Are A Lot of Grad Students From Privileged Families?

[waitinginvain?]

I know there are a lot of grad students who are struggling and/or in debt (I fall into the former category). But many of them seem to have been born with a silver spoon in their mouth. For instance, one student has seen lots of Broadway plays, worked with famous directors and playwrights, and traveled all over Europe. I've heard others talk about their summer trips to Japan or Kiev. I believe the one who went to Kiev was studying abroad. But she went to Skidmore College, which isn't cheap. Another pays to have her olive oil imported from Italy! So, do a lot of graduate students come from money?

[Eigen]

None of the graduate students in my program "come from money". Most range from 1st generation college students, to middle class.

In fact, very few of the graduate students I've met in other programs "come from money".

That said, I think your metrics are off. You're basing what people have done in the past with their monetary background, when it could also just be different priorities.

I know lots of people who've been all over Europe and Japan, with no parental support at all. A plane ticket and a backpack isn't that expensive, after all. Especially in the humanities, many of the students I know make it one of their top priorities to travel during the summer- it helps with perspective for their work, language fluency, etc.

[BrokenRecord]

You're basing what people have done in the past with their monetary background, when it could also just be different priorities.

This! If I were to be judged based upon my spending habits I would be dirt poor. If you know where to look, it is very easy to find last minute airfare, trips, cruises or anything you want on a bargain. I am a huge shopper, but only shop for 70% or more off the original price on nearly everything I buy. My whole room (shared townhome) is furnished with stuff from the "as-is" clearance isle at bed bath and beyond. Sure, you have to dry clean the curtains, wash the sheets, deal with a scratch on the dish, but it is worth it having high quality, expensive furnishings for way less than the low quality, "cheaper" competitors.

In my case, I am far from poor, but not comfortable enough with money to blow it. I like having the security in knowing that I have money stashed away in emergency funds. My partner is well-off so I'm fortunate to have him help out while in school. I'm lucky, no doubt about it, but I'm quite miserly and tend to scrimp when I can (except on nutritious, good food and laundry soap).

But in a greater sense, I don't think children of privilege generally pursue research-based graduate programs as it is kind of hard to pay someone to write your thesis or take your comps No but seriously, most who pursue graduate school now do so out of a financial necessity, as a means to (hopefully) a better paying and more fulfilling career---at least that is the case to my understanding in the hard sciences. I think liberal arts/humanities tend to have more well-off students in general, but being bankrolled by your family helps you get ahead with those already-established connections,

[Usmivka]

You're basing what people have done in the past with their monetary background, when it could also just be different priorities.

Agreed. Educational outcomes and opportunities do have a lot to do with socioeconomic status, but it looks to me like you are running off some faulty assumptions.

It costs very little to travel if you are cost conscious and a little lucky (couchsurfing, flight vouchers from friends who are stewards, hitchhiking, pitching tents in RV camps in the middle of cities, however you make it work).

I realize anecdote is terrible evidence, but I spent a few months in Europe with my partner midway through university and employed many of these strategies. In fact, we made a little money by being away, since we were in less expensive regions like Eastern Europe (and I think Kiev should be similarly inexpensive...) and sublet our apartment while we were away--we spent about $25 dollars a day and earned about $28 from the sublet.

And opportunities like Japan or Broadway shows? Maybe the first lived near NYC--student rush tickets are cheaper than a movie and snacks if you are flexible. And the latter, maybe their parents were in the military and stationed in Japan (at least two of the folks in my program fall under this category). Universities offer need based financial aid, so I don't really find a tuition argument compelling either. Apparently the graduate tuition in my program is ~$50k a year, but since the school pays all of that it doesn't reflect on my wealth.

Regardless, even if you classmates come from wealth, it sounds like they are taking advantage of it to do enriching, educational things. Those don't seem like bad peers to have.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Usmivka

[dazedandbemused]

I think liberal arts/humanities tend to have more well-off students in general, but being bankrolled by your family helps you get ahead with those already-established connections,

Wow, that article is kind of hilarious in its obliviousness! The comments are even funnier though.

But in response to the OP, I would say that you can't judge how flush someone is with cash by their past experiences. I most certainly don't have any large quantities of cash, but when I was in undergrad I went to a couple of Broadway shows because those were the things that I valued. With student rush tickets, it's about 35 dollars. When the money's tight, some people would rather eat expensive restaurant food and walk everywhere; others would live on PB&J as long as they could afford to put gas in the car. I wouldn't judge your classmates for their experiences, because a lot of my undergrad experiences helped to open new areas of inquiry to me as a scholar, including a few international trips. As Usmivka said, they sound like some pretty interesting people

[BrokenRecord]

Wow, that article is kind of hilarious in its obliviousness! The comments are even funnier though.

Exactly! It was pretty impressive until you hit "I went to work for the family business"

[mandarin.orange]

Exactly! It was pretty impressive until you hit "I went to work for the family business"

Couldn't agree more. I was pretty impressed with her shrewd advice on how to "out-think the competition" - pre-emptively asking for jobs and whatnot - and all was negated by that statement.

[michigan girl]

Not in my graduate programs. Education and social work aren't exactly money-generating professions, and the content emphasis on social justice, counseling, and empowerment would appeal to more working- and middle-class students.

I think you are more likely to encounter students from wealthy and privileged backgrounds in the following disciplines: law, business, medicine, dentistry, theater/performance, and the humanities (PhD level).

[Xanthan]

Hold on, let's back this train up a little. Trips to Europe and imported olive oil don't mean that those students come from the 1%. HOWEVER... I've noticed a great majority of PhD students I've met (both in my field and others) have one or two parents that got education beyond the bachelor's. My family was certainly never rich, but my father is a professor, and I'd be insincere to suggest his advice didn't help me navigate the admissions process.

I also taught high school in an inner city district... I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get. Let's face it: most of us here ARE from privileged backgrounds, on at least some level.

[imonedaful]

It is going to be tough to get a correct answer on this unless somebody has done a research paper analyzing the socioeconomic status of graduate students families. Actually, I am pretty sure papers have been written about it.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/x5707h7p23p20513/

That link will direct you to a whole book about it. It was written in 1985, and even at that time, there was no direct correlation of background and the choice of going to graduate school. The summary tells you that income of one's family does effect where they may choose to go to school at the undergraduate level, but becomes nonsignificant as students progress through college because it is purely dependent upon their unique experience once in college. This makes sense, since the longer you are in college the more you break away from your family background. You start becoming established in your own right.

One of the great things about being a graduate student is that you get the opportunity to meet students from diverse sets of background. And, I agree that you cannot judge people on their spending habits. Most graduate students are spending their own money, not their parents. As for the person who imports Olive Oil from Italy, it might actually be cheaper. Sometimes buying something directly from where it is made can be cheaper than paying the mark up once it makes it here. I am not sure, but I know have bought some consumer goods directly from China where they are manufactured and they were cheaper than buying the same items here.

[raise cain]

Hold on, let's back this train up a little. Trips to Europe and imported olive oil don't mean that those students come from the 1%. HOWEVER... I've noticed a great majority of PhD students I've met (both in my field and others) have one or two parents that got education beyond the bachelor's. My family was certainly never rich, but my father is a professor, and I'd be insincere to suggest his advice didn't help me navigate the admissions process.

I also taught high school in an inner city district... I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get. Let's face it: most of us here ARE from privileged backgrounds, on at least some level.

This.

Flights and trips are expensive. My family and I moved to Canada 20 years ago, and last year was the first time my dad went back to our home country. This summer is the first time my mom is taking a vacation overseas. I'd say that most, if not all, of my PhD cohort has parents with a bachelor+ or at least fairly successful in some professional field. I know there are people way worse off than me in grad school, but I have yet to meet them. The majority of students I have met in my MA and now in my PhD have parents that have helped them out, even a bit.

I used my student loan money to help support my mom when she was sick and out of work for several years. I am not eliciting pity, but I can't deny that sometimes it bugs the shit out of me that most of the people I know get kickbacks. Having said that, I try my best not to judge people's spending habits, because people have different priorities for what they want to spend money on & just because they buy expensive olive oil doesn't mean they're rolling in (pizza) dough. ;oP

[Dal PhDer]

I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get. Let's face it: most of us here ARE from privileged backgrounds, on at least some level.

I would disagree with this on some levels : mostly, I am offended that you think my family- who is lower class- and myself would make poor choices because we are poor, or that I am automatically assumed to be privileged because I am where I am. However, I would agree on some level that external circumstances such as household income, neighbourhood SES, and parental education may influence a child's accessibility to higher education. I think generalizing such a statement can lead to mixed messages and ill formed statements.

I'd say that most, if not all, of my PhD cohort has parents with a bachelor+ or at least fairly successful in some professional field. I know there are people way worse off than me in grad school, but I have yet to meet them. The majority of students I have met in my MA and now in my PhD have parents that have helped them out, even a bit.

Hi *wave*, you've met one now!

To the OP, I don't think you can generalize to say "all" or "most" ...there are so many different cases and situations that can lead someone to choosing to pursue higher education. Yes, if we look at the social determinants, income generally will determine what you have access too. Whether this if through monetary accessibility, or through family perspectives/experiences that make it inaccessible...but you can't generalize.

I come from a single parent low income home. I am the first in all my family to pursue any type of education past highschool. My family has never encouraged me or discouraged me in pursuing a degree...I was always taught that you should, above being self-sufficient, achieve in life what makes you happy. My mother wanted to contributed what she could to my tuition, but I wanted to pay for it myself and did. This does not mean that I haven't also been able to travel to Europe (with her), travel across North America, or sacrifice what I want because of money...if I want my sun-dried stuffed olives, dammit, I am going to have them.

I am not trying to stand on a soap box and lecture or get sympathy...but I personally find it insulting that someone would assume I was handed or helped in some way to get where I've gotten. I have worked everyday since I was 16 to make sure I could afford and still afford to do what I love doing. I also work hard to excel at what I do and be able to have the support of funding. To think that I am where I am because of someone other than me, well...I don't like that. Mind you, I won't disagree that some students are handed everything and get where they are because of their family...but that doesn't mean we're all like that.

[theologyofyourface]

My family was certainly never rich, but my father is a professor, and I'd be insincere to suggest his advice didn't help me navigate the admissions process.

Same here.

[BrokenRecord]

I also taught high school in an inner city district... I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get.

*Thread hijack*

I find it quite ironic how you preface your assertion by stating a qualifier "I taught high school in an inner city district". You may have "taught" in an inner city district, but it seems to me you have failed to really teach yourself about your students and the circumstances of their surroundings outside of the confines of your classroom. To suggest a "big" part of the achievement gap is due to poor students making "bad" choices really ticks me off. No, a BIGGER part of the achievement gap is having privileged people come into inner cities, 8-5, leave the classroom and go across the tracks back to their respective green-lush suburbs without interacting with the actual environment that those who you've taught had to live in and thus, making authoritative commentary about how they know the BIGGEST problem which ails their academic success. Have you ever stopped to think that a "big" part of poorer students making "bad" choices are those choices based upon SURVIVAL and not just "bad advice" like their affluent counterparts? Have you ever known any of your students whose parents tell them to not come in the house until they have such and such money for rent, no matter if they have to steal, rob, etc.? Survival. An affluent teenager drinking or smoking dope? Bad choices. See the difference? Sure, we all to some extent know right from wrong, but how can you instill that moral depth in a 5 year old when they grow up in an environment where a human life isn't even valued? Where they can't play outside without fear of being shot? Take that contrast to an affluent 5 year old, who is taught to value the environment, the polar bears, the trees and other nature-oriented things? It's staunchly different worlds. Perhaps I'm being too harsh, but I see this "blame the victim" attitude all the time, as if poorer students are somehow incapable of making good choices. That is simply not true. A responsibility of privilege, like I was fortunate with, is daring to be uncomfortable with your surroundings. Want to know poverty and suffering? Try going to a minority-serving institution for college and living smack in the middle of the projects, as I've done and even others have done a lot longer than I have. Do that for a few years and I'm sure you will see how these kids arrive with their "bad choices".

[BrokenRecord]

Dal! I'm so sorry I didn't read your comment before posting my own. But you essentially summed up exactly what I was thinking and I commend you for breaking mold in your family; I'm the first one to pursue graduate school in my own.

Although my family is definitely better off now, we also went through a period of pretty bad suffering especially throughout high school and college when my parents divorced. It was rough, and in college I didn't have the luxury of calling home to my mother for money as my friends did. Like a previous poster I've also had to take out loans in order to help my mom. I'd do it over again in a heartbeat and still would. All of that as you know makes me greatly appreciative of my funding for graduate school as I wouldn't be able to go without it. I don't fault people for being more privileged than I (and I even consider myself privileged), but what I do mind is this seemingly subconscious know-it-all complex that prevails affluent people, as if they understand all that ails poor people, when in actuality they don't know anything.

[CageFree]

I also taught high school in an inner city district... I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get. Let's face it: most of us here ARE from privileged backgrounds, on at least some level.

This comment really hit a sour note for me. I understand you're trying to explain the socioeconomic dimensions of the achievement gap, but the 'reason' you give for it is just flat-out wrong.

I taught in the inner city for two years too, and then spent several years in a diverse, yet suburban district... I had kids from both sides of the tracks and got to compare them "side by side."

It is easy to talk about "choices" when you've grown up having a wide array of choices available to you. Coming from a "privileged" background, you can choose to care or not; you can choose to work hard or skate by. However, these choices are NOT available to kids in poor, inner-city neighborhoods; their available choices are limited by their environment and situation, and often times, those "choices" are about survival.

In the inner city, many of my students lacked the most basic resources to be truly successful. It was not about "poor" choices... it was about having parents who were working 2-3 jobs just to put food on the table, so the kids had to stay home and babysit, or were not allowed home until after the parent(s) came home. I had kids who lived in motels. It was about not having books or a computer around the house. I met with parents who said the kid didn't have time to complete homework because they needed his or her help with the family business. Many of my students had spent at least a year with a string of subs because their school could not hire and/or retain teachers...heck, my first year of teaching, one English teacher left for Winter Break and never came back. My kids didn't have an English teacher the rest of that year. There were a number of unfilled positions at the school where I taught. Even the interns didn't last.

I won't even get into the issue of the kids whose parents didn't speak English and had discouraged them from speaking it until they started elementary school, setting them back several years.

I taught about 15 miles from the beach, and in most of my classes, at least 50% of the kids had never seen the ocean in person.

I saw more "bad choices" in the suburban district, and they were usually made by the more well-off kids. Kids who didn't want to do homework and whose parents made excuses; kids who got involved in 20 extracurriculars that left no time for studying; kids who thought they could wait till the end of the semester, turn in "late work" or ask for "extra credit," and ran into a brick wall (i.e., me), then threatened and screamed when they didn't get their way. Kids who lied to their counselors and sat in their offices to get 'excused' from a quiz or test because they didn't bother studying. In short, kids who had a huge sense of entitlement and didn't understand the word "no."

My 'underprivileged' students were the ones who came after class to get extra help, asked questions, and made good choices just by showing up every day... even if they had been up all night because their little sibling (or son/daughter) had been up sick all night, or were working 30+ hours a week to help support their families. They didn't do the prettiest, most perfect work, but it was their own work; they didn't cheat, and then threaten to sue me and the district because I 'dared' accuse them of cheating.

I did not grow up in the inner city and can't even begin to pretend to understand what it's like to grow up in such an environment. But I tried spending time in the community, and I talked to them about it... and one lesson I DID come away with is that I had to abandon my naive idealism, borne from a combination of the desire to "change the world" and a feeling that I "knew better," and start LISTENING to my students, before I could teach them effectively.

Edited September 9, 2012 by CageFree

[michigan girl]

Xanthan, on 07 September 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

I also taught high school in an inner city district... I suspect that a big part of the achievement gap is due to poor students not making good choices, often because they don't get the advice more affluent kids get. Let's face it: most of us here ARE from privileged backgrounds, on at least some level.

I agree with Dal PhDer and CageFree. This comment is very insensitive to the needs of underrepresented and disadvantaged families. Although I was fortunate enough to be raised in a middle-class household, I grew up in the inner city where neighborhoods could quickly transition from stable to dangerous in a couple of blocks. This is what I have observed from my personal experiences:

• The achievement gap is not about poor decision-making; the 'personal responsibility' argument is outdated and elitist. The Republicans supported that approach with the 1990s welfare reform ("let's force single poor mothers to work their way out of poverty") but many problems emerged: low-paying service jobs, lack of access to child care, and poor transportation options. How can disadvantaged people improve their lives when those in power refuse to improve the broken system??
  
• Many forms of oppression (i.e., racism, classism, sexism, etc.) and a conservative agenda to deregulate (e.g., vouchers, charter schools, corporate brainwashing curriculum) and restrict access to quality education is the real culprit.
  
• After the landmark ruling of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), people of color and the poor still continue to attend socioeconomically- and racially-segregated schools that are unsafe, under-resourced, and under-staffed. Teacher retention is declining as more school districts continue to replace veteran teachers with younger, cheaper, and under-prepared teachers.
  
• Inner-city students and their families face so many obstacles that they have a higher probability of working in low-wage, dead-end employment or becoming part of the penal system. In either situation, private companies profit from this type of cheap labor.
  
• Poverty is both stressful and expensive. Privileged people don't have to worry about how to pay for food, bills, and transportation.
  

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 37 million people in this country live below the poverty line. The income inequality gap has grown to its highest point since the Great Depression. The middle-class is also rapidly falling into poverty due to stagnant wages, anti-labor initiatives, and foreclosures. It's easy to blame people's circumstances as poor decision-making, but this view is dangerous because it ignores the reality of structural oppression and racism in this country.

Xanthan, there are many underprivileged students who have college aspirations. They want to help their families and succeed in life. Why should these students have to struggle to gain access to the same resources bestowed upon their privileged peers? For instance, while the parents of privileged students can hire tutors and/or pay $1000+ per ACT/SAT test-preparation course, many parents of under-privileged (and even middle-class) youth cannot afford these services. Should these students change their career goals because they lack money? Please reconsider your narrow-minded views, Xanthan.

Edited September 9, 2012 by michigan girl

[imonedaful]

I did not grow up in the inner city and can't even begin to pretend to understand what it's like to grow up in such an environment. But I tried spending time in the community, and I talked to them about it... and one lesson I DID come away with is that I had to abandon my naive idealism, borne from a combination of the desire to "change the world" and a feeling that I "knew better," and start LISTENING to my students, before I could teach them effectively.

Great post. I whole heartedly agree. I was a substitute teacher in a large school district for a year that where in a wide array of socioeconomic settings. Just in that short time it was easy to see how drastically different the learning environments are at different schools. In some of these schools the kids had to worry if they came to school with a new backpack or pair of shoes that they would get stolen or jumped in the hallway. A lot of the schools lacked funding and did not have the basic supplies for students to learn. Many of the high school students worked full time jobs during the school year because they had to help support their families. None of these children chose to be in that environment, it was the circumstances they were given. I am sure some do make bad choices (as everybody does) but often they are not given the tools to make the best choices. On the other end of the spectrum are the priveleged kids. Some of them really seize their opportunities and work hard and are thankful for what they are given but there are a large portion that just feel entitled. I must add, when I was subbing, the nicer the school the messier the kids were. They would just throw stuff on the ground and expect somebody else to pick it up. It was terrible. But, with those priveleges they have a lot more room to make bad choices. Unfortunately, a child from a low income family does not have that same room for error.

[wildviolet]

"They would just throw stuff on the ground and expect somebody else to pick it up. It was terrible."

I had this experience at a high school in an affluent neighborhood where I taught kids who were from blue-collar money. Many of my students got Cs or below, and I rarely heard from the parents. Drugs on campus was rampant, and the kids were dirty--they even said that it was the custodian's job to pick up after them. Many of them came to school wearing designer clothes, shoes, and handbags, and dressed to the nines! Every day! Ninth grade girls in full make-up!!! The principal asked me if I wanted to come back the next year, and I said no. I'd rather teach poor kids than rich kids. I grew up a poor kid myself and what saved me was the gifted program and caring teachers in the public schools. I just can't relate to rich kids, probably like rich kids can't relate to poor kids.

The American dream for many is just that--a dream. Even if I get the highest degree I can, a PhD, I will still graduate with debt. My colleagues who are married have bought homes here. One pair bought a home here AND has a condo back in California. I don't have parents who can help me out. I don't have a legacy of money handed down from generation to generation. I don't have a trust fund. But, I do have two kids that I raise practically by myself, and I don't think it was a result of bad choices (maybe naivete, but not bad). I have the head on my shoulders, and I won't let my socioeconomic background limit my choices. But, many of the cards have already been played, and there is only so much I can achieve on my own. It's not all about individual achievement--that's what they want you to believe. The truth is that the system is already structured for some students to win and others to lose. Middle and upper-middle class parents know how to play the game--they are able to place their children strategically within the system. For the rest of us, it is either chance, luck, or a concerted effort on the part of those concerned with democratic equality to provide pathways for poor and disadvantaged children to have the same opportunities as those from privileged backgrounds.

Even though I consider myself lucky in many respects, and I credit my intelligence and hard work as far as getting to this place in my life, I recognize that there are limits and inequities still in the public schools and in American society. We are a long way from accepting people as they are and promoting equal opportunity for all.

Edited September 10, 2012 by wildviolet

[Usmivka]

I just wanted to say there are so many great posts here, and I am all out of upvotes for the day. Special thanks to imonedaful (indeed you are) for doing some research and providing us all with the link to an academic paper that directly answered the OP.

[wildviolet]

I come from a single parent low income home. I am the first in all my family to pursue any type of education past highschool. My family has never encouraged me or discouraged me in pursuing a degree...I was always taught that you should, above being self-sufficient, achieve in life what makes you happy. My mother wanted to contributed what she could to my tuition, but I wanted to pay for it myself and did. This does not mean that I haven't also been able to travel to Europe (with her), travel across North America, or sacrifice what I want because of money...if I want my sun-dried stuffed olives, dammit, I am going to have them.

Good for you! No wonder we get along well--I have a similar background as you... I'm the first in my family to pursue a PhD, and my family has neither encouraged nor discouraged the pursuit of higher education. While my parents were happy with my MS and good wages as a public school teacher, I wasn't happy with it. Hence, the descent into destitution for five years. On the other hand, I could also view it as another way of looking at my life--paring it down to the necessities. Do I really need 3 eyeshadow palettes? Clothes from Nordstroms and Ann Taylor? First-rate sushi?

I think, I hope, that in five years, a new me will emerge, not just "intellectually" and "academically" as my professors suggest but personally as well--perhaps with a perspective of what I need to survive, not what I want to live the perceived middle class or upper middle class lifestyle.

[SeriousSillyPutty]

Ooh I was just reading about this! In George C. Galster's paper, "Urban Opportunity Structure and Racial/Ethinic Polarization", he introduces a model of "life choices" within the context of (you guessed it) urban opportunity structure. This is part of what he says:

"Central to this model is the notion that decisions are made rationally, but with imperfect information, in the context of the constraints and payoffs percieved by the decision-maker.... Thus, observed behaviors that contribute to current and future socioeconimic achievements (for example, bearing children out of wedlock as a teen, acquiring more education, committing a crime, or participating in the labor force) are shaped not only by personal characteristics but also by the geographic context in which those decisions are made. Unfortunately, low-incom racial/ethnic minorities often occupy residential niches wherein they encounter an inferior set of choices and associated payoffs. Just as space is warped in an Einsteinian universe, so urban space is warped in its structure of opportunities, to the disadvantage of poor minorities typically residing in core neighborhoods."

The examples are things like, if your only schooling option isn't a good one and it won't prepare you for college anyway, the percieved pros & cons balance of a low-quality high school education or just entering the labor force shifts.

Based on this, the post about kids making "bad decisions" is not neccearily mutually exclussive to what everyone else is saying, if it is understood that "bad" implies "not conducive to long-term financial success" (or some such thing), and that there often aren't "good" alternatives. Of course, blaming the victim or preaching pure meritocracy can and should be countered at depth; I just don't know if that was necessarily the implication.

And as for having good role models... the article talks a bit about that, too. With two identical families who, say, value education equally and have raised their kids with equal work ethic, the family who lives in a neighborhood where the other families have more education is more likely to go to college, just because they are exposed to more of those options, whereas in tougher neighborhoods the easiest path to money that they are exposed to probably does not involve education.. So even if both have postive role models in the home, simply being in poorer neighborhoods can make the path trickier.

Regardless of role models is the concept of networking/ developing "soft skills". Going to integrated schools gives children from minority cultures a chance to learn majority culture norms, which are helpful in the majority culture controlled labor market. Spending time with people who have good jobs means you are more likely to hear about good job openings, for instance.

So, to return to the OP, while most grad students don't have diamonds on the soles of their shoes (Paul Simon anyone?), it's certainly easier to make it to a position where grad school is an option if one has had the privilege of good local school system, minimal financial influences on college choice, etc. Based on that, it seems there's destined to be more "priveleged" people there. But, like others have said, different priorities can also help to explain a difference in backgrounds. Maybe two people with parents of the same middle-class income, one opted for a more expensive house in a better school district, one opted for a cheeper house/less impressive district and saved the money toward a trip to Europe.

Wow, sorry this is so long. I'm taking a class called "The Political Economy of Urban Education", so this stuff is on my mind a lot.

[Dal PhDer]

Good for you! No wonder we get along well--I have a similar background as you... I'm the first in my family to pursue a PhD, and my family has neither encouraged nor discouraged the pursuit of higher education. While my parents were happy with my MS and good wages as a public school teacher, I wasn't happy with it. Hence, the descent into destitution for five years. On the other hand, I could also view it as another way of looking at my life--paring it down to the necessities. Do I really need 3 eyeshadow palettes? Clothes from Nordstroms and Ann Taylor? First-rate sushi?

I think, I hope, that in five years, a new me will emerge, not just "intellectually" and "academically" as my professors suggest but personally as well--perhaps with a perspective of what I need to survive, not what I want to live the perceived middle class or upper middle class lifestyle.

I love this!!

I am like you...um...do I really need 4 different shades of orange nail polish? Probably not.....it's funny. Even though we didn't have a lot of money growing up, I never felt deprived of anything!

I know this isn't the case for all privileged students, but I sometimes think they have it harder off...often times they have higher expectations that they are pressured to meet. Whereas my family is happy if I am happy!

[MashaMashaMasha]

But many of them seem to have been born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I agree with many of the posts on this thread, and could share similar anecdotes about being the first in my family to earn a degree, let alone a PhD. My experience is that when I am going through a time of struggling/in debt, even stories about other people with money enough to do fantastic things is *obnoxious*. Take the other posters contributions to heart, embrace the fact that people from all backgrounds can be interesting (or downright terrible, whichever) and focus on the work you have ahead of you, not the financial priorities and decisions of other students.

[koolherc]

Wow, I disagree with a lot that's been posted here. Flights to Europe ARE expensive. RV tents are expensive. Couchsurfing (the webpage), and knowing when the best time to buy flights is, knowing about rush tickets, knowing what the FAFSA is, and knowing how to apply to college all requires a type of access that goes beyond dollars and cents and incorporates a privilege that comes from being the dominant culture with access to and power over information. Yes, the grand majority of graduate students are privileged. If your parents were professors, that makes you privileged. Let's not let the shifty nature of the term "middle class" deceive us. Is middle class a family of four on 25k a year or is it a family of two on 100k? Both are considered middle class to many people.

In NYC, the Metropolitan Museum of Art charges a suggested donation of $20+ per adult visitor---that is, technically, you only have to pay a quarter to get in. I know plenty of native, inner-city NYers (from the Bronx, Queens, etc.) who've never gone to the Met, even though they could do it for free, and would enjoy it. Even going into Manhattan only requires $2.50 on the train, but there's still a mental privilege and presumption that is required.

I taught about 15 miles from the beach, and in most of my classes, at least 50% of the kids had never seen the ocean in person.

SeriousSillyPutty also made some good points, though I disagree with some of the language (" "postive" role models").