<p>Hi, I'm going to apply for US colleges this fall and I had some questions about financing my studies. The colleges I'm gonna apply to are:
Yale
Duke
UVa
Dartmouth
Princeton
Wharton
Williams
Amherst
Stanford
Columbia
Harvard</p>
<p>As you can see they are all highly selective schools but i believe i have a good shot at getting accepted to at least a some of them.</p>
<p>I'm aware that Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and Amherst are need-blind for all applicants so I will simply apply for financial aid when I apply to those schools. The problem I have is with the other schools, some of them meet full demonstrated need to all students and some not but all of them are need-aware when it comes to accepting international students which obviously decreases my admission chances drastically.</p>
<p>I plan to major in Econ or Business with a Finance orientation, depending on the school, with the intent of going in to investment banking after graduation (hence the ultra selective schools). I mention this because it's one of the highest paying entry-level positions with all-in compensation over 100k.</p>
<p>My question is if it's worth taking out approximately 160-180k of debt to be able to apply to those schools without asking for financial aid?</p>
<p>BTW the loans I would take are funded by my government and have interest rates between 1 and 2 % as well as very favorable repayment plans.</p>
<p>Well, being a full pay student helps sometimes, but not necessarily for these schools. These are elite universities that attract plenty international students who can afford the full tuition. </p>
<p>I personally believe - and many people here will agree - that it’s INSANE to borrow that much money even if your (apparently very generous) government keeps the interest super low. </p>
<p>And if that $100,000 salary you’re dreaming about is working in the US – are you aware that you won’t necessarily be able to stay in the US after graduation?</p>
<p>Second, it’s going to be tough for an international student. I would say apply first, then worry about finances. Living in sweden will probably help you though, as opposed to coming from China.</p>
<p>Btw, can you post objective stats? Many international students apply not knowing that these are highly selective schools and applying as interntional students probably decreases your chance by 2-10x.</p>
<p>I would like to second everything that katliamom said. </p>
<p>I personally would not take out that amount of loans for a college education. Too many things that could go wrong that would leave me with a crippling amount of debt. (I was in your shoes, by the way. I opted for a full ride at a liberal arts college and now I am a grad student at Stanford, funded on a fellowship that pays me $30,000 a year in addition to tuition and health insurance. It’ll take me a few more years to get that “elite” college degree, but I came out debt free.) </p>
<p>One of the things that could go wrong, as katliamom said, is the work visa situation. There were two years in the last decade where it was literally <em>impossible</em> for new college graduates to get a work visa to stay in the US. Visa rules and demand change every year, so unfortunately no one can predict how things would play out for you. </p>
<p>Other things could change as well. How confident are you that you really want to work 80-hour weeks as an investment banker? What if you don’t get your dream job? What if something happens (e.g. unexpected health issues) that will force you to quit college without a degree?</p>
<p>I’d be too risk-averse to take on that gamble, but it does work out for some (and goes horribly wrong for others).</p>
<p>sweden94–in my opinion those universities and colleges on your list will give you a lesser chance of admission if you tick the “will you apply for financial aid” in the common application form.
My advised to you would be to visit each of the colleges’ website and check out the link to financial aid and international admissions.
When these ivy leagues visited my child’s school in our country last year, they advised us that financial aid is not available to international students even if they say “need-blind” whatever!
I hate to disappoint you but that is just the reality.
…just my opinion.</p>
<p>You are right that the phrase “need-blind” does not imply that there is actually any financial aid awarded; it only means that financial need will not factor into admission decision. I know a few colleges that describe themselves as “need-blind” but also warn international applicants that there’s only limited aid available. (I recall that the 3/2 engineering program at Columbia uses a phrasing very much like this; it’s also well known that Cornell is very stingy with financial aid for international students.) </p>
<p>And then there are the likes of Harvard and Princeton and MIT who are “need-blind” and pledge to “meet the full demonstrated need” of every admitted student. You are not claiming that these universities have been publishing fraudulent data about their student body for years, are you?</p>
<p>Thank you for your opinions and I do understand that it’s a huge amount of money to borrow especially this early on in my life. I was wondering though if anyone had an idea of the difference in admission rates between internationals applying with and without aid. I know most of these colleges put internationals who do not apply for aid in the same applicant pool as domestic students, true? But how much would it statistically increase my chances not to apply for aid?</p>
<p>Nope. Not worth it. A home student would be ill-advised to take on this much money, much less an international with uncertain job prospects. You’re essentially going to be a wage slave for the rest of your life, paying this off. If the need-blind schools don’t accept you (and HYP is need blind. If they like you, they will pay for you) just let it go and get a European education</p>
Not true. International applications are still read as a separate group because foreign applications are not easily compared to American ones. (There’s also a separate quota for international applicants. Most universities do not want more than 10% to 15% of their student body to be international.)</p>
<p>
Difficult to say because these statistics are not being published. I can give you a few numbers I do have, and let you draw your own conclusion from them.</p>
<p>International admission rate of a university that does not award any aid to international students:
UC Berkeley, 14%.</p>
<p>International admission rate of a university where only very needy students are eligible to apply:
Berea College, 2%.</p>
<p>International admission rate of a university which is need-blind and meets full need:
MIT, 2%.</p>
<p>Just how much your financial need would affect your chances of admission cannot be said in general because “need-sensitive” universities can be need-sensitive to various degrees. For example, Mount Holyoke is need-sensitive and only half the size of MIT, but funds more international student on financial aid than MIT does. Cornell is need-sensitive and much bigger than MIT, but only funds one third of the number of international students as MIT does.</p>
<p>^^ this is absurd and misleading advice. Sweden, everything b@rum and others wrote is verifiable if you do your research on this site and others. Of course, you could do what doctoribach says and waste a lot of money applying to schools you either won’t get into, or only at a life-crippling debt. Your choice. But you’ve been warned :)</p>
<p>160k is too much debt. Even on 100k salary, you won’t be able to repay the loan quickly. Taxes + cost of living reduce your take home pay. It’ll take you eight years if you pay off $2000 a month (which is a lot)</p>
<p>b@r!num—my mistake with my statement - “When these ivy leagues visited my child’s school in our country last year, they advised us that financial aid is not available to international students even if they say “need-blind” whatever!”</p>
<p>I don’t meant it that way, those college representatives did say however that if we (international students) will apply for financial aid it will lessen the chances of admission, and we can’t take that chance!
Those college representatives were from ivy league schools, they expect international applicants to be full paying and not apply for financial aid.<br>
Even the education counsellor at the US consulate also has the same advised.
Put it this way, our country can provide the best college education that US can also provide and not end up in debt, so why do some of our children want to study in the US knowing that they will not be able to afford it and instead apply for financial aid?</p>
<p>I do believe in “need blind”/“need based” whatever but this only applies to countries that cannot provide a better education for their children, most especially those who are deserving.
This doesn’t apply to our country we we came from!
This is just my opinion, please don’t take it differently! :-)</p>
<p>…and I meant Freshman entry, I know that there are some US colleges who offers a part financial aid to deserving college grads who wants to pursue a masters/doctorate degree but this is actually sort of a sponsorship kind between universities.
…just my opinion!</p>
<p>intlstudent2016, I would still really like to know who exactly you were talking to. </p>
<p>The reason I am skeptical about your claim is that I personally know several poor international students from rich countries on need-based financial aid at the tippy top colleges. I assume that the less-generous Ivies (e.g. Cornell) do indeed expect most international students to pay the full bill, but I am somewhat doubtful that the “need-blind & meeting full demonstrated need” Ivies (e.g. Harvard) would make a statement like that.</p>
<p>b@r!um, do you honestly believe that schools are need blind for internationals? Then you must also believe that there are no quotas yet magically year after year, in US college after US college, the international students number remains at ~10%. I do agree that an admissions officer would never made such a statement openly for an advertised need blind school. However, when admissions decisions are discussed, it is very easy to decipher a student’s ability to pay, without having the financial application info. An admissions officer is an employee of the school and are aware whether the school has financial hardships due to decreased endowment returns, etc, so if the applicants are almost equal, they will go for the full/almost full pay individual. There was an article some years ago in NYT where the ad coms were interviewed in a need blind top LAC that was having financial problems and they made it clear that they preferred to accept two almost full pay students than a full need one. </p>
<p>I am amused that Harvard had to state, “Are there quotas for international applicants? There are no quotas or limits for international students. All students are considered in the same pool for all places in the incoming class, regardless of citizenship or the school they attend.” Yet, my child’s high school that is a public feeder for H has more than 25% of their applicants accepted at H year after year, even though it is not one of the state’s top schools. Looking at naviance for that school, regardless how many top students apply at the other ivies every year, even EA, they always accept ~1 each at YPPDMS. Clearly there is quota and yield protection. Top schools do not accept the majority of internationals because they are exceptional students but because they want to provide the illusion of diversity to their main clientele, the US student, establish an international presence to get lucrative consulting contracts, and increase number of applicants so the selectivity #will increase (but the profile of student accepted will not change). Unfortunately the breakdown numbers for international/domestic applicants are not known but can easily be deciphered by the international reputation of each school. NYC, Berkeley, UCLA have a better name recognition overseas than UChicago, Rice, Emory, Washington St Lewis, even though they are not better schools. One can argue that the higher number of applicants are internationals. If we include the LACs, which are virtually unknown overseas, even though many of them meet full need, then it makes it more clear the percentage of international students in the applicant pool.</p>
<p>“The bottom line is that there is very little financial aid available, and many international students do not study in the US because they cannot afford the expense. This is especially true for undergraduate education.”
taken from this link–
[eduPASS</a> | Financial Aid for International Students](<a href=“http://www.edupass.org/finaid/]eduPASS”>Financial Aid for International Students - eduPASS)</p>
What does one have to do with the other? (But for the record, I believe that universities have targets for international students, not quotas. Just like they have targets for many other variables of their student body.) </p>
<p>
They are known; quite publicly not too long ago. Peterson’s used to publish the number of international applicants/admits/enrollees separately until 2009 or so. Unfortunately, they’ve now removed these data from their website. I believe that the Institute of International Education might still be keeping track of international admission data, but they are very picky who they release institution-level statistics to.</p>
<p>I did compute the overall and domestic-only admission rates for several colleges and universities, when those numbers were still available. If I remember correctly, the difference was barely noticeable (± 1%) at most universities because the # of international applicants was only a small fraction of the total # of applicants, even at universities that should attract a boatload of international applicants (like MIT). The only significant difference I found was at small liberal arts colleges with financial aid for international students: for example, in fall 2008, Mount Holyoke had a total admission rate of 53% but 64% for domestic students only.</p>