colleges are 4 year universities in the U.S.A
“A striking new book… Although full of the comedies, rivalries and mini-dramas one might find in a high school movie or romcom, it is also a serious—and seriously depressing—study of American higher education.”—Matthew Reisz, Times Higher Education
“Paying for the Party is well written and perversely hard to put down. Readers who did their own share of partying in college may cringe in rueful recognition.”—Mary Taylor Huber, Change
“Instead of being a great equalizer, Paying for the Party argues, the American way of college rewards those who come not just academically but socially prepared, while treating working-class students more cruelly, and often leaving them adrift.”—Ross Douthat, The New York Times
“Focusing on the pathways leading to the college experience, the authors reveal an honest, if at times unflattering, look at the reality of the academic experience for women of both high and low socioeconomic status. Packed in with the data derived from the authors’ interviews is an intimate portrait of the study’s participants combined with researcher commentary that clarifies what the data represent: an unsettling picture of universities failing to lessen the disadvantages facing many of their students… This work will provide spectacular insights into gender and schooling and serve as a useful example of how to report ethnographic research.”—Rachel Wadham, Library Journal (starred review)
“In typical frat parties, Armstrong and Hamilton see much that is wrong with college education today. Such parties allow daughters of the affluent to flaunt their social advantages while exposing the vulnerabilities of female students from less-privileged backgrounds. Unfortunately, the authors find such parties well established in the ‘party pathway’ through the university. Focusing on female students, the authors find from campus observations and interviews ample evidence that four years on the party pathway will open doors of power for the elite while stranding the wannabes with mountains of student-loan debt and few employment options for paying off that debt… A provocative exposé of socially polarizing trends in higher education—certain to spark debate.”—Bryce Christensen, Booklist
“Armstrong and Hamilton report the results of their five‐year study of a group of young women who began in the same freshman dorm but ended up in very different situations. The constraints of social and economic class remained formidable, and moving into the professional class seemed virtually impossible, especially for those women who followed what the authors call ‘the party pathway.’ Women from more privileged backgrounds survived their partying through school due to their more substantial support systems at home. We also see how difficult the college adjustment was for less talented students and for women from modest backgrounds and small towns… The conclusions are sobering, if not depressing. Armstrong and Hamilton assail the university itself for a number of failures, including an ineffectual system of student advising; a plethora of meaningless majors and courses designed to attract full‐paying students, many of whom have no intention of actually pursuing such a career; and its continuing support for the fraternity/sorority system, which the authors contend undermines the very academic mission of the university. Athletics take some major blame, as well. The authors also discovered that some of the women who transferred to regional campuses performed better and were happier.”—Kirkus Reviews
“Armstrong and Hamilton pepper the book with student interviews, and ultimately suggest substantial changes to university structure for creating an egalitarian, merit-based environment. The extensive research and approachable writing style make this book useful to any audience interested in learning more about social differences within the education system.”—Publishers Weekly
“With astute observations and insights, Paying for the Party sheds new light on the lived experiences of contemporary students. It is a very important piece of scholarship that will inform the national discourse on the current state of U.S. higher education.”—Richard Arum, author of Academically Adrift
“By focusing on the lives of young women who spent freshman year living on a ‘party floor,’ Armstrong and Hamilton help us understand critical issues facing American higher education, including the out-sized role of sororities and fraternities and how the values of affluent students coincide with the interests of universities to empower the ‘party pathway.’ Richly observed and vividly narrated, this is an important ethnography of American campus life.”—Steven Brint, University of California, Riverside
“In this bold book, Armstrong and Hamilton capture the strikingly different pathways women undergraduates can take through public universities—‘party,’ ‘professional,’ or ‘mobility’—and show how the dominant campus culture indulges the upper-middle class and limits the prospect of the upwardly mobile. The authors show the complex connections between parental resources, sociability, educational outcome, post-graduation lives, and the importance of the right brand of shoes. This book illuminates the realities of the college experience today, when an adult life without crushing debt is fast becoming the privilege of the few.”—Michèle Lamont, author of How Professors Think
“Paying for the Party is very provocative and should be read by every dean of students on every residential campus. At a time when women are making rapid progress in educational attainment compared to men, Armstrong and Hamilton show how young women’s academics, social lives, and labor-market opportunities get aligned in college—and what happens when they do not.”—Mitchell Stevens, author of Creating a Class
..............
https://www.forbes.com/sites/learnv...g-class-kids-to-fail-in-college/#3f8e8a604024
It's a depressing idea: College—that integral part of the American Dream, and a key ingredient in social mobility in the U.S.—could actually prove to be not as helpful for working-class kids as it is for their more affluent counterparts.
And the two sociologists proposing this controversial theory didn't arrive at their conclusions lightly, either. In "Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality," Elizabeth A. Armstrong and Laura T. Hamilton describe the year they spent living on the dorm floor of a large Midwestern university, the more than 200 student interviews they performed over the course of five years ... and the 2,000 pages of field notes that followed.
In other words, they immersed themselves in the scene to see what was really happening on campus—or at least inside one particular dormitory hall, from which, they say, it's easy to extrapolate.
LearnVest spoke to Hamilton, as well as undergrads who describe themselves as working class, to find out why this could still be happening in America in 2013, and what you need to know to choose the right school.
Why Class Matters At College
While most freshman, regardless of provenance, move into similarly utilitarian dorm rooms, those interchangeable cinderblock walls often do little to level the playing field in the long run, say Armstrong and Hamilton.
What they found is that if two students of equal ability, with parallel aims, arrive at the same school—yet one is from a less-advantaged background—the forces at work on college campuses today mean that she may not complete her degree, may feel socially ostracized and may have a harder time finding a job after graduation.
"One of the findings in the book was that translating a college degree with an associated major and GPA depends so much on parental capital and social resources," explains Hamilton. "Take two students with a 3.9 GPA and the same major. The student from the more affluent family will have two unpaid internships on her resume when she graduates—maybe one that her parents helped her get."
And, as Hamilton and Armstrong continued to follow the women after they graduated, they found the same held true once the women were job hunting.
According to the researchers, this parental advantage, combined with the allure of a college party scene that may take a student's focus away from academics, can hurt working class students more than affluent ones, who can more readily fall back on parental ties and safety nets.
Since When Did Colleges Become Country Clubs?
It's hardly a secret that college costs have skyrocketed. But what may be lesser-known is one reason why: "On the campus we studied, there was massive building of recreational centers and luxury apartments," says Hamilton. "These projects are more about student life—the academic quality of things isn't getting better. Someone called it the country-clubization of higher education."
They may have a point.
Richard K. Vedder, a professor at Ohio University who studies the economics of higher education, was quoted in the New York Times after a new report on college spending showed that public research universities, such as the one Hamilton studied, increased their spending on student services by 20% between 1998 and 2008. Yet spending on instruction increased by just 10%.
"A lot of it is for great athletic centers and spectacular student union buildings," Vedder told the Times. "In the zeal to get students, they are going after them on the basis of recreational amenities."
Hamilton agrees. "As the states have pulled funding from large, mid-tier schools, they’ve raised tuition and heavily recruited out-of-state and international students," she explains. "They can only get the less studious of the rich, so their effort is on creating a great party place." But, that environment, she adds, "is problematic for less-privileged kids: They can get sucked into a huge party scene they can't afford."
A Tale Of Sorority Disparity
In "Paying for the Party," Hamilton and Armstrong describe a deep divide between Greeks and non-Greeks on the campus they studied: A Pan-Hellenic system that catered to wealthy, white women, while the less-affluent were literally left "Initially, we assumed that floor isolates would find each other and create their own friendship groups," writes Hamilton of women who were excluded quite noticeably from the goings-on on their dorm floor. Take Michelle, a working-class student paying her own way through college and a floor isolate who was "surrounded by affluent partiers—Naomi and Abby on one side, and Melanie on the other," describes Hamilton in "Paying for the Party."
Despite repeated requests to quiet down, the revelers next door were "really loud," Michelle told the researchers. "[My roommate] Valerie and I could not sleep. There were nights when we were up until 5 a.m. just waiting for them to shut up." It was like, she said, "Do you guys go to class? Do you not have classes? I can't understand why people would come to college and fail. I guess if you're not paying for it yourself, you can just take it for granted."
Many would argue that college isn't the middle school cafeteria—it's about getting a degree. But the social impact of that first year was so severe for some isolates that not only did the dynamics often impede their academic efforts, some left the university altogether as a result.out in the cold, becoming what Hamilton termed social "isolates."