Wow - 7 in 10 high achieving/low income students are white...says a lot of affirmative action in this country based on skin color alone. With that said, I think there are a few things that need to be addressed:

1.) School 'Guidance' Counselors are a joke. Typically, they have degrees from bottom of the barrel schools themselves and focus almost all of their attention on the bottom 25% of the class which they just hope to have graduate. This hurts the vast majority of students that are left without any real advice on what is possible, especially if their parents did not attend college.

2.) Unless you know someone that went to a top school or work in a high end industry, you will never really be exposed to the importance of your college rank. You will never realize how many opportunities you don't get simply because most top firms don't recruit low ranked schools.

3.) A lot of your success in life will be determined by the company that you keep. The guy that sticks close to home and hangs out with high school buddies that are not in school and/or into drugs, crime, etc - more than likely will drag down the high performing student as well. I call this the housing project effect.

4.) Money does not buy happiness - but it makes things a whole hell of a lot easier. Most poor people don't want to move 1000 miles away from home because they have no financial support. Yes, you can have loans - but that is typically not enough money to provide the peace of mind these students need to take that huge plunge.

Overall, we need to get rid of race based affirmative action and institute affirmative action based on family net worth.

Hell of a post, Jacque....NW Flag

#5 | POSTED BY BOAZ

This just in - 7 of 10 students are also white.

Maybe in 1970's. Now, about 50% of the of the student body. Once you factor in that the whites are disporptionately represented in the 'rich/middle class' student body, the amount that make up the 'poor' students will be even less. Let's be conservative and say that it is 45%. This is a huge discrepancy between actual achievement and access to quality higher education for whites.

That and you basically have to know someone or be a "legacy" student like Dubya to get into a top school AND have some way of paying for it.

This is just ridiculous. You can hold up Harvard all you want - but they give generously to poor kids. It is actually much harder to pay for Harvard as a middle class kid as you will be excluded from all of the grant money targeted for the poor and your parents will not be able to give you enough to cover your costs.

However - I would look to the CA state schools like UCLA, Cal Berkeley, UC Davis, UC San Diego, etc - all of them will give you free tuition and fee money if your parents are poor - the cut off for the declining fee waiver is like $80K in yearly income for your parents. Through in a $4K/year Pell grant and the cost to attain a 4 year degree from a world class university really is not high if you are poor. Once again, it is the middle class kids that are left out.

You can say what you want about the "housing effect" (I'm guessing white kids' friends don't do drugs, or drop out, or anything like that)

Where do you equate housing project with Black? Ah, that's right, the racist left rears its ugly head again. The fact is that the friends and family drag the high performer down - regardless of race.

but there are darn few low income kids, black or white, who can afford that quarter million for a basic degree, or just a 125,000 if you get all the grant money you can.
#8 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3

The cost for an education from an elite school is no where near $125,000 out of pocket if you truly are a high performing poor kid. That is the cost (probably even understated) for a middle class kid with an 'expected parent contribution' however.

Eb - that Jacque was really simplifying his explanation of why poor blacks don't go to Ivy League schools. You know, like maybe they can't afford to spend a couple hundred grand.

#11 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3

Ah, I did mention poor black kids going to Ivy League schools a single time. Further, for purpose of defining an 'elite school', I think the study considered about 250 schools to be elite - this is way, way more than just the Ivies. At the end of the day, you attempted to describe a corner case which was not relevant to the content of the article - and really not relevant for any discussion as you based it on faulty information.

It's better to be poor, if you want financial aid.

#15 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST

Absolutely right - most colleges use an 'expected family contribution' number which decreases the student's ability to get aid. First off, there is a big disconnect between ability to pay and willingness to pay on the part of a parent. Second, most of the aid given to middle class kids is in the form of loans as opposed to grants. The problem with the poor kids not performing is really a function of their communities and their ties to it - for middle class kids, the system is just fundamentally unfair and broken.

Can't be said enough.
#15 | POSTED BY PRAGMATIST

And Prag - you should stop agreeing with me on topics or the lefties will pull your liberal membership card.

This is terrible advice. Please don't ruin anyone's life by saying this ever again.

#20 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

I agree 100%. Cheap low ranked schools are where poor people go to learn how to stay poor. Of course, you likely won't see it that way until after you finish because you will be comparing yourself to the lower class people you grew up with rather than the potential money/career you are passing up by choosing a low ranked school. Like I said above, until you are in a highly selective/high paying company you will not see the amount of hurdles a low ranked school places in front of you.