RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceReader Comments
Insufficient aid deters sophomores from joining clubs
Published: Friday, February 6th, 2009
Rafael Klein-Cloud ’11 had hoped to bicker Cap & Gown Club with his friends this week. Then he learned about the price tag, which at more than $8,000 is only partly covered by his financial aid package.
"My parents were ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
This is an interesting article. I can say that I didn't know of a single person during my time there (Class of ’06) who said they genuinely wanted to be in an eating club but couldn't solely due to the extra cost (and this was back *before* they increased upperclassman financial aid another $5k/year so it would cover the meal portion of eating club fees). I'm sure there may have been a couple here and there, but it was uncommon enough that I never knew of a specific case where that was the sole thing keeping somebody out of a club. (I also know that my club had at least one or two members who we let in free because their individual family circumstances left them unable to pay, and it may have been more.) There were certainly some people who weren't that keen on the clubs but who might've joined one if it were completely free, but that's a slightly different story. And the University's official policy has always been that if you really wanted to be in a club but didn't have the money, they could help you arrange a loan for that amount.
But I can see how some recent happenings may be changing this a bit. My suspicion is that the actual driving force here may have less to do with the cost of the clubs per se and more to do with the University's new four-year college initiative actually providing an attractive alternative for dining outside the clubs. When I was there, this wasn't really a viable alternative: if I wanted to actually have food to eat on a daily basis, I needed to be in an eating club. And because it was really more of a necessity than a luxury, even people who would now say they couldn't afford it (like some of the people in this article) would somehow find a way to afford it — that is, you see more people fretting about the cost of joining a club in part because not joining a club has now become a realistic option. And then when we broaden our view out to all the students whose families could afford to spare the money but not without a little sacrifice, previously they could honestly tell their parents that this is a necessary expense and the parents would pay; but now that's a harder case to make, and parents may be pushing back a bit harder. If any of this is in fact the case, then ironically, a move the University took that undoubtedly makes people better off – offering a viable dining alternative to the eating clubs – might be causing the appearance on campus that so many people are suddenly struggling just to cover the club social fees.
That's not to understate how much of a role the current economic turmoil plays in this — the story here about the student who couldn't join a club because her family's jobs were in trouble is pretty dreadful. But it's hard to see how, just three years after I was there – and with the University now covering almost $7k of financial aid toward food/club fees, whereas in my time I think they only covered circa $2.5k – the issue of students who genuinely can't afford to join clubs has suddenly gone from a relatively rare occurrence to (if the quotes in the article are correct about this being such a widespread problem for sophomores now) what sounds like a real crisis.
Financial concerns clearly excede those families requiring finacial aid. As a parent of a current sophomore, I currently pay full tuition. By definition, that puts me in the highly compensated bracket. With my net worth decreasing by one third with the stock market fall, anticipating retirement in about twelve years and and desiring to help with graduate school expense as well, I find it difficult to rationalize an extra eight thousand dollar bill. Ultimately, administration will have to decide what role eating clubs should play. When I went to Princeton, I was in a four year residencial college and somehow I managed to have a successful career and happy life despite this. In my opinion, subsidies for eating clubs should be a low priority in these financial times.
@ '77 P11
Your bill won't be $8,000 more next year if your child joins a club. Current residential college dining plans cost ~$5,000, so your bill will be ~$1000-$3,000 more.
Interesting article. Great comment '06, I enjoyed reading it.
\
Neither I, nor any of my friends who took out loans to pay for an eating club have regretted it. Ever. I do agree and wish the school's response could be better to cover the last small difference. That said, it's hard to feel bad for someone who would graduate with roughly $6000 in loan debt. Compare that to those of us who came before the time of grants instead of loans. As all things in life, it's a choice and a sacrifice. I found the extra loan debt (on top of other loans, not grants) to have been worthwhile. Good luck to the students making the decision. Don't rule out talking to the clubs like '06 mentioned, I knew many students who also had their fees waived as well. And don't forget to talk to the financial aid office to have your options explained to you. They're good people.
My email in full:
"Finances were a big part of my decision to join Brown. While Princeton's financial aid policy is generous, it would not have covered all expenses connected with eating clubs. However, it was a lifestyle choice as well. My idea of a quality night is popping popcorn with friends and sitting down to a silly movie, or long discussions over hot chocolate and tea. Very rarely do I decide to go out to the Street.
As for Brown vs. Independent...
The biggest appeal of Brown is the camaraderie. I love the idea of sharing family-style meals with awesome people all year round. Plus, I'm convinced that it has the best food available on campus. The cooking teams are constantly competing to out cook one another in the name of friendly competition."
I do believe that the financial considerations are important when making decisions, but my decision to join Brown was a lot more complex than the clubs were too expensive. The decision to join Brown was the best for me, and I love being a part of it.
I agree that there needs to be more transparency in terms of costs for the eating clubs. Some have hidden fees, etc., that should be made more clear to interested Sophomores.
My son joined Terrace last year and with the financial aid he gets we are not noticing any difference in cost. He seems to be really enjoying the experience for which I'm glad. The only unexpected cost that came up was the sophomore year fee which I wish we had known about ahead of time and planned for accordingly. Other than that I think the university has done a good job of making it possible for students on financial aid to be able to enjoy the eating club experience.
Perhaps as an econ major, I tend to look at things too much in terms of that discipline, but one major thought kept popping up as I read this article and the other comments: it's all about value.
I would be included in the group of people for whom joining an eating club required a financial sacrifice, and a more personal financial sacrifice, as I am covering the entire cost of my education (Sallie Mae owns me until 2023). I had to make a choice based on how much I valued the eating club experience. Did I value being in my club more than the difference in cost between going independent or joining a res college and being in the club? My decision was ultimately yes. Whether people realize this or not, this is the decision that each undergrad is making when they decide whether they are going to join a club, a co-op, a res college, or go independent. If you don't place enough more value on joining a club than on one of the other options, then no, you shouldn't join the club.
Regarding the suggestion that Princeton's policies are advantaging students whose families are more well off, well I'd both agree and question what else Princeton is supposed to do. Most aspects of life give an advantage to those with more money. Students with more money buy nicer clothes and drive nicer cars. Should Princeton subsidize clothing and vehicle purchases? My classmates who went into consulting are making much more money than I am as a teacher, and I am making more money than my friends who took Project '55 fellowships. Should Princeton do something about that? I think we'd all agree that that is outside the realm of Princeton's responsibility. This issue is really no different than that one; in the end it comes down to individual decisions and personal value.
This article and the accompanying responses make it abundantly clear why Princeton loses applicants and admits to other schools who are less interested in "the eating club experience" or find it too rich for their blood. When the virtually necessary (in the minds of the majority) expenses of "the eating club experience" are added in, Princeton is more costly than its peers.
The concern is not that the University should be subsidizing the clubs more, but that it should be subsidizing the four-year college route less. When is the last time an upperclass dorm was renovated? What is the average square footage of an upperclass dorm in Whitman versus in regular draw? How many more common rooms, computer clusters, and other amenities are found in colleges than in, say, Brown.
Also, why does financial aid not cover club social fees, when my tuition covers four-year college events that I will never go to. For sign-ins at least, clubs are no more elitist or selective than the colleges themselves, so they can't honestly claim that they shouldn't subsidize social expenditures for some when they already do for others: the only plausible rationale is desire for direct control. And contrary to the uninformed claim of one of the students quoted in the article, club social budgets from those fees never pay for a drop of alcohol.