<p>"So fine, patuxent-- gnash your teeth! But I think the whole story typified something quite different than elitist back-room deals."</p>
<p>Funny, I though patuxent was being sarcastic (and not nasty in any way.) It's no backroom deal - they throw need-blind out the window in April - or, more exactly, families become poorer (hey, we all do, come September!) This is such a common occurrence it is hardly worth noting. They spent all that energy giving the student one of those rare places, and don't like to be turned down for a measily $5k.</p>
<p>But let's give credit where it is due: Pres. Simmons did the same thing at Smith before moving to Brown, and, despite some critics, it worked. Its outside contributions last year soared past even Williams, and they completed a $425 million fund drive, the largest in small college history. They did it largely on the strength of spending into the reserves to ensure low-income students in ever-increasing numbers could attend. </p>
<p>Simmons is the one Ivy President who has gotten it right when it comes to figuring out what low-income students really need in order to attend. The others have basically just talked a good game (though, to be fair, Princeton's aid per student attending has gone up 15% in the last two years, though it doesn't seem to have impacted who they are admitting, unlike Brown's policies.) Not surprising, being the daughter of sharecroppers hereself.</p>
<p>In my book, or at least in my "quick reply", Prez Simmons is a hero!</p>
<p>The story IS wonderfull SBmom and I am sure the kid deserves what he got and bravo for going to bat for him and to brown for raising his award. Doubtless they would have done it even without the competing offer. It is good that there are institutions like Brown that exist above the sordid hurly-burly of commerce (and if anyone doubts it just ask them).</p>
<p>BTW it is not the financial practices I object to but rather the mendacity coupled with priggish self-righteousness. I don't mind them competing for the most promising students. In fact I encourage it and I encourage them to look in new places and to use innovative measures of promise that take into account more than just test scores.</p>
<p>I think you meant "need-based" not "need blind."</p>
<p>Don't you think it is likely that all 5 schools somewhat UNDERESTIMATE a given family's need? One of the 5 might underestimate it by less than the others, thus prompting the one of other 4 to do a FA review? </p>
<p>To me this isn't 'throwing need-based out the window', it is the school being pressured-- via competition-- into digging a little deeper to better meet a kids genuine financial need.</p>
<p>I doubt there are any students at need-based schools who are cruising easily on financial aid, unless they have out & out lied and gamed the system. Pretty much everyone must pay till it hurts, and then a little beyond.</p>
<p>Need-based goes out the window when rich kids get financial aid or poor kids get to cruise with no pinch. </p>
<p>I was interested to note a nice touch on the Brown financial aid page....... they do still allow kids on financial aid to do work study AND keep the Work scholarship for the freshman year if they need extra funds. The work study is paid at $7.50/hour and a list of jobs is posted. I think that is an option which might help this work financially. I can't imagine my son couldn't do 7-10/hours work in some area of interest, and I am a firm believer in work study helping students gain a connection to the campus. It certainly didn't do me any harm in the dark ages when I was in school, and I got to know a lot of people I otherwise would not have through it!</p>