Georgia’s vaunted HOPE Scholarship has become welfare for the state’s rich
An Atlanta attorney argues that HOPE now constitutes "welfare" for wealthier Georgians and more lottery funds ought to go to pre-k.
I ran an e-mail that I received from Emmet Bondurant, a prominent local attorney and education advocate, calling for the HOPE Scholarships to be limited by income so more funds can go to the critical needs of pre-k.
I asked Emmet Bondurant to expand his views into an op-ed and here it is. (A joint House and Senate education committee meets Aug. 2 at 10 a.m. to discuss HOPE funding. I plan to attend. Should be interesting.) I plan to run the piece on the Monday education op-ed page but this is a preview for Get Schooled readers.
I know many of you like HOPE the way it is, but Bondurant is looking at the issue of dwindling resources and what investment yields a greater return for the state. Again, there is no doubt that HOPE has done a lot to inspire high school kids to work harder and take more AP classes to get into UGA or Tech. And as the quality of the students has improved, so has the quality of the universities.
But would the state as a whole benefit more if we redirected increased funds to pre-k and to those youngsters for whom college is not a foregone conclusion from the cradle? (All research shows that HOPE influences where kids go to college, rather than whether they go.)
Read the piece and let us know what you think:
By Emmet J. Bondurant
It is now obvious that as a result of the recent increases by the Board of Regents in college tuitions, as well as the growth in the number of students graduating from high schools with B averages, the Georgia Lottery is not going to generate sufficient revenue to fund HOPE Scholarships at current levels. Allowances for books and student activity fees are going to be drastically reduced – and if the shortfall in lottery revenues continues, the HOPE Scholarships themselves will be in jeopardy.
I urge legislators to exercise real leadership and convene a study committee composed of genuine experts in public education to evaluate the real – as distinguished from the imagined – benefits of the HOPE Scholarship program and determine whether Georgians are getting the maximum bang for the buck from the hundreds of millions in lottery revenues that are spent on HOPE Scholarships and HOPE Grants.
Are the HOPE Scholarships and Grants the best way to genuinely advance public education – or would Georgia’s children derive a far greater benefit if the same dollars were used to make high quality pre-k available to all 3 and 4 year olds?
Georgia is wasting hundreds of millions of dollars annually in lottery revenues to subsidize the tuition costs for middle and upper-income families who would have sent their children to college on their own expense, without a hand-out from the state. To make matters even worse, these same families forfeit $2,500 annually in college tuition tax credits from the federal government by accepting HOPE funds from the Georgia Lottery.
Many studies by leading educators and economists have shown that the Georgia could achieve far more bang for the buck at all levels of public education by investing the revenue generated by the Georgia Lottery in pre-k than in HOPE Scholarships and Grants.
Legislators must take an honest look at the evidence and answer the hard questions about the value of pre-K versus HOPE that have been ignored for too long. Since the General Assembly is going to be forced by the shortfall in lottery revenues to do something, why not adopt real reforms, instead of merely nibbling around the edges and adopting half measures that are merely politically expedient?
There are two obvious ways for lawmakers to reduce the drain on lottery revenues. First, lawmakers should cut out welfare for the rich, and let families that can afford to send their children to college pay their own way. If the General Assembly were to reimpose a $75,000 means test for HOPE, for example, 73.5 percent of all Georgia families would still be eligible for HOPE Scholarships. The only families affected would be upper-income ones fully capable sending their children to college without a lottery welfare check or hand-out.
The idea of eliminating unneeded welfare payments to the rich should appeal to true conservatives who are willing put principle ahead of their own selfish interests.
The state could also save tens, if not hundreds, of millions in lottery revenues by cutting HOPE Scholarships to attend both public and private schools by $2,500 each. Such a change would cost the parents of HOPE recipients nothing, since they’d then qualify for the $2,500 American Opportunity Tax Credits against their federal income taxes. Then, the federal government, rather than the Georgia Lottery, would contribute $2,500 of the cost of each Hope Scholarship.
If our new governor and General Assembly don’t take the lead in reforming HOPE and pre-k, who will?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
211 comments Add your comment
RealDawg
July 23rd, 2010
8:34 am
The colleges and universities have taken advantage of Hope by continuing to raise “fees” in addition to HOPE. With nominal new enrollment at UGA, it is amazing the number of new buildings that have been built. A parking deck for the fine arts building? Not necessarilly saying they are related but that there are limited resources and the colleges are redirecting because of Hope.
In reality, the state likely needs less Hope money going to liberal arts schools and more toward those that are seeking training for actual careers whether that is from a technical school (Hope Grant) or a four year institution. Hope is a valuable resource and shouldn’t pay liberal arts degrees, including the one I have.
Ned Puddleman
July 23rd, 2010
8:34 am
Both lotteries and gambling are for people that lack the understanding of mathematics. It is a tax that people choose to pay. The only problem I have is that the government is running it instead of private business.
The HOPE scholarship should be about merit or it shouldn’t exist at all. The so called “rich” are already paying well above average for the cost of college via tax confiscation. So I fail to see how the HOPE is “welfare for the rich”. If anything it is a return of capital that has been paid into the system that will never be greater than what has been paid in over a lifetime.
And for those of you that want to sock it to the “rich”, what happens when the “rich” get out of the system?
I
July 23rd, 2010
8:35 am
@North GA Jimmy: LOL! The most I’ve ever won on the lottery was $7…have lost much more. Started buying the occassional ticket after husband was laid off in March…I figure it goes straight to my kid at UGA when I lose. We would’ve been “rich” before March…two teachers making almost 100K combined. Husband was RIF-ed…now we’re just s-c-r-e-w-e-d.
Oh Well
July 23rd, 2010
8:37 am
I’d never heard of pre-K until I moved here. Where I’m from it’s called “preschool”.
In any case, my 7 year old went to a GA Pre-K program and it was far from a “babysitting” experience. He was reading on nearly a 2nd grade level when he left. Of course, not all programs are made the same. He did go to a program that typically deals with vouchers and Head Start clientele. However, at the end of the day – my son was MORE than ready to excel in school (which he continues to do). Of course, my husband and I are VERY active parents that take a role in setting expectations and making sure that he gets enrichment outside of the classroom.
My point is…pre-K is not babysitting.
Tony G.
July 23rd, 2010
8:38 am
Make way over 75k, not even remotely rich, struggle for everything, work many 18 hour days, daughter graduated from UGA in three years with hope all three years, no debt; one year of Grad school got her masters (South Carolina) 50k in loans. While at UGA like everyone else out bill was around 9k for room and meals, this is a student that had full ride offers to many other out of state schools, is in hospital administration now and doing very well and we are thankfull for her HOPE. Son is a athlete at a state school, lost his hope after the first year, too much missed class and 20 hour bus rides in the spring eroded his GPA we struggle to pay his tuition and he works in the summer to help out. I don’t think he was “unprepared” for college because he hasn’t kept a B average, he’s on track to graduate and if he were a non athlete probably would have kept hope; point being folks that think paying back for kids losinig HOPE aren’t looking at the entire picture. HOPE is perfect the way it is changing it is a bad idea, it works with all the money going to the students none going to extra govt. school administration (as would be required to expand pre K programs).
Unreal
July 23rd, 2010
8:38 am
I am sick and tired of people being punished because of the amount of money they (or their parents) make. Why should a kid with a 4.0 and a household income of l50K have to suffer while a kid who barely squeezed by with 3.0 and a household income of 40k get all the free handouts. I am all for the HOPE Scholarship, but it must be equal. If you make the grades then you earn it, regardless of status. If your parents don’t make the money to pay for school (as was the case with my parents) then get loans!!. Our government is trying to make it to where everyone gets a free education. That can’t happen without someone getting screwed. It just kills me to see people punished for success. What kind of example does it set for our children, if they see that the reason they can’t get HOPE is because mommy and daddy make too much money as a result of them working hard and making the right decisions?
lizzie
July 23rd, 2010
8:38 am
perhaps if the millions of dollars we spend on illegals was halted, the state would
have more revenue for pre-k. plutocrats like emmet bondurant, who is a multimillionaire,
have zero care, compassion or empathy for the american middle class. although, he can afford
to live like a king(like his partners do,) he seems to feel that that people earning $75-150,000
have more than they need. he might be surprised to know that those people have a hard time paying for state university and not because they are living the high life. we are ruled by multimillionaires now who carp that middle class americans are “greedy.” i’m sick of these people
and ones like maureen downey who support the idea.
Rick
July 23rd, 2010
8:41 am
The HOPE scholarship should be based on the income of the student, not their PARENTS! What law makes all parents responsible for paying for their children’s college education?
If a student has a large inheritance, then maybe you have a case. But most students regardless of their family background don’t have many financial resources. Children from a rich, middle class, or poor family don’t make the same amount of money for a given college degree.
drjimmy
July 23rd, 2010
8:42 am
I don’t understand the resistance to return the income cap to HOPE. Yes, return. The program initially was limited by an income cap. Returning the income cap requirement would not change HOPE, it would simply return it to its roots.
Believe it or not, students who WANT to earn a college degree can do so. I earned three and left school with $800 in student loans. It’s simply a matter of working while in school and minimizing expenses. I am now faculty at UGA. I can tell you most of the students here live much better than my friends and I did when we were in school. We did not drive new $30,000 cars. We did not go on Spring Break to Mexico. We spent a lot of time together having fun without spending money. As a result, we all graduated. We all have successful careers. We also have memories of fun spending time together, not spending money.
As a person that completed college with no help from my parents and no HOPE, I can say it is possible. I also have am aware HOPE was a need based program when it started. My vote is to institute at least some graduated income cap. That is not change, it simply returns HOPE to what it was.
RealDawg
July 23rd, 2010
8:43 am
@ Rick. Very good point. Unless the parents continue to claim them for taxes then they are kinda responsible. Can’t have it both ways.
My own two cents
July 23rd, 2010
8:50 am
@color me confused. “The lottery is actually a poor man’s tax.” A tax is a payment demanded by the government for services and must be paid and failure to pay a tax is a criminal offense. The lottery is a game of chance that happens to be run by the state. Failure to play the lottery does not result in criminal penalties, so the lottery is not a tax.
Also, you stated that “The rich actually buy very few lottery tickets.” You are generally correct in that statement. One big difference between “rich” and “poor” is how “the rich” use their resources (money). The lottery promises but does not deliver a nice return on your money whereas saving, investing (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, even real estate) generally delivers a better return. For example…Lets say we each have $100.00 and I buy lottery tickets for the Fantasy 5 or Powerball and Mega Millions. After the drawing most likely will be out the $100. You put your $100.00 into the bank. At the end of the year you will have $102.00 in the bank with interest. We each made a choice.
Mr. Bondurant is obviously playing the class warfare strategy. Out here in the sticks we have Head Start, Pre-K, and private preschools. IMHO, the students in private preschool generally do better in K-12 than do the Pre-K and Head Start students. Why? because parents who are paying for it get into the habit of being involved in their child’s education than parents who send their kids to the lottery funded programs. I’m skeptical that diverting money away from HOPE to pre-K is going to deliver the “bang for the buck” Mr. Bondurant claims will happen.
2 of my children are in college (1 on HOPE and 1 lost it) and 1 is in high school. The provisions allowing students to get back on HOPE after losing it should be done away with. My child that lost HOPE is doing better now that he has to pay for college himself and it motivates him to do better. The child that is on HOPE is a self motivator who wants to be an M. D. He sees that HOPE can help him get there while lessening his burden.
Sorry for the rambling post.
Amazed
July 23rd, 2010
8:53 am
It’s clear that the original purpose for HOPE has been forgotten…to keep “quality” kids in Georgia. The idea of switching the funding to pre-K programs simply is another form of “welfare” to use the words of the original author. While at it…also add free childcare and after-school programs.
Tony
July 23rd, 2010
9:01 am
Everybody wants a piece of the pie and the pie remains the same size. Deciding which programs are more beneficial is a critical decision that must be made for the future of our children! Many people decry the PreK program by calling it a “baby sitting service”. This is so far from the truth, yet so many people buy it – hook, line, and sinker!
The PreK program does provide huge benefits for children, especially the children from families affected by poverty. In short, it levels the playing field for these children and there is the rub. Those in power do not really want to increase the competition against their own children by improving the opportunities for the underprivileged. The PreK program benefits all children in many respects, too, but these effects are not as dramatic as those for the children who have little access to enriching activities.
HOPE, on the other hand, has OBVIOUSLY become an entitlement for the middle class. Simply by the discussion here one can tell that even those families with means have set themselves up to depend on the HOPE as they send their children to college. Simply taking the HOPE away based on income is not really the way to go, either. There are many students who are deserving of the benefits of an education and we should find ways to provide scholarships for them.
Earning a college education takes a lot of hard work. It seems to me that the idea of working hard as a part of our value system is where our society is really taking a hit. Entitlements undermine that value, and HOPE has become an entitlement.
While we continue to debate on the various aspects of public education, college education, vocational education, and the merits of putting tax money into those programs, we have focused only on the providers. We have generated considerable criticism about what those providers should be doing, what they are not doing, and how we should be expecting more from them. What we have not focused on are the ways our communities should be working together to promote better values especially when it comes to learning.
It is my opinion that until we have more serious discussions about the work ethic of the students we will not see much improvement in our achievement rankings. If you ask me, this is where many of the other countries in the world are “beating the pants off of us.”
really
July 23rd, 2010
9:01 am
hardmanb
sounds good, but to make ppl feel better lets just install the income level that it seems most in Washington use: $250,000 a year. Families that make that kind of money dont send their kids to state colleges anyway.
AJinCobb
July 23rd, 2010
9:08 am
@Skram30082:
“That’s the problem with HOPE. As soon as HOPE was created, many families saw the government check coming, and ceased to plan for college. I can’t tell you how many times I heard parents say, ‘Well, we don’t have to pay for college anymore!’”
Including HOPE in the family’s college savings plans is not “ceasing to plan for college.” It’s only rational to plan based on reasonable expectations of the environment, which includes government programs. You have to plan based on current information and reasonable projections. That’s the difference between planning and fantasy.
Your criticism reminds me of a pet peeve of mine: People who accuse parents who complain when they are inconvenienced by unexpected school cancellations, of regarding schools as “babysitting” and betraying that their “true colors” i.e. that they don’t really care about education, just “free babysitting.” If your child is registered in school, it’s only rational to expect that your child will be at school on scheduled school days (unless they are sick, of course) and you don’t need to make any additional arrangement for child care during school hours. What are people supposed to do to prove they value education? Hire a babysitter to sit in their empty house on school days, to be available just in case school gets canceled?
Likewise, if you have an A student in high school who intends on attending a public college in state, it’s rational to plan for college funding including HOPE. What would you recommend instead? Putting more money into a 529 plan than the student can use for educational purposes, if they get HOPE?
November
July 23rd, 2010
9:16 am
Folks, this would be just another form of “Income Re-distribution” and to put it simplier, another entitlement program. Leave “Hope” alone and don’t screw it up like politicians do to most things in this state.
Ray
July 23rd, 2010
9:29 am
It’s really no surprise the anti-American government rightwing totally discounts research in their ‘evaluations’ of pre-K.
Face it, an educated electorate would mean the death of the GOP.
And they know it. That’s why the republican line blooms in the South, where the fat, lazy, AND stupid provide fertile ground for rightwing snake-oil.
But then, that’s just more of that research stuff….
paulette snoby
July 23rd, 2010
9:36 am
I do not agree that the hope scholarship monies would be more beneficial for a Pre-K program. What is taught in those programs can easily be done at home; I did it for my 3 children and they didn’t need a high priced babysitter to learn. The Hope provides a very small amount for college students today; it helps but everyone needs money to live on or off campus and books and other fees which Hope doesn’t even touch. Money for college is well spent compared to the babysitting done in PreK!
Lynn B
July 23rd, 2010
9:38 am
PLEASE do not take away one of the few programs in this state that does not punish hard working middle class citizens. Sure there are those in the very upper class who can afford to pay but in restructuring this program you will hurt the middle class who are squeezed to the limit now. Keep your socialist ideas in the federal programs where they already are and leave the Hope Scholarshoip alone! All Georgia students qualify for this program on an equal playing field. At some point we’ve got to stop penalizing the people who work to succeed in this country.
Involved Parent
July 23rd, 2010
9:40 am
John, that’s great! How many people did you have in your household? How many mouths did you have to feed? If we had $40k per person in our household, we’d definitely be able to afford to send all three of our children to college. However, we have about 17k per person. We don’t have fancy gadgets in our house. We don’t drive fancy cars. In fact, we have only one car. We live in a modest home. We do carry a great deal in student loan debt because while HOPE did pay our tuition, it did not pay for our room and board. We struggle now to keep our heads above water. I have no idea how we’d be able to send all three of our children to college when we can’t afford any extras now.
You Asked
July 23rd, 2010
9:40 am
The logical extension of Mr. Bondurant’s opinion is that Pre-K programs should be cut because they are corporate welfare for daycare franchises and a subsidy for families with two working parents.
Certainly the formula for how the HOPE funds are distributed needs to be evaluated and reevaluated constantly depending on the size of the population is serves (both college and pre-K) and the funds available in any given year, but a lobbyist and “education activist” lawyer is the last person I’d put in charge of those decisions. Let the Georgia Student Finance and Investment Commission work with the Georgia Lottery, Technical College system, University System and Department of Early Care and Learning to make professional and balanced judgements on these matters. They are all highly professional state agencies who do a great job of making these services available to students and keeping them running smoothly.
dawnstar
July 23rd, 2010
9:46 am
One way to stop the grade inflation for these students to attend college under the HOPE scholarsip program is to change the way the first year is paid.
Make the HOPE grant become retroacive to pay for the first year if the B average is maintained. To those who wish to party and neglect their studies, no money would be wasted on them. For those who study, apply themselves to their course work, the grant would be a great boon for them as they continue into their major course work.
That first year with most of our high school students going into the leaning support prgrams of each collee, HOPE should not have to pay for remediation for the students who did not learn enough or acquire enough knowledge in high schoole to function in college courses.
I am a high school teacher of many years above 30, who has seen the quality of educational expectations drop because of HOPE. The high school teachers, especially the senior ones, are encouraged to “help” students achieve a certain grade point average so the students can achieve the B average to acquire HOPE award staus.
I agree with the poster who recommneded GPA, SAT scores and AP tests taken and passed to be in the determining factors.
College is not meant for everyone. Those who hated high school because of sitting in boring courses and doing work will never succeed in college. Those who never took an AP course, succeeded in rigorous course work and developed a work ethic along with a strong sense of self-discipline will not achieve in college.
The best way to prepare students for HOPE is to simply allow the teachers to teach with rigor and value of each course, not worry about someone’s ability to go to college. Last time I heard, planning for an individual’s future was still an unimpeded individual right. This is one I will not get involved in, other than counseling the students and presenting options for further educational studies. This is a personal choice. Many of our students simply want to work in the workplace. Many boys and girls want to work with their hands. Why not develop a superior system of career-vocatioanl schools for them to attend so they will have hands-on teaching and instruction in their selected areas and leave the college classrooms for those really interested in pursuing an education in the professions and the sciences. Can a student do both? Absolutely! But we need to offer our students more than a college option; they need a choice to follow thir own desires or to try college for a dream? The choice is theirs. The opportunity to allow them the choice is ours to provide this for them.
An advocate for public education change & choice
July 23rd, 2010
10:04 am
The difficulty I have with the proposal is the gains made in pre K are subsequently stiffled in K and 1st grade a large number of cases as these early primary levels have been “dumbed” to the point were many students are kept in a holding pattern re-learning information they have already been introduced to. Unless this proposal includes a restructuring of cirriculum from prek – 1st grade, I don’t think the it buys nearly the value projected.
Fact of the matter is HOPE originally had income cap limits and those limits should be placed around the award again. Problem is no one wants to engage the tough fight to re-establish a limit. I think the idea of restructuring the award such that its a loan to be repaid by the student if they fail to mean early bench marks or drop out could be added as well to balance things out.
An advocate for public education change & choice
July 23rd, 2010
10:05 am
Rescue me from the filter please….
Gone Fishin
July 23rd, 2010
10:05 am
It’s good to see that class warfare is alive and well. Well since HOPE is still in place I will let you people send my daughter to school and I will buy a boat instead.
William Casey
July 23rd, 2010
10:08 am
I disagree with those who say that HOPE isn’t wasted on “partying” students and rewards achievement:
1. In today’s grade-inflated high school environment, achieving a “B” average in no way guarantees that a student is ready for college level work. When I began teaching in 1975, having a “B” average at least meant that a student was willing to work. No more. The pressure is now on the teacher to make sure that everyone gets a “B,” rendering it meaningless.
2. I know that HOPE is pulled after a year but that year’s “partying” money is GONE (wasted) and the state won’t recoup it. I’m simply aware of too many of my over-privileged former students who wasted that first year HOPE money.
3. Requiring sudents who lose HOPE to pay back money won’t work either. I know people who have owed money on student loans for 20 years with no intention of paying it back. That’s why I favor a reimbursement plan. In the world of work, one gets the paycheck AFTER performing the work. Why should HOPE be different. The “B” average in high school only earns one the OPPORTUNITY for help in college. It’s the college level work that earns the pay-off.
It bothers me that serious students (of any income level) face HOPE cuts while the clueless get a year’s free ride.
An advocate for public education change & choice
July 23rd, 2010
10:09 am
@ Dawnstar: Your idea of Why not develop a superior system of career-vocatioanl schools is a sound one. I went to high school in VA and this concept was in place when I was at that level. In fact, I went through that particular pathway in getting my high school diploma and it was this experience that inspired my career in Information Technology. Coupling a high school diploma pathway with the technical college system in GA would be an easy win for all. I believe it will spawn a more productive workforce and spur along more grow in the green job sector which in increasing numbers is settling roots in GA.
William Casey
July 23rd, 2010
10:15 am
DAWNSTAR…. you are my new best friend!
An advocate for public education change & choice
July 23rd, 2010
10:16 am
@ Gone Fishin: I have literally sat in conference rooms with former co-workers who have described explictly what you’re comment refers to. In fact they were upset at the time that they couldn’t get out on the boat because of Lake Lanier water levels.
@ My Own Two Cents: Excellant idea (ie. if you lose HOPE you don’t regain it). Couple that with being required to pay back what you got and squandered and now you’ve added a degree of accountability to equation that will work wonders.
Lastly, I think the state has to account for the fact that the rising costs of the University system is a key contributing factor to the HOPE programs woes. Has anyone done a correlation of tuition cost increases and the financial strain on HOPE.
Bobby T
July 23rd, 2010
10:16 am
I make 70k and have 3 children in my household. 1 of them has a profound special need so my wife does not work in order to care for him. The HOPE Scholarship is my two typical children’s only hope of making college affordable/attainable shy of putting them and myself in debt for years to come. Lord knows I can’t take a second on the house to do it.
Gwinnett Parent
July 23rd, 2010
10:37 am
It is still questionable whether GA pre K actually gives these children a “boost” In kindergarten every kids starts at a different level. My daughter did not go to a lottery funded pre K and could run circles around the kids that did. Also, how can we guarantee that these children actually go to college? A lot of the kids respond to bad environments and all of the state funded pre K in the world cannot stop it. For a lot of parents Georgia pre-K is nothing more than free daycare.
Maureen Downey
July 23rd, 2010
10:38 am
@AN ADVOCATE, With you on making it harder to regain HOPE. As for tuition, I do think HOPE has allowed more increases since Regents know that most parents aren’t paying for college tuition. Virtually, every Georgia student admitted to UGA or Tech is HOPE qualified now.
However, I have to point out that Georgia retains one of the more modest tuition rate schedules for its public universities and colleges. Even without HOPE, it is still a bargain.
Maureen
Concerned Educator & Parent
July 23rd, 2010
10:55 am
75,000? Really? So, a family that makes $80,000 (abt $66,000 after taxes) with 3-4 children would be able to send them all to college on their own dime? In what fantasy world does Mr. Bondurant believe that this is possible?
Maureen Downey
July 23rd, 2010
11:01 am
@Concerned Parent, The elimination of HOPE for families earning over $75,000 would not end financial aid. Every student can still apply for financial assistance and I would assume that the family you describe would still qualify for need-based aid. At some colleges now, families with incomes under $60,000 get full tuition under need-based plans. At Emory, I think the cutoff is family income of $100,000 for its full tuition need program.
Most states — even those with higher college-going rates than Georgia — do not have HOPE-like programs, but the students still go to college. They still qualify and receive need-determined aid.
Maureen
New Blood Needed
July 23rd, 2010
11:04 am
Kira Willis has been an advocate for making HOPE a reimbursement plan since she announced her candidacy. Read more about this and other topics on her website.
Kira Willis for State Superintendent! The people will speak! New blood needed!
http://www.willisforstatesuper.com
New Blood Needed
July 23rd, 2010
11:04 am
http://www.willisforstatesuper.com
catlady
July 23rd, 2010
11:05 am
Research locally as well as unbiased research shows HOPE has changed the destination. It has had a minimal effect on encouraging kids to try college who had never planned to go. (I am talking about the scholarship here, not the HOPE grant that goes to tech school students. That award HAS proven effective in getting folks into postsecondary ed who might never have tried it.) So saying, is that a BAD thing?
I think keeping it a merit award is a good idea. Yes, higher SES kids have an advantage–they always have and always will. I’d like to see the requirements tightened, so that it is really a SCHOLARship, given to scholars. That might include looking at the GPA only with certain classes, or having an SAT/ACT required minimal score, or, as I would advocate, requiring candidates for the scholarship to take at least 1 AP course and exam, with a B average and a 3 or higher on the exam. This requirement would help indicate if the student is actually “college material”. I would not require more than one AP, as many small high schools do not offer many AP classes at all (I think our local hs offers 4). IMHO, the requirements are too low, and we have too many students of less than stellar “scholarship” getting the award. In addition, that many “honor grads” do not present an excellent SAT, and that so many students (is it 2/3?) lose the award after a year of college shows that there is too much grade inflation, IMHO.
Sam
July 23rd, 2010
11:06 am
My art teacher in high school had the audacity to brag about having HOPE for four years, but wouldn’t play the lottery because she thought it was immoral.
HOPE was the only reason I was able to go to college. My mother supported our family on ONE teacher salary. Even at her income, I did not qualify for PELL. My college roommate did, but only because her mother was paid under the table and didn’t report her income. Once again, the people following the rules get punished.
I worked hard in HS to get the grades for HOPE. The HOPE for teachers helped me pay for part of my books one semester ($750 does not go a long way these days, with a single book costing $130). I don’t know how people do it without financial aid!
Just A Teacher
July 23rd, 2010
11:06 am
Here is my view for what it is worth. The HOPE scholarship program is a complete waste of tax money and should be eliminated entirely. I came from a working class background and had to work very hard to pay for my 2 degrees. My parents did not pay for my college education because they couldn’t afford to do so. Since entering the teaching field, I have seen expectations in the classroom eroded by this program. According to the grading outlines written for the school system where I am employed, an A is to be given to reward excellent or outstanding work, a B is to be given for above average work, and a C is earned for doing average work in the course, and a D is to be assigned for doing work that is below average. However, following those guidelines is impossible because every parent believes their child should receive an above average grade. That is ridiculous! How can everyone be above average in every subject? I am not a mathematician, but I do understand a little bit about averages. If we followed the appropriate grading guidelines in K – 12 education, this would not be an issue since so few students would actually be eligible for HOPE. But since this is not the case (and won’t be until we stop trying to appease parents who feel their children are ENTITLED to a free college education in Georgia), the HOPE program should be disbanded entirely.
Just A Teacher
July 23rd, 2010
11:12 am
Maureen, please check the filter.
The point is
July 23rd, 2010
11:17 am
Of course it’s a regressive tax paid mostly by the poor to support the middle and upper class. But it’s a VOLUNTARY tax. While seeking a nanny state solution, why aren’t people like Emment seeking a personal responsibility solution as well. Why not some billboards placed in low income communities that say Thank You. Thank you for paying for Buffy’s education, while your child falls even further behind because you spent your paycheck on the lottery, instead of a book for your child.
ScienceTeacher671
July 23rd, 2010
11:32 am
I’m late to the party, but if I were in charge of reforming the program, I’d enact three basic reforms:
1. Ensure that the Lottery Corporation is paying the full percentage allowed by legislation, especially before allowing the Lottery Corporation to pay bonuses to employees.
2. Charge tuition for Pre-K on a sliding scale, such that the low-income at-risk students for whom the program was designed are able to attend free, but upper-income parents pay slightly more than “regular” day care.
3. For university (but not necessarily vo-tech or community college) admission, require a minimum SAT/ACT score to minimize the effects of grade inflation at high schools. Alternatively or in addition, if a student loses HOPE due to poor grades, require the last 2 semesters to be converted to a low-interest student loan.
BB
July 23rd, 2010
11:41 am
Don’t give in to the pressure, Just A Teacher. Your grades can still mean something, even if many other teachers’ don’t.
Forsyth County mom
July 23rd, 2010
11:46 am
My daughter is entering her Sophomore year at Agnes Scott College after graduating with honors from North Forsyth High. As a private college, the tuition at Agnes Scott is almost $40,000 per year (including room and board). My daughter receives HOPE, and because of that, she also qualified for Agnes Scott’s scholarship program, called The Agnes Solution. Even with these scholarships she will graduate with thousands in debt due to the student loans she needs to make up the rest of the tuition. Yes, she chose a private college and will have to deal with the loans when she’s done (we are in no financial position to help her), but she worked HARD throughout school to ensure that she qualified for HOPE. She took (and passed) so many A/P classes and tests that she entered Agnes with enough credits to be classified as a second-semester freshman, and now the rich politicians want to take away what the almost guaranteed to these kids? All they heard about through high school was “HOPE, HOPE, HOPE”. “Stay in Georgia, keep up your grades, and we will guarantee you the HOPE Scholarship”. It is supposed to be a reward for their hard work, and to keep the best and brightest here in Georgia. DON’T take it away from them now….they’ve earned it!!!
catlady
July 23rd, 2010
11:48 am
William Casey, I like the idea of a loan cancellation after a student shows they can do the work. However, what you will see is parents UNWILLING to take out the loan precisely because they know the kid isn’t going to “make it.” Of course, I think if it is important, you will climb any mountain to get that degree. People do not realize HOW VERY MUCH MONEY of their taxes is lost by 2/3 of the freshmen losing HOPE. It is about $12,000 per student for a year at UGA/GT that comes out of taxes, (Not counting the hope, the books, the room and board, etc). (so if there are 6000 frosh and 4000 don’t cut it, that is almost $50M per year wasted on putting on classes, etc, at just those two institutions!) I for one have a terrible problem with wasting that kind of money on kids “finding themselves.” Let them do that on their own dime. Let’s focus on sending SERIOUS SCHOLARS to college from the taxpayers’ pockets.
An advocate: Did you know for longer than there was an upper income cap, there was a LOWEr income cap? My elder daughter, an A- student, would not have gotten HOPE had she gone to a public college in 1995. Why? WE MADE TOO LITTLE MONEY! Because she qualified for full Pell, she would not have gotten HOPE at UGA. (She went to a private college (Where she got the TIG (HOPE) and got Pell also, BTW.) YEARS AFTER they adjusted, and then removed, the top cap, they finally got around to taking off the bottom.
I am not for any kind of income cap. Privileged kids have always had a leg up, no matter what we are talking about. Even without talking about tuition money, privileged kids are more likely to have the B average, for example. They get the tutors, the SAT prep classes, the stimulation, the trips. We have to accept that those with money have an advantage (Did you ever seriously think they don’t?) However, if HOPE is to be merit based, then it needs to be applied equally. It IS a shame that poor folks tend to buy lottery tickets at much higher rates than the wealthy, thus subsidizing their education. However, lottery participation is a free choice, even if not a smart one.
I have never bought a lottery ticket. Although I am no longer poor (finally out of grad school!) I’d rater spend the $1 or $5 or whatever it costs on something I am sure of–food, electricity, gas–than something that “might happen.” Each person makes their own choices on how they spend their money.
Ms. Downey at 11:01: Excellent points. Georgia is a mid-low tuition state. And it isn’t that kids can’t go to college without HOPE, it is that many people don’t want to make the sacrifices to send their kids without HOPE. That is also their choice, but to make the argument that they cannot afford for their kids to go is specious and self-serving. If you can’t afford it, don’t send them!
Many states have much higher tuition, but they also have significant, but more demanding, requirements for needs-based aid (see MA, for example, or NY). Other states have followed the low tuition, low aid model. NC until fairly recently charged NO tuition to instate students!
In Georgia we are pretty fortunate about our access to higher ed and our relatively low tuition. Other states limit access much more severely, or they charge astoundingly high tuitions (and redistribute part of it as needs based aid). I encourage others to look around before you complain too much.
catlady
July 23rd, 2010
11:52 am
I knew the filter would catch that one (11:40)!
Just A Teacher
July 23rd, 2010
12:04 pm
@BB . . . Unfortunately, that is much easier said than done. If a teacher has a high failure rate, then he or she is not considered to be a team player and is subject to retaliation from administrators. Although they would never admit it, many admistrators (and teachers, too) go by the philosophy that you need to go along in order to get along. Bucking the system is not as easy as you make it seem. Furthermore, the grading outlines that I mentioned in my previous post do not say with whom to compare the students in order to arrive at those average statistics. Should they receive a B for being above average in the class, the school, the school system, the state, the country or the world? I think the guidelines were deliberately written as to obscure their meaning. If Georgia students are to compete in a global economy, shouldn’t their grades be based on international standards rather than compare them to local or state statistics?
TheUniversityPhantom
July 23rd, 2010
12:16 pm
after 25 years working in the University System, I’ve seen HOPE change the very fabric of public higher education in Georgia. Before HOPE, a college education was just as attainable with work and the existing federal aid programs. HOPE has turned an education from a privilege which was to be earned, to an entitlement. The public school system has been twisted towards Hope and “No Child Left Behind” crap and even the SAT dumbed down (look at the history). You still have students in college with lack of basic preparation just like you did in the pre-Hope day. The difference is today they are ENTITLED to be there on the government tit, and they know it. There’s no such thing as aspiring to a college education. Ask any faculty member who’s been around for 20 years or more.
West Cobb
July 23rd, 2010
12:28 pm
I think all the posters should realize the reason the op-ed writer picked $75,000 was to find a statistically significant number to illustrate his point. The reality is there just aren’t very many wealthy individuals on a numerical basis, especially here in Georgia. We’re talking about a group that’s smaller than 2% of the state’s population. The state is not teeming with millions of rich people with their offspring. More people live in Smyrna than all the households in Georgia with incomes above $500,000 per year. Considering how few children upper income people have compare to lower income, we’re talking about a few thousand students. Drop the income to $75,000 and we’re talking about a big chunk of the state. Finally, more wealthy families send their kids to UGA than any other school (I know this because it’s what I do for a living). The official statistic for UGA’s incoming Freshman class is 25% have a GPA of 4.0 or greater. Good luck even getting in. Harvard? really? Do you even know any rich people? I thought not.
College Student
July 23rd, 2010
12:37 pm
1) To say that a person is undeserving of reward for their accomplishments because their parents make more money than another person’s parents is not fair. If anything, maybe you can weight the HOPE scholarship based on FAFSA results, though I’m not really sold on that idea.
2) It’s one thing to raise GPA and SAT requirements for HOPE eligibility, but mandating AP classes is ridiculous. Have you seen the disparaging difference in the opportunities for students based on where they live? I came into Tech with Zero hours, while my roommate had 21. Was it my fault? There were maybe 10 AP classes at my high school. That goes back to the state, and where the money goes. To say that a person didn’t “try hard enough” because they don’t have as many AP hours as some other person isn’t fair because you don’t even know what obstacles they might have already overcome.
3) College is not expected in every household. HOPE DOES give some people that opportunity to continue with their education. Isn’t it arrogant to assume that all people have college preached to them their whole lives?
4) Pre-K doesn’t benefit everyone. Some people can’t even afford Pre-K. Seemingly the same dilemma as the college debate, but not quite. That which can be learned in Pre-K can be taught at home. Things like your alphabet, colors, etc. My mother is Not qualified to teach me Calculus 3 and Differential Equations. Seems like we should put the money where it can do the most amount of good.
5) I say all of this knowing very well that I can only speak based on my own experiences and the ones of people I know.