$ money money money $

[NorthernPike]

Re: $ money money money $

Not to mention the economic impact brought into the state and the multiplier effect from money not only spent by the student, but also family and friends as they visit, etc. Note that the institutions fixed costs do not change by adding students, so the "real" cost of adding out-of-state students is not what it seems (i.e. the amount financial aid award), it is VERY likely that out-of-state students yield a net gain to the state treasury. There is also real and substantial diversity, inclusion and pluralism gained from them.

Fair point, but, last time I checked students do not have a lot of disposable income and foreign family and friends to not make frequent visits. If all the seats are full there is an added cost and greater competition for courses and other resources. Finally how many foreign students actual stay or can stay in this country after graduation? No doubt some but not many for the benefit they are receiving. And (I know and said finally but please indulge me) are schools who use in state tuition to attract hockey players actively recruiting non-hockey players? I would suspect that the hockey players outnumber the non-hockey players. I know, I know as long as it is offered to all it is OK but it seems like playing with in the rules not the spirit of the rules.

 

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: $ money money money $

Fair point, but, last time I checked students do not have a lot of disposable income and foreign family and friends to not make frequent visits. If all the seats are full there is an added cost and greater competition for courses and other resources. Finally how many foreign students actual stay or can stay in this country after graduation? No doubt some but not many for the benefit they are receiving. And (I know and said finally but please indulge me) are schools who use in state tuition to attract hockey players actively recruiting non-hockey players? I would suspect that the hockey players outnumber the non-hockey players. I know, I know as long as it is offered to all it is OK but it seems like playing with in the rules not the spirit of the rules.

I'm sure I'm not the only one getting very tired of saying this over and over again these last couple weeks. Why don't you people start reading the information in the discussion before joining in the debate? It's all there to be easily read... It's not actually based on whether it's offered to more than just athletes, it's based on whether it is given to (read: accepted by) more than just athletes. If the ratio of Athletes to Non-athletes in the pool of students actually receiving the money from a particular aid program is disproportionate to the ratio of Athletes to Non-athletes in the total student body, the NCAA can and will determine it to be a de-facto Athletic Scholarship. This is where Buffalo State and Geneseo got punished last year. Both schools are now on probation and both were banned from the 09-10 SUNYAC and NCAA postseason tournaments. UNE is apparently being investigated for the same thing, and we'll hear about their punishment soon enough.

In slightly simpler terms, for a DIII school to comply with the prohibition of athletic scholarships in DIII, it must pass this simple test: When looking at any fully-enrolled randomly-selected student's financial aid package they are actually receiving, the probability that this student is a student-athlete must not be substantially different from the probability that any random fully-enrolled student selected is a student athlete without looking at the financial award letter. If there is any grant or award whose presence indicates a statistically-significant increase of the student's status as an athlete, the school fails the test, and that program must be changed or discontinued and the program will receive punishment no matter what.

A school can offer a canadian aid grant. That is not, in any way, a violation of the NCAA DIII bylaws. Imagine this hypothetical: (and NUProf, feel free to correct me)
A school has 5,000 students, and 250 of them are athletes. That's 5%. This schools has accepted 500 canadian students, and offered every one of them the canadian aid grant. 25 of those Canadian applicants are athletes. 20 of the Canadian Athletes accept the grant and attend the school. But, despite the school's best efforts to "actively recruit non-athletes", the school is not the top choice for the non-athletes and as such only 10 of the non-athletes accept the grant. Only 5% of the students awarded the grant were athletes, but now 66.7% of the students receiving the grant are athletes. Given that only 5% of the student population consists of athletes, the NCAA would rule that this ratio of athletes receiving the aid is disproportionate, and thus the canadian grant program is a de-facto athletic scholarship.

 

[NorthernPike]

Re: $ money money money $

I thought I would get that reaction. Did you not read my acknowledgement that if all got it that it was OK. I get it. My point here is to show that all schools (not just private schools) give aid to students that others may see as questionalbe when it really is not.

 

[norm1909]

Re: $ money money money $

Fair point, but, last time I checked students do not have a lot of disposable income and foreign family and friends to not make frequent visits. If all the seats are full there is an added cost and greater competition for courses and other resources. Finally how many foreign students actual stay or can stay in this country after graduation? No doubt some but not many for the benefit they are receiving. And (I know and said finally but please indulge me) are schools who use in state tuition to attract hockey players actively recruiting non-hockey players? I would suspect that the hockey players outnumber the non-hockey players. I know, I know as long as it is offered to all it is OK but it seems like playing with in the rules not the spirit of the rules.

Some good points, first some clarification. Foreign students are students from out-of-state, alien students are from out-of-the-country. Foreign students usually have similar resources to in-state students. Alien students typically fall into two categories; those with sufficient financial resources to attend anywhere, and either lack local schools with significant reputations or want a US Education, with a majority of those attending DIII schools doing so because they can’t meet the admission standards of their DI preferred choices and those who would need significant financial assistance to attend ANY school. Foreign students usually choose for similar reasons, but because of lower transportation costs, there are usually more foreign than alien students, particularly those choosing to attend out-of-state but nearby schools. Their anticipated out-of-pocket expenses certainly play a part in the particular schools they choose, but for many, this is not the primary criteria.

As for amounts of disposable/discretionary financial resources, most in fact have sufficient resources, and while the frequency of visits of friends and family is generally dependent on the costs of visits – such as travel expenses etc, once they do visit, they typically spend significantly more than the frequent visitor. I stand by my statement that "it is VERY likely that out-of-state students yield a net gain to the state treasury".

Finally, your most significant point “are schools who use in state tuition to attract hockey players actively recruiting non-hockey players”. This is a problem for many schools, actually recruiting alien and foreign students. Some schools have diversity, inclusion and pluralism offices that have significant support from the institution to significantly actively recruit. Without such active recruitment, active alien and foreign student recruiting efforts fall to the only other department with a significant recruiting component – the athletic department. This is what caused the unintentional problems at SUNY Geneseo and Buffalo, a universal financial aid package not receiving balanced promotion, with the unintentional result of a significant number of recipients being those recruited by the athletic department.

 

[Caveman-RC]

Re: $ money money money $

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/De3QK-LJpPo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: $ money money money $

I thought I would get that reaction. Did you not read my acknowledgement that if all got it that it was OK. I get it. My point here is to show that all schools (not just private schools) give aid to students that others may see as questionalbe when it really is not.

Oh, fair enough. Quite honestly, I got as far as this when I started formulating that response:

....are schools who use in state tuition to attract hockey players actively recruiting non-hockey players? I would suspect that the hockey players outnumber the non-hockey players.

And I think you'll realize from the information in my post that this simply cannot be true. If the hockey players outnumbered the non-hockey players in the grant program, the school would fall into a Geneseo/Buff State/UNE-type situation.

As for your comment (in the initial post) that it seemed more like playing within the rules rather than in the spirit of the rules: until such a time as the rules tighten to prevent these things, whether or not it is in the spirit of the rules is ultimately immaterial. I'm a fan of 2 programs that used to benefit greatly from using creative financial aid packaging. One of them even paid dearly (more than any other DIII Hockey team has paid for NCAA infractions) for indirect financial aid issues (which may or may not be considered relevant to this discussion). Neither of those 2 teams benefit from it anymore - Bob Emery will be the first to tell you that he's BEGGED the school to work out something more like what Oswego has, etc. If he's after a player and he finds out Oswego's interested, unless the kid has expressed that money isn't a concern, he backs off. Simple as that. My teams are no longer the big-dogs in financial aid packaging in DIII Hockey. And I don't care. As long as everybody's within the rules, if a program can get the institutional backing to do it, good for them. I honesty HOPE that Plattsburgh can start to be more competitive with the likes of Oswego in this department soon.

However, to counter that argument: I've heard from some rather in-the-know sources (and no, it's not Derek) that Coach McShane at Norwich and Coach Beaney at Middlebury will tend to give up hope when they find out that Plattsburgh or Oswego are at the table. Middlebury is, of course, a unique situation with the NESCACs: not only is their financial aid department no longer working with them, their admissions department seems to be working directly against them these days, with the exceedingly high admissions standards limiting the team to almost exclusively recruiting Prep players. But Norwich... few will argue with the statement that Norwich has had a hugely successful few years. Huge. And yet Coach McShane acknowledges that Plattsburgh is financially a more viable option, while in turn Coach Emery (who has ALSO had a huge amount of success over the last 4 years) acknowledges Oswego's financial aid superiority.

I'm starting to ramble and talk in circles (I'm not a great writer or public speaker), so I'll sum up what I'm trying to say... Maybe it's the case that all of the schools I've just discussed (Plattsburgh, Oswego, Norwich, Adrian, St. Norbert, and maybe even UW-Superior, Elmira and Middlebury) are all among the best user of financial aid packaging in men's DIII Hockey. I'm not going to argue with that. But the differences within that group are absolutely remarkable, with Oswego being, from an outsider's perspective, clearly the best in this department... but it doesn't always translate onto the ice. Yes, in recent history virtually all of the Final Fours have consisted mostly (and in 3 of the last 4, entirely) of that group. And almost all of the National Championships in the last 15 years have fallen in that group. But the relative differences within them don't translate into who is the winner. And how the hell do you explain 2009, when NONE of them made it out of the Quarterfinals?

So yes, maybe it gives a distinct advantage. But it has been proven time and time again that it does not make you unbeatable, and the one who pays the most does not always win. So for those less fortunate programs whose schools give them nothing: Get the school to relax its stance on this, or suck it up and play the **** game. You just might be surprised with what you can achieve anyway.

I hope this post makes any sense to anybody...

 

[PSUChamps2001]

Re: $ money money money $

Oh, fair enough. Quite honestly, I got as far as this when I started formulating that response:



And I think you'll realize from the information in my post that this simply cannot be true. If the hockey players outnumbered the non-hockey players in the grant program, the school would fall into a Geneseo/Buff State/UNE-type situation.

As for your comment (in the initial post) that it seemed more like playing within the rules rather than in the spirit of the rules: until such a time as the rules tighten to prevent these things, whether or not it is in the spirit of the rules is ultimately immaterial. I'm a fan of 2 programs that used to benefit greatly from using creative financial aid packaging. One of them even paid dearly (more than any other DIII Hockey team has paid for NCAA infractions) for indirect financial aid issues (which may or may not be considered relevant to this discussion). Neither of those 2 teams benefit from it anymore - Bob Emery will be the first to tell you that he's BEGGED the school to work out something more like what Oswego has, etc. If he's after a player and he finds out Oswego's interested, unless the kid has expressed that money isn't a concern, he backs off. Simple as that. My teams are no longer the big-dogs in financial aid packaging in DIII Hockey. And I don't care. As long as everybody's within the rules, if a program can get the institutional backing to do it, good for them. I honesty HOPE that Plattsburgh can start to be more competitive with the likes of Oswego in this department soon.

However, to counter that argument: I've heard from some rather in-the-know sources (and no, it's not Derek) that Coach McShane at Norwich and Coach Beaney at Middlebury will tend to give up hope when they find out that Plattsburgh or Oswego are at the table. Middlebury is, of course, a unique situation with the NESCACs: not only is their financial aid department no longer working with them, their admissions department seems to be working directly against them these days, with the exceedingly high admissions standards limiting the team to almost exclusively recruiting Prep players. But Norwich... few will argue with the statement that Norwich has had a hugely successful few years. Huge. And yet Coach McShane acknowledges that Plattsburgh is financially a more viable option, while in turn Coach Emery (who has ALSO had a huge amount of success over the last 4 years) acknowledges Oswego's financial aid superiority.

I'm starting to ramble and talk in circles (I'm not a great writer or public speaker), so I'll sum up what I'm trying to say... Maybe it's the case that all of the schools I've just discussed (Plattsburgh, Oswego, Norwich, Adrian, St. Norbert, and maybe even UW-Superior, Elmira and Middlebury) are all among the best user of financial aid packaging in men's DIII Hockey. I'm not going to argue with that. But the differences within that group are absolutely remarkable, with Oswego being, from an outsider's perspective, clearly the best in this department... but it doesn't always translate onto the ice. Yes, in recent history virtually all of the Final Fours have consisted mostly (and in 3 of the last 4, entirely) of that group. And almost all of the National Championships in the last 15 years have fallen in that group. But the relative differences within them don't translate into who is the winner. And how the hell do you explain 2009, when NONE of them made it out of the Quarterfinals?

So yes, maybe it gives a distinct advantage. But it has been proven time and time again that it does not make you unbeatable, and the one who pays the most does not always win. So for those less fortunate programs whose schools give them nothing: Get the school to relax its stance on this, or suck it up and play the **** game. You just might be surprised with what you can achieve anyway.

I hope this post makes any sense to anybody...

Very good points Nate. You are dealing with two different sides. A) Those who don't want to admit that their teams use huge FA packages to gain high quality talent and B) Those who don't want to realize that those teams who have these huge FA packages are doing it legally, like it or not.

I don't think anyone is claiming the whole "unbeatable" thing, but its pointed out that those with the packages (on average) are always there at the end of the year. It's hard to deny that. You can say that about McShane, but I know Emery has publicly said the same thing about Norwich when he hears a player was heading to Norwich. Plattsburgh's FA has gone up some compared to 2004-2005. It's easy to see in the results what happens.

The whole "why don't the other sports prosper"....you dont see too many "foreign" football stars or basketball players....so why someone would bring that into the mix is beyond me.

I agree its kind of cool to see the little guys win once and a while, kind of why Im an anti-Yankee fan, but to not realize your team is using this legal advantage to be one of the premier college hockey teams is just crazy. Like I said several times. Was Plattsburgh a benefactor of FA packages in the 90's? Absolutely, it was the only way to compete with certain private schools on the National stage. But what Plattsburgh gave back then is pennies compared to what some schools are able to give legally. I will also go one further and say what Plattsburgh got caught for in the '87 investigation isn't nearly as bad as what is happening these days around college sports.

What happened in Geneseo/Buff State was IMO an honest mistake. I don't think they intended to not have an equal amount of non-athletes to athletes, but did. Its not like they wern't giving or accepting other foreign students. Nor is anything SNC or Adrian or who ever is doing illegal. Again, it brings up the "spirit of the game", but so be it. I love the fact that almost every SUNYAC team these days (I forget who doesn't) gives out FA packages. It's really helped the league. I am not sure Plattsburghs 32-0-2 Conference Unbeaten Streak from '98-00 will ever be matched.

 

[NUProf]

Re: $ money money money $

Let's look at a hypothetical.

Suppose a player has two options
School A Private school, 40K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success
School B State school, 20K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success

Just on that basis, School A will need to come up with pretty close to 20K more in financial aid just to be on a level playing field financially. There are of course other issues, and some of them may be worth the increased cost - academic programs at the school. If the player wants to major in math, and School A has a better math department than School B, it may make a difference. Fit with the program. If the player is a goalie, is there an incumbent #1, or did the #1 just graduate? Does the player like the coaching staff. In that sense, state schools have a built-in financial advantage. Remember the the test. If I randomly select a financial aid package, there is nothing in the information that changes my ability to assess whether or not the student is an athlete.

Prob (student is an athlete) = Prob (student is an athlete|knowlege of FA package) - There I did it, I phrased it as a conditional probability problem.

 

[PSUChamps2001]

Let's look at a hypothetical.

Suppose a player has two options
School A Private school, 40K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success
School B State school, 20K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success

Just on that basis, School A will need to come up with pretty close to 20K more in financial aid just to be on a level playing field financially. There are of course other issues, and some of them may be worth the increased cost - academic programs at the school. If the player wants to major in math, and School A has a better math department than School B, it may make a difference. Fit with the program. If the player is a goalie, is there an incumbent #1, or did the #1 just graduate? Does the player like the coaching staff. In that sense, state schools have a built-in financial advantage. Remember the the test. If I randomly select a financial aid package, there is nothing in the information that changes my ability to assess whether or not the student is an athlete.

Prob (student is an athlete) = Prob (student is an athlete|knowlege of FA package) - There I did it, I phrased it as a conditional probability problem.

That's great but when private school A can give just as much in FA as public school B's school cost WITH FA deducted...why not go to the premier provate school? And yes, it happens. Yes there are other variables, but in many cases I've heard of kids not coming and or leaving, MONEY is by far the MAJOR factor. Yes there are some kids that pick a school based on academics, friends, open spot on the roster, but it still comes down to "Can I play here and afford it or do I have to pick somewhere else"

 

[westscout]

Re: $ money money money $

Great conversations here.

I am have been proven wrong about my assumptions.

Everything is on the up an up, just some institutions have chosen to offer a much higher amount of FA packages to all students.

What I don't get is why every school just doesn't do the same? If it legal and the school does not loose money. Maybe that is a really stupid question.

Westscout

 

[NUProf]

Re: $ money money money $

That's great but when private school A can give just as much in FA as public school B's school cost WITH FA deducted...why not go to the premier provate school? And yes, it happens. Yes there are other variables, but in many cases I've heard of kids not coming and or leaving, MONEY is by far the MAJOR factor. Yes there are some kids that pick a school based on academics, friends, open spot on the roster, but it still comes down to "Can I play here and afford it or do I have to pick somewhere else"

It certainly is the case that academic reputation factors in to the process. If we get to the point where the cost of attending school A = cost of attending school B (or the costs are close), there are a lot of factors involved. If on an equal dollars, equal chances of playing situation occurs and school A is regarded as an elite school and school B is regarded as Jerkwater State, then the advantage clearly goes to the private school with the good rep.

 

[NorthernPike]

Re: $ money money money $

FA 101

When a family completes a FAFSA they provide income and asset information about the family (parent and student). That results in an Expected Family Contribution (EFC). That amount (EFC) is a constant no matter where the student decides to go to school. What varies is the cost of education from school to school. The most obvious difference in cost being between public and private schools. But, even public schools have varying cost just as private schools have varying cost. So, if a schools cost is higher than the family’s EFC the resulting difference is their financial need.

For example, school A cost $15,000 and the family has an EFC of $15,000. In this case the family does not demonstrate a financial need ($15,000 - $15,000 = $0) and will most likely only have scholarship and/or loan eligibility. School B has a cost of $40,000. The same family with a $15,000 EFC would have a $25,000 financial need ($40,000 - $15,000 = $25,000). If the school can meet that need with financial aid the student can choose the college they wish to attend based on factors other than cost.

That is how financial aid works for everyone. That is why financial aid packages look different from school to school. It is also why some seem to think that some schools offer more aid than others. They do, but only because of need based on varying cost.

 

[norm1909]

Re: $ money money money $

It certainly is the case that academic reputation factors in to the process. If we get to the point where the cost of attending school A = cost of attending school B (or the costs are close), there are a lot of factors involved. If on an equal dollars, equal chances of playing situation occurs and school A is regarded as an elite school and school B is regarded as Jerkwater State, then the advantage clearly goes to the private school with the good rep.

I agree that academic reputation should be a significant factor, particularly given that long term, high paying; professional success in DIII hockey is extremely rare. Unfortunately, I suspect that for MANY student athletes, the factors of primary importance are: Where is their significant other attending, where are/have their friends going (not just where are their teammates going), who has shown an active interest, what is the coaches reputation, who does their existing/prior coaches recommend, what is the non-hockey life like, ease of their parents & their personal "MVP's" to attend games, what can they afford, can they meet the admission standards, then what is the academic reputation..

________________________________________________________________________________________

FA 101

When a family completes a FAFSA they provide income and asset information about the family (parent and student). That results in an Expected Family Contribution (EFC). That amount (EFC) is a constant no matter where the student decides to go to school. What varies is the cost of education from school to school. The most obvious difference in cost being between public and private schools. But, even public schools have varying cost just as private schools have varying cost. So, if a schools cost is higher than the family’s EFC the resulting difference is their financial need.

For example, school A cost $15,000 and the family has an EFC of $15,000. In this case the family does not demonstrate a financial need ($15,000 - $15,000 = $0) and will most likely only have scholarship and/or loan eligibility. School B has a cost of $40,000. The same family with a $15,000 EFC would have a $25,000 financial need ($40,000 - $15,000 = $25,000). If the school can meet that need with financial aid the student can choose the college they wish to attend based on factors other than cost.

That is how financial aid works for everyone. That is why financial aid packages look different from school to school. It is also why some seem to think that some schools offer more aid than others. They do, but only because of need based on varying cost.

The FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) applies only to US students, but your general explanation is good.

 

[NorthernPike]

Re: $ money money money $

True but many schools use a simailar method to calculate need for foreign students.

 

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: $ money money money $

FA 101

When a family completes a FAFSA they provide income and asset information about the family (parent and student). That results in an Expected Family Contribution (EFC). That amount (EFC) is a constant no matter where the student decides to go to school. What varies is the cost of education from school to school. The most obvious difference in cost being between public and private schools. But, even public schools have varying cost just as private schools have varying cost. So, if a schools cost is higher than the family’s EFC the resulting difference is their financial need.

For example, school A cost $15,000 and the family has an EFC of $15,000. In this case the family does not demonstrate a financial need ($15,000 - $15,000 = $0) and will most likely only have scholarship and/or loan eligibility. School B has a cost of $40,000. The same family with a $15,000 EFC would have a $25,000 financial need ($40,000 - $15,000 = $25,000). If the school can meet that need with financial aid the student can choose the college they wish to attend based on factors other than cost.

That is how financial aid works for everyone. That is why financial aid packages look different from school to school. It is also why some seem to think that some schools offer more aid than others. They do, but only because of need based on varying cost.

I'm aware of all that. Believe me, I'm still filing the FAFSA annually. I'm not just in Spain on vacation, you know

What we're talking about here, although we are (perhaps incorrectly) using the term "Financial Aid Packaging", we are actually referring to school-initiative grant programs. Which are an important piece of the financial aid puzzle that you left out of your post. Those are financial awards beyond the Stafford Loans (which are what you are referring to) that are offered for various reasons, in addition to endowed scholarships and the like. Sometimes they're for having really good grades. Sometimes they're for being Canadian. Whatever it is, it's because you're either part of a group that school has determined should be awarded for certain achievements, or because you're part of a group that the school want's to attract to their institution.

On top of that, most private and many public schools will also have endowed scholarships based on alumni donations that are awarded based on criteria set by the source of the funds and/or the school, and can range from being a Journalism Major, to having the last name of O'Connor, to being a 5'2" brunette with 25 freckles on your right cheek. Sometimes these can be a source of the grants that we're discussing here, but usually they're of the grant type in the first paragraph.

Both of these types of aid usually do not need to be paid back, whereas the type of aid to which you are referring does.



For example, Plattsburgh State has a financial aid calculator online. If you play around with the data, you'll see that, no matter the nationality you put, it does indeed calculate your need-based awards based on the method you described. But then, if you put in high enough grades, you'll start to see merit-based scholarships for that. And, if you put in a nationality other than US, you'll see an "International Student Grant" that is put into it as well. $5,000 if you are Canadian or Cuban, and $2,500 if you are anything else other than American. Things like that are what we're talking about.

In the case of Oswego and some others, it's actually more a case of having "In-State Tuition", "Out-of-State Tuition", and "International Student Tutition", and the 3rd tuition rate being similar or equal to the In-State rate. I believe this would also be factored as a financial aid benefit by the NCAA by using the difference between the Out-of-State rate and the International Rate, because they are Out-Of-State Students (as in, they are not getting a reduced rate because their income taxes pay to run the school lol)

 

[norm1909]

Re: $ money money money $

True but many schools use a simailar method to calculate need for foreign students.

It is true that establishing an Expected Family Contribution (EFC) is the key to determining financial aid need, but the ability to verify the information that would be provided by alien students is next to impossible. A common approach is to rely on a network established by the schools international recruiting office, often using or supplemented with NGO's (Non-Government Organizations), particularly when dealing with third world/developing countries to seek out students most likely to benefit from financial assistance. Otherwise, a flat (fixed) offer is made to all students without a need to prove anything other than country of residence.

 

[NorthernPike]

Re: $ money money money $

It is true that establishing an Expected Family Contribution (EFC) is the key to determining financial aid need, but the ability to verify the information that would be provided by alien students is next to impossible. A common approach is to rely on a network established by the schools international recruiting office, often using or supplemented with NGO's (Non-Government Organizations), particularly when dealing with third world/developing countries to seek out students most likely to benefit from financial assistance. Otherwise, a flat (fixed) offer is made to all students without a need to prove anything other than country of residence.

Not for our friends who live North of the boarder. They have very reliable tax returns. Remember we are talking about hockey players. Not many of them come from India. But, you are right, there are other places that are not so reliable.

 

[norm1909]

Re: $ money money money $

Not for our friends who live North of the boarder. They have very reliable tax returns. Remember we are talking about hockey players. Not many of them come from India. But, you are right, there are other places that are not so reliable.

It is NOT that the tax returns are not “reliable”, it is that the ability to independently verify them isn't available, for that matter, the ability to verify the information is generally unavailable even for US students, hence the need for/reliance on the FAFSA.

BTW, this alien student is an "Indian" hockey player

 

[puckrfactor]

Re: $ money money money $

An Indian hockey player??? Does that mean he plays lacross????

 

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: $ money money money $

Let's look at a hypothetical.

Suppose a player has two options
School A Private school, 40K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success
School B State school, 20K per year cost of attendance, long history of competitive success

Just on that basis, School A will need to come up with pretty close to 20K more in financial aid just to be on a level playing field financially. There are of course other issues, and some of them may be worth the increased cost - academic programs at the school. If the player wants to major in math, and School A has a better math department than School B, it may make a difference. Fit with the program. If the player is a goalie, is there an incumbent #1, or did the #1 just graduate? Does the player like the coaching staff. In that sense, state schools have a built-in financial advantage. Remember the the test. If I randomly select a financial aid package, there is nothing in the information that changes my ability to assess whether or not the student is an athlete.

Prob (student is an athlete) = Prob (student is an athlete|knowlege of FA package) - There I did it, I phrased it as a conditional probability problem.

Prof, completely unrelated here, but you're the only statistics guy I know, so I figured I'd ask you...

In this recent post on the Language Log, Mark Liberman discusses and analyzes a statistical analysis of the frequency of the use on the first-person pronoun in popular songs year-to-year in the 1980-2007 time frame. Anyway, in his post he shows how the graph given in the original document (which is linked to in the blog post) doesn't exactly (if at all) show what the numbers show, and says "it seems to me that their Figure 1 is superfluous at best and misleading at worst."

My question for you is this: Is Mr. Liberman missing something here, or is he right in saying that this graphical representation is, based on the numbers provided, greatly misleading?