If the actual financial aid offer is only slightly better than the NPC estimate, then it may be that the college set the NPC to be slightly conservative on the amount of grant aid, to reduce complaints about why the actual financial aid offer was worse than the NPC estimate.
Got it. But my point is that it happens before the process; its endemic in the admissions culture. For example, nearly 70% of H frosh played high school sports, according to a survey in the Crimson. And 12% of them planned to walk-on and/or were recruited. That’s a significant chunk of the entering Frosh, which gotta fill those country club sports.
See, they don’t need to “go looking” for signs of privilege and wealth halfway thru the process; the applicant pool is already chock-full of priveleged and wealthy candidates from which to choose.
As long as highly selective colleges use accomplishments (aka ECs) as a primary admissions criteria – after grades and test scores – the lower income are just at a distinct disadvantage. It should be no surprise that top private colleges contain many full pay students.
I take the elite colleges at their word when they say that, at an individual level, they are need-blind in admissions—they won’t reject anyone based on inability to pay. But at the same time, they use a number of screens that effectively ensure that a high percentage of their incoming class will be full-pays. Whether this is a conscious strategy on their part, or merely an unintended consequence of choices made for other reasons, I can’t say, but surely savvy veteran admissions officers have noticed by now. These include:
- Legacy preferences. The median Ivy legacy has a much higher SES than the median college-bound HS senior. I don't have data to prove it, but my guess is the median Ivy legacy is a full-pay. The median college-bound HS senior surely is not.
- Filling a large percentage of the class ED. Most applicants with financial need are extremely reluctant to apply ED. They want to shop around and compare FA offers. Full-pays have no financial reason to shy away from ED. Some schools fill as much as half their entering class in the ED round, with a much higher acceptance rate than in the RD round. This gives prospective full-pays a strong incentive to apply ED.
- Recruitment of athletes for "elitist" sports. Here's a list of Harvard's men's varsity sports: baseball, basketball, heavyweight crew, lightweight crew, cross country, fencing, football, golf, ice hockey, lacrosse, sailing, skiing, soccer, squash, swimming & diving, tennis, track & field, volleyball, water polo, wrestling. Here's a list of the University of Minnesota's men's varsity sports: baseball, basketball, cross country, football, golf, gymnastics, hockey, swimming & diving, tennis, track & field, wrestling. Comparing the two, here's a list of sports in which Minnesota doesn't compete but in which Harvard fields varsity teams and presumably recruits at least some athletes, giving them an admissions "hook": heavyweight crew, lightweight crew, fencing, lacrosse, sailing, skiing, soccer, squash, volleyball, water polo. Here's a list of varsity sports Minnesota offers but Harvard doesn't: gymnastics. I don't think a lot of lower or middle SES kids from north Minneapolis, the Twin Cities' working class suburbs, or small high schools in rural or small town Minnesota participate in crew, or fencing, or lacrosse,, or sailing of squash. There's certainly some soccer, and skiing is quite popular in parts of Minnesota (Olympic skier Lindsay Vonn is a Minnesotan). And there is some lacrosse, a game that is still quite popular in Native American communities here, unlike New England whre it's mainly a prep school sport. By and large, these are New England prep school sports. That's also true of ice hockey in the Northeast; here in Minnesota, as in Canada, it's always been more of a working class sport, though it's now also popular in some affluent suburban districts. Overall, though, Harvard's athletic recruitment would tend to favor New England prep school types, who are much likelier than the median college-bound senior to be full-pays.
- Reliance on high SAT scores. Elite colleges like to say they don't fixate on standardized test scores which are merely one data point in their holistic admissions review process. But that understates the importance of those scores. High scores won't get you in, but low or middling scores are almost certain to keep you out, barring extraordinary countervailing considerations. As others have pointed out, high SAT scores actually correlate much more strongly with parental income than they do with future academic success. Even the College Board won't claim much more than that SAT scores, combined with HS grades, are a slightly better predictor of first-year college grades than HS GPA alone. That's an extraordinarily weak claim; it means that after the first year of college, all bets are off, and there's no established statistically significant correlation between SAT scores and ultimate success in college. Yet high SAT scores are used as a kind of threshold requirement--a necessary but not sufficient condition for admission to elite colleges. And so used, they virtually guarantee that a high percentage of admits will be full-pays.
- Patterns of student recruitment by admissions officers. The AOs of elite colleges like to say they "know all the high schools" in their territory. I've always viewed this as an absurd claim. There are 30,000 or so high schools in the U.S. They can't possibly know that many very well. What they really mean is that they know the schools they deem to be the "best" in a particular geographic area. What that translates to in our area is that every year they come around and do info sessions at a handful of high-end private schools and a few of the most affluent suburban public high schools, and spend time with the GCs and the headmaster or principal at those schools. They spend little or no time in urban schools, or in public high schools in less affluent districts, or in high schools in rural or small town Minnesota. And you can't blame them, in a way. Most of the applications they're going to get from Minnesota are going to come from those high-end private schools and affluent suburban high schools, and that means the applicant pool from Minnesota is going to skew affluent and substantially full-pay. Everyone else they'll treat as "out of sight, out of mind." They "know" the non-elite schools only insofar as they lump them all together in the category of "not worth wasting my time on."
- Going hand-in-glove with #5, the emphasis on secondary school curricular "rigor" also favors applicants form more affluent schools which can afford to offer more rigorous curricula. True, most elite colleges do practice affirmative action for URMs, and give some preference for first-gens, and otherwise like to tout stories about how this or that applicant overcame daunting obstacles yet somehow managed to put together a set of credentials that meet our exacting standards, or come pretty close. But that's barely more than window-dressing, as far as I can see. After filling up the bulk of the class with high SAT, high "rigor," predominantly high SES applicants from the "best" private and public schools, they then assuage their consciences by admitting a few non-standard (for them) applicants to round out the class.
1 Like
True. Especially if the college does not look as favorably on low SES ECs, like work experience or caring for relatives in a single-parent home.
Don’t forget that other aspects of the application process can also matter. For example, if a college requires SAT subject tests, counselor recommendation, teacher recommendations, CSS Profile, interviews, etc., lower SES students in lower SES high schools where most college-goers are headed to the community college or local state university that needs none of these things may not realize until it is too late that they are needed. Meanwhile, high SES students in high SES high schools probably have a well-oiled college admissions process and schedule to remind students to get needed things done in time, and all of the counselors and teachers are familiar with the need to write recommendations, so they are more likely to be able to write good ones for the top students. The high SES student may also show the expected mannerisms to an alumni interviewer more so than the low SES student.
Surprisingly, there are many more public high schools with fencing teams than there are private. The truth is, most HS fencing programs are dreadful. Colleges recruit club fencers, not HS fencers. As such, your point is well taken.
@bclintonk, bravo.
@bclintonk-
excellent summary of the factors elite colleges AO’s use to make admission decisions
The huffpo article is just an opinion piece that says “I don’t believe it” with nothing to back up their sentiment.
If adcoms are using different cues - zip codes, sat, ec’s to determine ability to pay, then they’re going to make the same assumption whether you apply for aid or not. So you might as well take the school at it’s word and apply for aid.
“How are all the colleges that don’t ask on the application finding out?”
The question is in the Common App form. So basically all schools ask.
BC post #42 nails how the tippy top elite schools manage to have enrollments that are heavily slanted towards high SES. Even the wealthiest of schools with tons of aid still have a budget for financial aid that can’t be exceeded. By handling their overall admissions pool the way they do, they ensure that they will have enough full payors each year.
Below that rarified level of college, being need aware at the admissions stage is reasonable and necessary for the schools and usually better for the kid too.
The alternative is “gapping” kids at the financial aid stage. Accepting them but then offering an amount of aid that makes attending impossible or possible only with very high loans. That doesn’t help the kid, other than letting him know that he could get accepted into a school that he would be unable to attend.
@bclintonk - Colleges actively recruit inner city schools in search of low SES and minority students that can succeed at their institutions. Chicago Scholars (http://www.chicagoscholars.org) is a group I have worked with in the past. They hold numerous meetings during the year to coach up CPS students in how to test in, apply and succeed in college, and cap it with an annual event matching about 140 schools and 900 CPS students. Colleges will offer acceptances for kids on-the-spot at their annual luncheon, which is quite the opposite of ignoring inner city kids.
It’s just kind of obvious that the applicant pool doesn’t change all that much over a few years so surprise surprise, the accepted pool isn’t going to change all that much either.
Mom2colllegekids, I think it was Mini who made that claim.
mini was [ is] a Man.
Yes I didn’t say otherwise.
^^mom2collegekids’ reference was about a “Mom”, not a “dad”.
"There used to be a mom who posted here on CC whose kids went to a variety of Ivy League schools. They were very high income full pay. She used to insist that being full pay and not applying for aid was a plus, even at the so called need blind schools. She didn’t believe that they were truly need blind. She said that the consistent numbers reported by these schools detailing how many qualified for aid was a strong indication that these schools werent’ really need blind, otherwise the numbers qualifying for aid would swing from year to year.
She also would argue that often a student’s ECs and zip code were revealing, as well as their essays."
“…SES students in lower SES high schools where most college-goers are headed to the community college or local state university that needs none of these things may not realize until it is too late that they are needed…The high SES student may also show the expected mannerisms to an alumni interviewer more so than the low SES student.”
Wow. This takes my breath away for its broad understanding of some of the distinct differences in how students are challenged, called upon to meet the challenge, and, (likely to be) received. Not news, but a cold and sobering reminder of the chasms that exist.
Not looking favorably at work experience or caring for a relative? No human value to valuing the humans nearest to us? So the kids must care for the ailing across the world, but not the old grandmother at the back of the apartment?
Post #54, I think she must forgot who it was or the gender of that person. But I remember Mini discussed this subject at length.
“Not looking favorably at work experience or caring for a relative?”
In the case of the top colleges, why do so many think poor kids can only babysit? No one seems to believe they can join and lead clubs, play sports and engage in music, take on travel opps, vol and have have impact in their communities and achieve. Think about it.
^^^^ of course people of low socioeconomic status “can” do all of those things. Unfortunately, there are many, many who have home obligations that consume so much of their time that these types of activities are luxuries to them. No to mention that sometimes these activities require transportation not accessible to these students. I KNOW this because I volunteer to counsel these types of kids. @bclintonk beautifully expressed some of the nuances of the plight of lower income students vying for spots at top colleges…starting with, the vast majority have absolutely no idea where to even begin to apply to such schools, or what they need to do to complete the dozens of little requirements necessary to submit a completed application, ask for FA, etc.
I also see the mentoring programs. And while I don’t agree all kids should always go to the highest rated school that will accept them, I see what many kids who start in challenged positions have been able to do and how a top college can suit them, regardless of some anecdotes.
A URM coworker who began his post-Ivy career in a mentoring program talked about the challenges in identifying kids late, his program started with kids in 11th. Any of us parents would agree that’s late for any kid. But many bright challenged kids are getting identified much sooner, and mentored through hs (if not starting sooner) and the app process.
No, I’m not saying all low SES kids find themselves on equal ground to others. But we can’t assume it’s futile for all, that they all have only the hs options of work and babysitting. And remember, many first gens are the children of determined parents, whatever their origins and struggles.