<p>I think Andover's need-blind policy is a brilliant marketing strategy. The need-blind policy attracts a lot of applicants requiring FA many of whom will be turned down in the end. As a result, Andover's acceptance rate looks stellar beating Exeter at the finish line. If one looks at the % of students on FA at Andover and Exeter, they are roughly equal (45%) and the FA budgets at both schools are likely to be similar. Just by proclaiming to be need-blind, Andover is looking more selective by attracting more applicants and beating Exeter in the process. Brilliant! As a result of this post, if Exeter also announces the need-blind policy, they owe me a nice FA package.</p>
<p>I heard that before the economic downturn, Exeter was considering a “free for everyone who can get in” strategy.</p>
<p>I have never liked any kind of “conspiracy theory”. Unless you have solid evidence, don’t speculate. How would you feel if others speculate that you are a ■■■■■, an adult who has nothing meaningful to do but sprading rumors, or a failed applicant who is bad-mouthing the schools that declined you or you had no chance at? At least, don’t get into that habit. The world wouldn’t be a happy place for you too live in.</p>
<p>Oh don’t be cynical. I know you are an adcom spreading good rumors!</p>
<p>Actually, I suspect that the significant difference in Andover’s and Exeter’s admission rates had more to do with how they shuffle their data. </p>
<p>I remember looking at Andover’s info. back in April, and if I’m remembering correctly, when I pulled out the calculator and did the math, their admission rate (was it 14%?) came from the number of total applications, not completed applications. This number could well have included my son, who filled out an athletic inquiry form and never got any further in his application. The admit rate was higher when I used the completed applications figure.</p>
<p>This year (though not in past years), Exeter’s rate of admission was based on completed applications. </p>
<p>However, it does make me wonder–if Andover is need blind, and Exeter isn’t, but their FA distribution is about the same, are their policies really different in practice?</p>
<p>I read on the Exeter newsroom that Exeter has a higher standard for FA applicants. At Exeter, they rate applicants on a scale of A1 -A4 with A1 being the best. Unless an applicant is A1, they will not be admitted with FA. At Andover, I don’t think that the admissions office even knows whether or not an applicant is applying for FA. But Andover rates applicants by first placing them in the “provisional admit” group and then deciding whether or not they want to admit them. Personally, I like Andover’s admissions policies better. But that’s just me!</p>
<p>Fun Facts For the 233rd Admitted Class</p>
<p>Number of preliminary applications received in 2010: 3,283
Number of completed applications received in 2010: 2,844
Number of preliminary applications received in 2009: 3,139
Number of completed applications received in 2009: 2,711
Percent increase in number of completed applications since 2008: 23
Percent increase in number of completed applications since 2000: 43 </p>
<p>Number of students admitted: 405
Number of students admitted who have been awarded financial aid scholarships: 161
Total amount of financial aid scholarships awarded to new students: $5,270,040
Percent (projected) of the 2010-2011 student body on full scholarship: 13 </p>
<p>405/2844=14.24%</p>
<p>Although Exeter had never declared need-blind, for an unknown number of years before 2009, it was effectively need-blind. It means that they admitted students without taking into consideration whether they were applying for FA. And once admission decisions were made, they evaluated each admitted students’ financial need and met it by 100%. This is the current practice of Andover.</p>
<p>In 2009, Exeter declined some applicants rated “A1” and “A2” because of their FA need - the way the stopped being need-blind. There has been a detailed report on Exonian on how they did it. (With a little digging, we could find it on CC) Even so, Exeter is still one of the boarding schools that are most generous in giving out FA. It is not need-blind any more, unfortunately. It could mean that they only turn down a few otherwise admitted applicants because of their FA need. Either because they offered FA to more students before 2009 or they still do, percentage of student boday on FA in Exeter actually exceeds that in Andover currently.</p>
<p>Shows you how good I am with a calculator. Or maybe that’s the math I did and I misremembered it because of my Exocentric bias. 
That’s the last time I try to throw a math calculation out on CC!</p>
<p>Here’s an Exonian article from 2009. </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/prep-school-parents/664503-exeter-no-longer-need-blind.html?highlight=exeter+blind[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/prep-school-parents/664503-exeter-no-longer-need-blind.html?highlight=exeter+blind</a></p>
<p>Some stats to ponder/confuse (Can you tell I’m avoiding a stack of final exams?!):</p>
<p>Andover:
Admitted: 414
Matriculated: 323
Day Students:291
Boarding Students: 818</p>
<p>Exeter:
Admitted: (2 581 completed apps. * .19 admit rate) 490 – shoot, just did math again…
Matriculated: 344
Boarding : 862
Day:201</p>
<p>Is Andover able to stay need blind because it enrolls more day students than Exeter? Or because it admitted far fewer (and was thus able, by default, to cut down the number of FA offers)? That might explain why their FA rates are the same but not their policies…</p>
<p>You are talking about yield and day student pool, which IMO doesn’t explain why one school is need-blind and the other is not. The short answer to your question is one word: priority. When money is tight, does the school make sure all admitted students are fully funded first before considering updating the science building, or hiring the best teachers, or vice versa? Something gotta give and that makes a difference.</p>
<p>For different individuals, “need blind + full need met” FA policy means different things. Many prospective applicants think that they have a better chance of getting FA at Andover. Well that’s true but only if you get in, which they actually have a lower chance at Andover. Some full pay families think they get nothing or lose out of the policy but others believe they could benifit from the diversity and talents brought to the school thanks to the policy.</p>
<p>More importantly, I think Andover is getting a little “larger than life”. People tend to get caught up in the prestige, selectivity and other external halos about the school, and forget to think hard whether they are a good fit for the school. It’s about time to stop the frenzy…</p>
<p>Stop the frenzy…Amen to that. There are plenty of wonderful schools that are academically rigorous and diverse that offer breadth and depth.</p>
<p>What we need now is colleges to recognize that and level the playing field among all great BSs when it comes to college acceptances.</p>
<p>^^I still think that colleges accept students not schools. In the current “frenzy”, Andover does get a better share of strong students and of course the education they receive there is not shabby either. Do you believe going to Andover helps college admission? Some people say it actually hurts.</p>
<p>
Huh? The most recent average SAT score for Exeter students is 2116, while for Andover students it’s 2062. And I don’t believe that either of these schools “teaches to the test.”</p>
<p>I love this! 
So you do think Andover’s name helps its not so impressive students get into selective colleges, as RBGG seemed to be suggesting that colleges have a better “rating” of Andover? Then I guess there is a better reason for the frenzy. ;)</p>
<p>No, reading between the lines of what I’ve heard, I think it might be possible that Andover’s college counseling gives more emphasis to the Ivies whereas Exeter’s college counseling is more destination neutral in helping their graduates find the “best fit.” And I don’t see this as a right vs wrong thing either. An Ivy degree probably does have more “cachet” value than a non-Ivy one.</p>
<p>Better share of stronger students? Do you mean than Exeter does? If so, then forgive me for saying that that’s kind of nutty. If anything, Andover gets more of the “it’s need-blind so what the heck I’ll apply anyway since I won’t be in a more competitive applicant pool like at Exeter” type of applicants. But if CC is any reflection of reality (which I doubt!), the two schools are probably looking at the same kids.</p>
<p>Or maybe you meant the better share of strong students than BS in general. Because the discussion was (yet another) A vs E, I assumed you meant than Exeter does.</p>
<p>I think both Andover and Exeter are feeder schools with long established relationships with AOs from ivies and other prestigious LACs.</p>
<p>I’m not so sure they have better students than say from Hotchkiss or Choate but their matriculation stats to the ivies are better.</p>
<p>Neat, no I wasn’t comparing A and E. That post was immediately after and specifically in response to the following post by RGBB (see that “^^”?).
</p>
<p>So it was in the context of “plenty of wonderful schools”. I have NO interest in comparing A and E in any way other than saying one is need-blind and the other is not.</p>
<p>Lastly, I respect RGBB’s point that A and E students are not better than students from Hotchkiss or Choate.</p>