<p>Please, if ANY international student who asked for FinAid got into UofC, please do me the favor of posting your stats, since I am a Junior depressed about the fact that admission for int'ls w/ FinAid is MUCH harder.
Thank you!</p>
<p>PS: Please post your SAT/ACT scores, geographic residence, GPA, AP/IB classes and scores. Thank you again</p>
<p>...bump... anybody?</p>
<p>I guess not (just as with Duke.) And that's a gooood sign :)</p>
<p>Internationals asking for financial aid have it tough, and there probably won't be much to appease you, Kowloon. I have a friend who was ranked in the top 5 in mathematics competitions in Canada who got rejected everywhere he applied (~10 colleges) except Dartmouth.</p>
<p>Now... I'm going my best not to swear, but DANG, this makes me mad... this makes seem the ORMs NOT discriminated against...</p>
<p>On the other hand, Kowloon, many countries have a program where the government will pay for everything as long as you work a specified amount of time for them after graduation.</p>
<p>phuriku: Did your friend apply to HYP?</p>
<p>I don't know the specifics of where he applied. I know that he applied to MIT, Caltech, and some other top-notch schools, which leads me to believe that he may have tried his luck at Harvard or Princeton. He was waitlisted at Caltech.</p>
<p>
Uh, that's why there are universities in your own nation. Funny that US residents pay taxes to the government which sponsors NSF, NIH, NASA etc. which provide fundings for US schools and you want to have an equally good chance of getting in...pretty greedy eh?</p>
<p>stupidkid: You're saying that US citizens need to have a better chance because US citizens pay money to the colleges (which might not be as correct as you claim it to be for private institutions). Therefore, according to your own logic, applicants from countries from which alumni donated money to a college need to have a better chance than applicants from countries with no alumni donating money. Convincing? Not really.</p>
<p>Maybe the universities in "your own nation" aren't as good as universities in the US? Internationals are punished for something they aren't responsible for - namely for being internationals. In a way, that's discrimination.</p>
<p>Apart from that, as somebody pointed out in a different thread where you posted a similar comment, internationals are very good for the US economy. (unfortunately something that cannot be said about the US government)</p>
<p>Yes, we do pay taxes, some of which the government allocates to various organizations such as NSF. These organizations in turn provide fundings to the US universities. </p>
<p>
I don't see how you got to that conclusion. If you donate money, then your children will have a better chance of getting in. Why should that affect your countryman?</p>
<p>
wow...so that must suck for the 6.4 billion people who don't live in the US. Maybe the Supreme Court should implement some affirmative action for them? Oh right, a civil rights law would be good too. The USA cannot discriminate!</p>
<p>I'm sorry that some of you guys didn't get into the US universities that you guys applied to. There are spots, it's just that the competition is too tough. Simple supply and demand.</p>
<p>"I don't see how you got to that conclusion. If you donate money, then your children will have a better chance of getting in. Why should that affect your countryman?"</p>
<p>It should affect my countryman because, as a student, I don't assume you (as a US citizen) pay too much money to the government (possibly even none). It's the same if somebody from my country donates money. As a US citizen, people from your country pay lots of taxes, but not you (because you don't work, at least not full-time etc.). </p>
<p>That's the same in 'my' case: As a citizen of country X which has an alumni that donated money, you didn't pay any money, but somebody from your country did. As you can see, it's the same. In both cases somebody (or many people) from a country paid money, [either taxes in US or donation in X] but not you personally. </p>
<p>Now it might be that as a student in the US you pay some taxes (I frankly don't know about that, but I assume that even if you pay some taxes, it's not very much. Also, I assume that if you pay taxes for a car or something like that, this money is not going to be used for universities but for building streets etc., so that in the end you personally didn't pay anything to the programs that support private universities).</p>
<p>"wow...so that must suck for the 6.4 billion people who don't live in the US. Maybe the Supreme Court should implement some affirmative action for them? Oh right, a civil rights law would be good too. The USA cannot discriminate!"</p>
<p>I bet you looked up the world population for that! Maybe the discrimination part of my post wasn't meant to be too serious, but it would certainly be as logical as many supposed anti-discrimination laws in the US. </p>
<p>Thank you for being sorry. I come to doubt that there really are spots. So far nobody on CC seems to have gotten into UofC or Duke as an international asking for aid. </p>
<p>Private US colleges are certainly legitimate and morally justified in accepting and rejecting whomever they want to accept or reject based on whichever criteria they want to use. If they don't want to give financial aid to international students, they are justified in not giving financial aid to international students. If they don't want to give financial aid to short people with big ears, they are justified in not giving financial aid to short people with big ears.</p>
<p>Excuse my ignorance on this subject, but don't private universities reap some benefit from providing financial aid to U.S. citizens? Universities such as Caltech have been [in]famous for picking the best students in science, regardless of race, background, or even personality. So why would Caltech not admit a strong international applicant over a weaker U.S. applicant if both ask for financial aid?</p>
<p>If it is indeed economically beneficial to an institution to accept a domestic applicant over an international one, then in my opinion, the decision is justified. Otherwise, I see it as (unfair) discrimination.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
If it is indeed economically beneficial to an institution to accept a domestic applicant over an international one, then in my opinion, the decision is justified. Otherwise, I see it as (unfair) discrimination.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>I disagree. Look, I know US universities are some of the best in the world and I can see why many people, internationals or domestics, want to get in. Private universities tend to favor domestics, ceteris parabus and it's not any more discriminatory than state-residents at public universities paying less tuition than out-of-state students.</p>
<p>The U.S. is suffering from a lack of techincal-based graduates and if Harvard wants to admit more Americans, more power to them. I don't believe that just because many of the best schools are in the U.S. obligates us to accept more internationals because their country doesn't have schools on-par with Ivy League. If they want to get in, they better work hard and prove that they'll add to the college (the same as any other applicant).</p>
<p>Back on topic, my Austrian friend who applied (for partial finaid) got rejected. Her school record and ecs weren't anything spectacular though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree. Look, I know US universities are some of the best in the world and I can see why many people, internationals or domestics, want to get in. Private universities tend to favor domestics, ceteris parabus and it's not any more discriminatory than state-residents at public universities paying less tuition than out-of-state students.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This comparison would hold better if, say, the UCs suddenly zoomed to be the nation's top X schools. If this occurred, however, non-California residents would be screaming injustice. Fortunately, private schools tend to hold the titles of the most prestigious universities.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The U.S. is suffering from a lack of techincal-based graduates and if Harvard wants to admit more Americans, more power to them. I don't believe that just because many of the best schools are in the U.S. obligates us to accept more internationals because their country doesn't have schools on-par with Ivy League.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Even though this argument is interesting, I don't think it's entirely relevant. From what I've seen, 50-75% of Ivy League (et al.) PhD students are internationals, all of whom are fully funded. This shows that Ivy League (et al.) schools don't necessarily have a problem with admitting international students as much as they have a problem with losing money due to them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If they want to get in, they better work hard and prove that they'll add to the college (the same as any other applicant).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The problem here is that many international applicants have amazing accomplishments and still aren't able to enter into top universities. I think that my friend who ranked in the top 5 in math in Canada would easily place in the top 20% of students at Harvard. Instead, that guy with a sub-1400 SAT got in because he was domestic. My friend dedicated his entire life to academics; what did sub-1400 SAT guy do? Internationals applying for financial aid don't just have it a bit harder than domestics -- admission is almost impossible for them.</p>