I also don't see any real contradiction either. Parental ability to pay (and I would add parental ability to provide tutoring or otherwise impart knowledge) is one component that results in advantages to these kids but their own hard work is also a necessary component.
I believe that HowlerKarma's original point was that the high level of what she called
pampering/primping/houthousing is a major contributing factor to increasing the costs of college for kids who don't have the benefits that the upper middle class does. HowlerKarma, correct me if I'm wrong.
The un-primped kids have to compete with the resources of the parents of the upper middle class, and they simply can't succeed in that competition, regardless of how capable they may actually be. The wealthier kids need the merit scholarships the LEAST yet are at a significant advantage in getting them precisely because of parental resources. This leaves the middle class kids with LOANS.
This is about growing inequality folks, not internal drive.
I thought that HowlerKarma was referring to miscellaneous minor scholarships for which it is a pain to apply but from which she would not expect more than 1-2% contribution toward college costs.
My thought was that most kids in the extreme range would not bother with these minor scholarships. Then again, I am not sure that I know what upper middle class means to everyone or how broadly that category can be defined.
On the growing inequality issue, I do see that.
Well, it's both things, actually.
Firstly, yes-- more advantaged students
are actually winning the scholarship sweepstakes in ever larger numbers. I was deeply saddened, actually, by my DD's cohort, and what I observed in it. There were distinct groups of students there, and in our SES bracket, DD is
unusual in that her parents are incredibly savvy about how to play the game. Many of my DD's (on paper, anyway) highly capable classmates came from homes which were similar in terms of SES advantage, but for whom the parents in those homes did not know the relative
importance of making sure that the resume builds a coherent high-achiever portrait by senior year. THOSE kids wound up getting
almost NOTHING in terms of scholarships. Seriously-- nothing. One in particular was a national merit commendee, graduated in the top 1%, had a couple of EC's demonstrating well-roundedness and task-persistence, and
still only got a tuition waiver for about 10% of his annual costs at a public uni.
THAT is what it means now to be middle class with fairly typical, bright parents, but lack a "hook" that is a means to get scholarship $.
