to comes from a lot of donors giving what they can not just the very wealthy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Jealousy? Those full pay parents chose to "scrap by" to increase admission chances for the educational opportunities they value for their kids. I don't think you're very realistic. Anyone can apply but it's not a lottery. You should have bothered to read the thread. May be the fancy degrees and the critical thinking they should have instilled would have clicked in.
Unrealistic about what exactly? Of course I know FA is not a lottery system, it is based on need. The school or degree someone has does not determine need. Need is based on actual income and expenses. For anyone to assume that the type of degree or school one went to determines your need only suggests they have not been paying attention to the financial market. There are many people with fancy degrees from fancy schools that are struggling to get by. I do not begrudge anyone who is scrapping by to pay for their child's tuition, but perhaps they too should be applying for FA instead of viewing it as a government handout they are ashamed to accept. Seems to me that is what is driving most of these comments. Those scrapping by don't want the wealthy full pays to look down on them, yet they freight at night over whether they really fit in or their kid is going to feel their middle class lifestyle is actually akin to poverty.
What's most disturbing about this thread is most of what I have read seems to go completely against the ideal of most IS we have toured. The have tons of donors who are don't have children currently enrolled in the school who donate millions of dollars so the school can offer FA to attract people from all walks of life (what do you think would be a better use of the donors money since THAT IS THE EXACT REASON THEY DONATE IT...I mean where should the million plus dollars slated for FA be redirected?) They all speak of equality for all, social justice for all, equal access to education for ALL regardless of income level (not degree or school attended), yet they seem to admit a significant amount of people who don't hold those core values. Or maybe you all are the exception to the rule and just have the loudest voice because those who are committed to the values don't spend their time looking for posts to unleash their misplaced anger on. Maybe you should move your kids to schools that do not offer FA (some exist) and then you won't have to worry about it.
Here I thought IS where mostly progressive liberal minded people...clearly not.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At our school some of the families are extremely showy about their wealth. Vacation discussions are the most overheard topic of conversation, luxury cars are the standard in the parking lot, and the kids frequently discuss how they have acquired the latest new toy, video game, big tv, etc. My DD comes home and says she is the only one without Uggs, Tory Burch, Vera Bradley, whatever to wear. Most kids have been to Europe, Hawaii, Costa Rica, Vail, the Caribbean, etc. In fact, families meet up in exotic locations frequently. I don't think its everyone but there is a contingent and it is pervasive.
No they do not. It is the perception, perhaps, but not reality. I do agree, however, that the girls in particular can be pretty materialistic about fashion brands. I think that the boys are a bit less concerned about it.
Also, please remember that some families are really showy, but don't have the money to back it up--or they are relying upon grandparents to fund their lifestyles. It's really hard to know for sure who has money and who doesn't because FA info isn't public (90% gossip). Sometimes the least showy have the most money, and those that are the most preoccupied with labels and show are the ones who are the most concerned about acquiring and holding onto wealth.
Does it really matter where they get their money from or even if they're living a life solely on credit?
No, what matters is that they're spending and consuming. Which can make it difficult for those kids/families who don't.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At our school some of the families are extremely showy about their wealth. Vacation discussions are the most overheard topic of conversation, luxury cars are the standard in the parking lot, and the kids frequently discuss how they have acquired the latest new toy, video game, big tv, etc. My DD comes home and says she is the only one without Uggs, Tory Burch, Vera Bradley, whatever to wear. Most kids have been to Europe, Hawaii, Costa Rica, Vail, the Caribbean, etc. In fact, families meet up in exotic locations frequently. I don't think its everyone but there is a contingent and it is pervasive.
No they do not. It is the perception, perhaps, but not reality. I do agree, however, that the girls in particular can be pretty materialistic about fashion brands. I think that the boys are a bit less concerned about it.
Also, please remember that some families are really showy, but don't have the money to back it up--or they are relying upon grandparents to fund their lifestyles. It's really hard to know for sure who has money and who doesn't because FA info isn't public (90% gossip). Sometimes the least showy have the most money, and those that are the most preoccupied with labels and show are the ones who are the most concerned about acquiring and holding onto wealth.
Anonymous wrote:So many double faced people regarding FA.
Anonymous wrote:At our school some of the families are extremely showy about their wealth. Vacation discussions are the most overheard topic of conversation, luxury cars are the standard in the parking lot, and the kids frequently discuss how they have acquired the latest new toy, video game, big tv, etc. My DD comes home and says she is the only one without Uggs, Tory Burch, Vera Bradley, whatever to wear. Most kids have been to Europe, Hawaii, Costa Rica, Vail, the Caribbean, etc. In fact, families meet up in exotic locations frequently. I don't think its everyone but there is a contingent and it is pervasive.
Anonymous wrote:So many double faced people regarding FA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We were one of those families. When my kid was younger, it wasn't a big deal but as they got older and all the kids would be talking about the trips they went on, summer programs, cars etc, it did become more difficult.
Sort felt like we were on the outside of the glass always looking in.
I agree with this. The lifestyle differences seem to get bigger as kids get older.