NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTE: Since there are so many college students here on General, I thought this article might be of interest. You can also see where you fit in (http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_01.html).


The College Dropout Boom (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/national/class/EDUCATION-FINAL.html)

By DAVID LEONHARDT
Published: May 24, 2005

CHILHOWIE, Va. - One of the biggest decisions Andy Blevins has ever made, and one of the few he now regrets, never seemed like much of a decision at all. It just felt like the natural thing to do.

In the summer of 1995, he was moving boxes of soup cans, paper towels and dog food across the floor of a supermarket warehouse, one of the biggest buildings here in southwest Virginia. The heat was brutal. The job had sounded impossible when he arrived fresh off his first year of college, looking to make some summer money, still a skinny teenager with sandy blond hair and a narrow, freckled face.

But hard work done well was something he understood, even if he was the first college boy in his family. Soon he was making bonuses on top of his $6.75 an hour, more money than either of his parents made. His girlfriend was around, and so were his hometown buddies. Andy acted more outgoing with them, more relaxed. People in Chilhowie noticed that.

It was just about the perfect summer. So the thought crossed his mind: maybe it did not have to end. Maybe he would take a break from college and keep working. He had been getting C's and D's, and college never felt like home, anyway.

"I enjoyed working hard, getting the job done, getting a paycheck," Mr. Blevins recalled. "I just knew I didn't want to quit."

So he quit college instead, and with that, Andy Blevins joined one of the largest and fastest-growing groups of young adults in America. He became a college dropout, though nongraduate may be the more precise term.

Many people like him plan to return to get their degrees, even if few actually do. Almost one in three Americans in their mid-20's now fall into this group, up from one in five in the late 1960's, when the Census Bureau began keeping such data. Most come from poor and working-class families.

The phenomenon has been largely overlooked in the glare of positive news about the country's gains in education. Going to college has become the norm throughout most of the United States, even in many places where college was once considered an exotic destination - places like Chilhowie (pronounced chill-HOW-ee), an Appalachian hamlet with a simple brick downtown. At elite universities, classrooms are filled with women, blacks, Jews and Latinos, groups largely excluded two generations ago. The American system of higher learning seems to have become a great equalizer.

In fact, though, colleges have come to reinforce many of the advantages of birth. On campuses that enroll poorer students, graduation rates are often low. And at institutions where nearly everyone graduates - small colleges like Colgate, major state institutions like the University of Colorado and elite private universities like Stanford - more students today come from the top of the nation's income ladder than they did two decades ago.

Only 41 percent of low-income students entering a four-year college managed to graduate within five years, the Department of Education found in a study last year, but 66 percent of high-income students did. That gap had grown over recent years. "We need to recognize that the most serious domestic problem in the United States today is the widening gap between the children of the rich and the children of the poor," Lawrence H. Summers, the president of Harvard, said last year when announcing that Harvard would give full scholarships to all its lowest-income students. "And education is the most powerful weapon we have to address that problem."

There is certainly much to celebrate about higher education today. Many more students from all classes are getting four-year degrees and reaping their benefits. But those broad gains mask the fact that poor and working-class students have nevertheless been falling behind; for them, not having a degree remains the norm.

That loss of ground is all the more significant because a college education matters much more now than it once did. A bachelor's degree, not a year or two of courses, tends to determine a person's place in today's globalized, computerized economy. College graduates have received steady pay increases over the past two decades, while the pay of everyone else has risen little more than the rate of inflation.

As a result, despite one of the great education explosions in modern history, economic mobility - moving from one income group to another over the course of a lifetime - has stopped rising, researchers say. Some recent studies suggest that it has declined over the last generation. [Click here for more information on income mobility.]

Put another way, children seem to be following the paths of their parents more than they once did. Grades and test scores, rather than privilege, determine success today, but that success is largely being passed down from one generation to the next. A nation that believes that everyone should have a fair shake finds itself with a kind of inherited meritocracy.

In this system, the students at the best colleges may be diverse - male and female and of various colors, religions and hometowns - but they tend to share an upper-middle-class upbringing. An old joke that Harvard's idea of diversity is putting a rich kid from California in the same room as a rich kid from New York is truer today than ever; Harvard has more students from California than it did in years past and just as big a share of upper-income students.

[ This article is 5 pages long. Read the entire article here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/national/class/EDUCATION-FINAL.html). ]

Thanks. for posting the article.. I'm currently running start bound! I'm very excited and plan to finish collage!

Thanks. for posting the article.. I'm currently running start bound! I'm very excited and plan to finish collage!
"Never give up, never surrender, never say 'die,' and take no prisoners!" :D

What? No one likes this article??? :(

Thanks. for posting the article.. I'm currently running start bound! I'm very excited and plan to finish collage!
You might wanna start by spelling college right... ;)

NOTE: Since there are so many college students here on General, I thought this article might be of interest. You can also see where you fit in (http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_01.html).


The College Dropout Boom (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/national/class/EDUCATION-FINAL.html)

By DAVID LEONHARDT
Published: May 24, 2005

CHILHOWIE, Va. - One of the biggest decisions Andy Blevins has ever made, and one of the few he now regrets, never seemed like much of a decision at all. It just felt like the natural thing to do.

In the summer of 1995, he was moving boxes of soup cans, paper towels and dog food across the floor of a supermarket warehouse, one of the biggest buildings here in southwest Virginia. The heat was brutal. The job had sounded impossible when he arrived fresh off his first year of college, looking to make some summer money, still a skinny teenager with sandy blond hair and a narrow, freckled face.

But hard work done well was something he understood, even if he was the first college boy in his family. Soon he was making bonuses on top of his $6.75 an hour, more money than either of his parents made. His girlfriend was around, and so were his hometown buddies. Andy acted more outgoing with them, more relaxed. People in Chilhowie noticed that.

It was just about the perfect summer. So the thought crossed his mind: maybe it did not have to end. Maybe he would take a break from college and keep working. He had been getting C's and D's, and college never felt like home, anyway.

"I enjoyed working hard, getting the job done, getting a paycheck," Mr. Blevins recalled. "I just knew I didn't want to quit."

So he quit college instead, and with that, Andy Blevins joined one of the largest and fastest-growing groups of young adults in America. He became a college dropout, though nongraduate may be the more precise term.

Many people like him plan to return to get their degrees, even if few actually do. Almost one in three Americans in their mid-20's now fall into this group, up from one in five in the late 1960's, when the Census Bureau began keeping such data. Most come from poor and working-class families.

The phenomenon has been largely overlooked in the glare of positive news about the country's gains in education. Going to college has become the norm throughout most of the United States, even in many places where college was once considered an exotic destination - places like Chilhowie (pronounced chill-HOW-ee), an Appalachian hamlet with a simple brick downtown. At elite universities, classrooms are filled with women, blacks, Jews and Latinos, groups largely excluded two generations ago. The American system of higher learning seems to have become a great equalizer.

In fact, though, colleges have come to reinforce many of the advantages of birth. On campuses that enroll poorer students, graduation rates are often low. And at institutions where nearly everyone graduates - small colleges like Colgate, major state institutions like the University of Colorado and elite private universities like Stanford - more students today come from the top of the nation's income ladder than they did two decades ago.

Only 41 percent of low-income students entering a four-year college managed to graduate within five years, the Department of Education found in a study last year, but 66 percent of high-income students did. That gap had grown over recent years. "We need to recognize that the most serious domestic problem in the United States today is the widening gap between the children of the rich and the children of the poor," Lawrence H. Summers, the president of Harvard, said last year when announcing that Harvard would give full scholarships to all its lowest-income students. "And education is the most powerful weapon we have to address that problem."

There is certainly much to celebrate about higher education today. Many more students from all classes are getting four-year degrees and reaping their benefits. But those broad gains mask the fact that poor and working-class students have nevertheless been falling behind; for them, not having a degree remains the norm.

That loss of ground is all the more significant because a college education matters much more now than it once did. A bachelor's degree, not a year or two of courses, tends to determine a person's place in today's globalized, computerized economy. College graduates have received steady pay increases over the past two decades, while the pay of everyone else has risen little more than the rate of inflation.

As a result, despite one of the great education explosions in modern history, economic mobility - moving from one income group to another over the course of a lifetime - has stopped rising, researchers say. Some recent studies suggest that it has declined over the last generation. [Click here for more information on income mobility.]

Put another way, children seem to be following the paths of their parents more than they once did. Grades and test scores, rather than privilege, determine success today, but that success is largely being passed down from one generation to the next. A nation that believes that everyone should have a fair shake finds itself with a kind of inherited meritocracy.

In this system, the students at the best colleges may be diverse - male and female and of various colors, religions and hometowns - but they tend to share an upper-middle-class upbringing. An old joke that Harvard's idea of diversity is putting a rich kid from California in the same room as a rich kid from New York is truer today than ever; Harvard has more students from California than it did in years past and just as big a share of upper-income students.

[ This article is 5 pages long. Read the entire article here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/national/class/EDUCATION-FINAL.html). ]

Well, since you have to be intelligent to get into a decent university and a diploma from such a university gets you in the higher income region, more people in the higher income region are (very) smart.

Intelligence has a (large) genetic factor, so their children are more likely to be smart, and thus more children of that class will get into university (and succeed)...

Well, since you have to be intelligent to get into a decent university and a diploma from such a university gets you in the higher income region, more people in the higher income region are (very) smart.

Intelligence has a (large) genetic factor, so their children are more likely to be smart, and thus more children of that class will get into university (and succeed)...
All true, but you don't go far enough. The gene pool continually tosses out highly intelligent people, even from the "bottom of the heap." Some allowance needs to be made for those people, don't you think.

And, although I know you didn't intend this, just having money ( or not having money ) is no determinant for being intelligent. "The rich man makes the rules for the wise man and the fool." :)

As a result, despite one of the great education explosions in modern history, economic mobility - moving from one income group to another over the course of a lifetime - has stopped rising, researchers say. Some recent studies suggest that it has declined over the last generation.

That's what ought to worry people--economic stratification. And recent tax policies have only made that stratification stronger, especially the repeal of the estate tax. It's getting harder and harder to move up economically now, because the blue-collar middle class is disappearing--it's now mostly service industry jobs or technology jobs or the haves and the have nots, and historically, when that divide gets too large, you have revolution, and it's usually violent. Take a close look at US history from about 1890-1940 for a lot of examples, especially inside the labor movement.

I found the article interesting.

Especially considering I will be the first person in my family to graduate from college. My family is middle class but we're on the lower end of it.

I don't understand the motivation for dropping out. I want to do better than my parents. I also don't want to be stuck with these student loans but no degree.

interesting article. too tired to really take it in right now, but its especially appliccable to me seeing how i've made the decision to drop out of uni myself, after 2 years here and two different degrees tried.
its not that i think i can do better and earn more in the workplace - although while that is true it is an incredibly short sighted view. i know i would do better in life, in general, by staying at uni and working hard to get a good degree - hell i studied much of the dynamics of higher education comparative earnings last year in my Conemporary Economic Issues module:p
the thing is i am really, simply, not happy at uni - i am not mature or responsibe enough - not 'grown up' enough - to hack it either. by taking a couple of years out i can not only earn a bit of cash, but also come back to uni knowing what it is i actually want to do with my life, what degree i really want to study and will motivate me, and will have gained the necessary skills and attitudes to do well. maybe then i'll be happier when i return

...or not as the case may be:(

I found the article interesting.

Especially considering I will be the first person in my family to graduate from college. My family is middle class but we're on the lower end of it.

I don't understand the motivation for dropping out. I want to do better than my parents. I also don't want to be stuck with these student loans but no degree.
*high fives* that's a great look on life.

I guess I see the upper end of the spectrum more. I'm from a family that has two previous generations of college graduates on either side, so I've always been raised to believe that college, and later grad school were my future. As a result, I find college easy to stick to, and I could easily coast by getting B's. *must resist urge to slack...* But there's other people who are first generation college students, and it's a whole lot tougher for them. I dunno, just some observations.

*high fives* that's a great look on life.
That's what I like to think :) I also plan on attending graduate school by the way.

Well, since you have to be intelligent to get into a decent university and a diploma from such a university gets you in the higher income region, more people in the higher income region are (very) smart.

Intelligence has a (large) genetic factor, so their children are more likely to be smart, and thus more children of that class will get into university (and succeed)...

. . .Intelligence has little if anything to do with the way education is practiced in this country. The most accurate predictors for whether a person goes to and graduates from college isn't intelligence, but rather organizational ability and the class of their parents. Neither have anything to do with intelligence, and in point of fact, most gifted students also tend to have very poor organization skills.

So no, people don't become rich because they are smarter. They become rich because they are able to use the financial tools their parents gave them, couple it with their own organizational ability and charisma, and use the smart people to get the work done for them.

The article itself points out many of the problems - but does not recognize them as such.

Higher education is just that - higher education - it is not meant for everyone. If only those who really belonged there were getting into college, the dropout rates - in any income range - would be lower.

The best way to put the problem, that I have ever heard came from my advisor at my university (Who was also Director of Admissions for said university), it comes down to generations. Children with college educated parents tend to go to college more and finish more. You can actually track the difference in opinion. The first college graduate in the family views college as a privledge, something that has to be worked for. The second generation of students in that family will view college as an option, a choice. The third views it as a right, there is no doubt in their mind that they will go to college.

There's also the matter of support. It's not the fiscal support, or even the cheerleading because first generation students will often talk of their parents cheering them on and sacrificing for them every step of the way, it's other types of support.

College is a big shock to the system, usually you have left home for the first time, and you are free for the first time as well (In college I helped advise new Freshmen. You could almost tell which Freshmen would go bonkers with their new found freedom, which would be terrified by it, and which would be able to handle it). The students whose parents and older siblings had gone to college were far better prepared to handle this type of shock. They had heard the stories and usually had advanced knowledge on how college worked. Also, when the shock did happen, the parenst were far better in dealing with the student's tearful call home than the non-college educated parents to whom this was out of their experiance.

Some colleges are now devloping rual and first student programs to address these issues.

As for myself, I was a mixture of both. My father went to college, but he died when I was very young. So I got the expectation that I WOULD go to college, but as my mother and step-father had never been, I was left to struggle and figure things out on my own.

The best way to put the problem, that I have ever heard came from my advisor at my university (Who was also Director of Admissions for said university), it comes down to generations. Children with college educated parents tend to go to college more and finish more. You can actually track the difference in opinion. The first college graduate in the family views college as a privledge, something that has to be worked for. The second generation of students in that family will view college as an option, a choice. The third views it as a right, there is no doubt in their mind that they will go to college.

There's also the matter of support. It's not the fiscal support, or even the cheerleading because first generation students will often talk of their parents cheering them on and sacrificing for them every step of the way, it's other types of support.

College is a big shock to the system, usually you have left home for the first time, and you are free for the first time as well (In college I helped advise new Freshmen. You could almost tell which Freshmen would go bonkers with their new found freedom, which would be terrified by it, and which would be able to handle it). The students whose parents and older siblings had gone to college were far better prepared to handle this type of shock. They had heard the stories and usually had advanced knowledge on how college worked. Also, when the shock did happen, the parenst were far better in dealing with the student's tearful call home than the non-college educated parents to whom this was out of their experiance.

Some colleges are now devloping rual and first student programs to address these issues.

As for myself, I was a mixture of both. My father went to college, but he died when I was very young. So I got the expectation that I WOULD go to college, but as my mother and step-father had never been, I was left to struggle and figure things out on my own.
Good post. I think the idea of advisors for college freshmen whose parents aren't quite prepared to cope with their children's concerns is a good idea.

Sounds like you're doing quite well despite neither your mother or step-father having attended. Congrats! :)

The best way to put the problem, that I have ever heard came from my advisor at my university (Who was also Director of Admissions for said university), it comes down to generations. Children with college educated parents tend to go to college more and finish more. You can actually track the difference in opinion. The first college graduate in the family views college as a privledge, something that has to be worked for. The second generation of students in that family will view college as an option, a choice. The third views it as a right, there is no doubt in their mind that they will go to college.

There's also the matter of support. It's not the fiscal support, or even the cheerleading because first generation students will often talk of their parents cheering them on and sacrificing for them every step of the way, it's other types of support.

College is a big shock to the system, usually you have left home for the first time, and you are free for the first time as well (In college I helped advise new Freshmen. You could almost tell which Freshmen would go bonkers with their new found freedom, which would be terrified by it, and which would be able to handle it). The students whose parents and older siblings had gone to college were far better prepared to handle this type of shock. They had heard the stories and usually had advanced knowledge on how college worked. Also, when the shock did happen, the parenst were far better in dealing with the student's tearful call home than the non-college educated parents to whom this was out of their experiance.

Some colleges are now devloping rual and first student programs to address these issues.

As for myself, I was a mixture of both. My father went to college, but he died when I was very young. So I got the expectation that I WOULD go to college, but as my mother and step-father had never been, I was left to struggle and figure things out on my own.

I think it is really more a matter of personal motivation. My mother didn't go to college. My father didn't go to college - in fact, he was a first generation high school graduate. My step-father didn't go to college.

Yet, it was always a foregone conclusion that I would go to college. And I did. And now I am in graduate studies.

This isn't because I had some program of people cheerleading me on. It is because I had the motivation to stick it out. When my peers were slacking off and not getting their homework done - I refused to join in and let my own grades suffer. When it looked like I needed extra money - I took a job to keep my mother from having to pay for everything, despite taking up to 21 hours a semester.

Most of the freshmen I saw coming in in my job - a supplemental instructor - were thoroughly unmotivated. They would come in the night before the test and tell me that they hadn't lifted the book yet. They would complain when I made them work through the problems instead of just giving them the answers. It was really disheartening.

I blame two factors for their indifference. One is their own lack of motivation. At least after the first poor grade, they should have calmed down a bit and dug into the books. The second is a high school system that is so fixated on treating everyone equally that it doesn't challenge the students that need it. Thus, many students get through high school - with high marks - without ever having to worry about studying.

I think it is really more a matter of personal motivation. My mother didn't go to college. My father didn't go to college - in fact, he was a first generation high school graduate. My step-father didn't go to college.

Yet, it was always a foregone conclusion that I would go to college. And I did. And now I am in graduate studies.

This isn't because I had some program of people cheerleading me on. It is because I had the motivation to stick it out. When my peers were slacking off and not getting their homework done - I refused to join in and let my own grades suffer. When it looked like I needed extra money - I took a job to keep my mother from having to pay for everything, despite taking up to 21 hours a semester.

Most of the freshmen I saw coming in in my job - a supplemental instructor - were thoroughly unmotivated. They would come in the night before the test and tell me that they hadn't lifted the book yet. They would complain when I made them work through the problems instead of just giving them the answers. It was really disheartening.

I blame two factors for their indifference. One is their own lack of motivation. At least after the first poor grade, they should have calmed down a bit and dug into the books. The second is a high school system that is so fixated on treating everyone equally that it doesn't challenge the students that need it. Thus, many students get through high school - with high marks - without ever having to worry about studying.
You're right about the lack of challenge for better students in HS, but I suspect it goes a bit deeper than the schools simply "treating everyone equally," although that's certainly part of it. From what I've seen, many parents have abdicated their responsibility for motivating their children to the schools, and the schools are overwhelmed with the combination of "mainstreaming," trying to maintain acceptable levels of discipline, and having to be "substitue parents."

You're a rare breed if you can motivate yourself. Make sure you stress that in any job interviews! :D

Apparently I'm a rare bird in NationStates. I'm one of those university dropouts.

Frankly, I was getting burned out holding a full-time job and an almost-full-time course load. I was the first in my family to go to university, I am the oldest child, and my family scraped for every penny just to raise 12 kids. When I decided to go to university (a choice supported by my parents), we all knew I would be getting scholarships and paying my own way.

I was scared to death of getting a student loan -- I did not want to start out in debt with no guarantee of a good job when I got out. So I worked. As a security guard. As a janitor. Nights at a 7-11. Summers at provincial parks or horse tours. After 4 years of work and school, with a degree still at least a year away, I couldn't do it anymore. My migraines were coming more frequently, my grades were not as good as they could be, and wonder of wonders, my roommate --who had helped me adjust to living in the big city and was homebase for the friends and 'family' I'd made at university -- confessed to being a heroin addict and had Hepatitis B.

So yeah, I dropped out. Thank God I didn’t take out a student loan! Call me lazy, call me stupid, call me whatever you want, but I never made it back to university. Fortunately, I now have a ~$50,000/year white collar job, and I can surrepititiously pay some of my parent’s bills.

Under the circumstances, I honestly don’t know if I would have done better if I actually got a degree. Although it would make changing jobs easier -- I wouldn’t have to argue that 6 years of technical writing experience trumps someone with a Bachelor’s with only 2 or 3 years of experience in the field.

So yeah, I dropped out. Thank God I didn’t take out a student loan! Call me lazy, call me stupid, call me whatever you want, but I never made it back to university. Fortunately, I now have a ~$50,000/year white collar job, and I can surrepititiously pay some of my parent’s bills.

Just a question - do you think the stress would have gotten so high that you couldn't complete it if you *had* taken out loans?

Heh, wow, 68th Percentile of just the Occupation category. And that was the lowest.

'Course, I was going on what our instructors told us we could EXPECT, it may change......

That article, while a daunting read, was super interesting. Geeez

<snip> Apparently I'm a rare bird in NationStates. I'm one of those university dropouts.

My migraines were coming more frequently,

This is why I had to drop out after many years of college and several different majors. My entire family has at least bachelor's degrees, some with doctorates. I am the only one without. I had one year to go and my migraines became so painful and uncontrollable that I had to drop out.

Now, 15 years later, I'm starting part time trying to finish. Of course they added classes, and the fact that I no longer live in the same city, and my health issues will probably require me to take classes for 4 years to get 1 year of credits in, it isn't so easy anymore.

:D I am not so into my major as I was back then, even though I admit I didn't study much, but did manage to get decent grades. I just want to finish. (My major is Econ, minor, Urban & Public Affairs).

Anyway, just having that piece of paper does get you a higher salary in many places. I had a job years ago, as an insurance agent, and I was the #1 sales rep., but I was paid less than those with bachelors, and even less than those with bachelors from prestigeous (read: expensive) schools. That pissed me off.

I guess I just want the sense of completion. Then I'll go on to become an entrepreneur and make Bill Gates look like a poor homeless dude! :p

Just a question - do you think the stress would have gotten so high that you couldn't complete it if you *had* taken out loans?

Hard to say. Hindsight is 20/20 and all. If I knew I was going to have the job I have now, well, probably not. But I didn't know, and English/Writing are not exactly the types of degrees that guarantee you good employment when you get out.

The straw that broke the camel's back was the junkie roommate. Learning about that took away a lot of the structure I had built up that let me keep going at my rather insane pace.

Under the circumstances, I honestly don’t know if I would have done better if I actually got a degree. Although it would make changing jobs easier -- I wouldn’t have to argue that 6 years of technical writing experience trumps someone with a Bachelor’s with only 2 or 3 years of experience in the field.It's amazing the difference those pieces of paper can make. For instance, I have a bachelor's degree in English and a Master of Fine Arts--a terminal degree--in Writing, but the university market is so tight right now that tenure jobs all require a PhD. Now, in order to get my MFA, I did 60 hours of coursework and completed a dissertation--far more than most schools require for an MFA. But because some unversities have started offering PhD's in Writing, my MFA is pretty valueless on the job market, unless I get a handful of books published first. Now, the people getting PhD's aren't doing any more work than I did to get my MFA, but they get a significant advantage in the job market, and in a market as tight as this one, any advantage helps.

It's amazing the difference those pieces of paper can make.

Absolutely, I agree. But I don't see myself going back to complete my writing degree; it's been ten years after all. If I did go back to school it would be because I wanted to completely change fields. Lately, I've been idlely thinking about going into pharmacy, so I'd need to go the science route.

Absolutely, I agree. But I don't see myself going back to complete my writing degree; it's been ten years after all. If I did go back to school it would be because I wanted to completely change fields. Lately, I've been idlely thinking about going into pharmacy, so I'd need to go the science route.

Wow... Pharamacy is a long haul...

Wow... Pharamacy is a long haul...

Well, I did say idle thoughts.

I'm in the middle of buying a house now though, so the thought of going back to school and paying mortgage and tuition with loans and part-time work gives me the screaming heebie-jeebies!

So I probably won't be switching any time soon.

Absolutely, I agree. But I don't see myself going back to complete my writing degree; it's been ten years after all. If I did go back to school it would be because I wanted to completely change fields. Lately, I've been idlely thinking about going into pharmacy, so I'd need to go the science route.
If I go back--more likely, when, but I've been in school, including my current fellowship, for ten years straight now--it'll either be for a PhD in literature (not writing--I refuse) or go back for a completely different field like history or poli-sci. You know, absolutely nothing that will help me get a job. ;)

I've actually been looking into FAU's public intellectuals program, only so far as looking at the website, but it sounds fascinating.

I think it is really more a matter of personal motivation. My mother didn't go to college. My father didn't go to college - in fact, he was a first generation high school graduate. My step-father didn't go to college.

Yet, it was always a foregone conclusion that I would go to college. And I did. And now I am in graduate studies.

This isn't because I had some program of people cheerleading me on. It is because I had the motivation to stick it out. When my peers were slacking off and not getting their homework done - I refused to join in and let my own grades suffer. When it looked like I needed extra money - I took a job to keep my mother from having to pay for everything, despite taking up to 21 hours a semester.

Most of the freshmen I saw coming in in my job - a supplemental instructor - were thoroughly unmotivated. They would come in the night before the test and tell me that they hadn't lifted the book yet. They would complain when I made them work through the problems instead of just giving them the answers. It was really disheartening.

I blame two factors for their indifference. One is their own lack of motivation. At least after the first poor grade, they should have calmed down a bit and dug into the books. The second is a high school system that is so fixated on treating everyone equally that it doesn't challenge the students that need it. Thus, many students get through high school - with high marks - without ever having to worry about studying.
Everyone is of course different, but speaking of the college student in general, it does break down to those three options, some go wild, some hide, and some handle it. You obviously handled it well.

The cheerleading isn't meant as a 'You can do this!' but as an ajustment program. These are things like trying to figure out the college universe, which is very different from the high school one, and if you have never been exposed to it before, is very confusing.

Things like, how to fill out the application, how do you register to classes when you've never had to before, what does a credit mean? What classes to I take, and so on and so forth. There's also adjustment needed for things like time management skills, working vs school work, and getting used to the various cultures and opinions that are on a college campus (for rual kids, this is a huge problem).

Not all students NEED this safety net of course, some do fine on their own, but I'm willing to bet you that those who did, like you, were motovated and considered more independant when a high school student than their peers. But even the best student can slam hard into the reality of college and need some support, and if your parents cannot relate, who do you turn to?

For example, after my second year, I pretty much collasped, due to full time work and an overload of school. My parents were suportive, yes, but at the same time, I could also tell they didn't understand what I was talking about. Thankfully my advisor helped me through that period, and could provide examples when he did the same things and suggestions on how the handle it.

Once I reached Graduate School, I had problems with how to figure out the complicated paperwork needed for graduating, course of study, committee, and so on. My parents tried to help, but again, I spent more time trying to explain what I was trying to do than actually doing it.

That's what these support groups do and help with. It's up to the student, but when you need a question answered or someone to listen to...

My family was very proud of me when I finally finished my MS, but I did get, "So what does that degree mean?" :rolleyes:

I'm a junior at an "elite" private university, and I can definitely vouch for the fact that the vast majority of students are upper-middle or upper class. I'm solid middle class, and even I feel a little out of my league at times (class-wise). My first thought was that a lot of them got in on their parents' money, but after being there for two years, I've realized that we're all there on our own merits. So I think maybe the reason that the upper class is disproportionately represented at private universities is because people of any class can get accepted, but the rich ones are the only ones who can afford it. My dad (first generation college student) makes six figures, but my mom and stepdad (both second generation students) just had to file for bankruptcy. Even with my dad paying $1100 a month, a pell grant, and a scholarship, I still have student loans out the ass, and I'll be paying on them for the rest of my life. But it's worth it. I could've gone to the state university in my hometown on a free ride (and then some), but I'm hoping a degree from this university will give me an edge when I have to apply to law school.

I've totally forgotten the point of this post...

Don't mind me.