This blog is overrated.

“Merit aid still king,” reports Inside Higher Ed. In order to be “king”, you’d think that merit aid would have to make up at least, oh, 51 percent of all grants given, but instead it’s more like 28 percent. Monarchy isn’t what it used to be.

But why shouldn’t it be 0 percent? After all, colleges have these formulas that perfectly account for every possible family financial circumstance, and families are always willing and able to pay exactly the contribution calculated. Unlike merit scholarships, need-based aid “might help needy students enroll in college who might not otherwise, instead of merely changing the enrollment patterns of those who could still otherwise afford a college education.” In other words, if a really excellent student can’t afford, say, Washington University (which, unlike the very highest-ranked colleges, still offers unfashionable merit aid), he can still go to community college. College is college, right?

This is the kind of thinking that makes analysts quote official unemployment statistics as a meaningful indicator. A laid-off engineer who’s now working at Home Depot part-time? Employed. The economy’s doing fine! Of course, at least most people will sympathize with the downsized tech worker. But the brilliant student who’s stuck at community college or a less-selective state school? What’s the problem? Are you implying that some colleges are better than others? You elitist!