For such an applicant, I think it would be reasonable enough to withdraw one’s financial aid application and notify the admissions office, while accepting a spot on the waitlist, of this action. If Middlebury did make its need-aware status clear in the waitlist notification letter, then I suspect that some applicants would do this without prompting.</p>
<p>I would also assume that Middlebury being “need-aware” means that they look to see exactly how much money is needed, not just whether someone has checked the box or not.</p>
<p>This analysis assumes that no applicant would choose to not apply to Middlebury based on it being need-aware only for the waitlist. The vast majority of applicants will be accepted or denied outright, and all “waitlisted” students have the option of declining the spot and “taking” the rejection.</p>
<p>
The conventional definition of “need-blind” is not considering financial need for Early Decision or Regular Decision applicants. Certainly colleges could do a better job publicizing this, but they don’t have much motivation.</p>
<p>The conventional definition of “need-blind” is not considering financial need for Early Decision or Regular Decision applicants. Certainly colleges could do a better job publicizing this, but they don’t have much motivation</p>
<p>===============================</p>
<p>huh, then those same colleges shouldnt expect integrity from others either. “Conventional definition” ? Seems lame to me.</p>
<p>It’s not always that black and white. There are many cases where attendance without aid could theoretically be within reach but very painful for the family to pay for, and it would certainly make attendance easier or more feasible if aid were offered. </p>
<p>Since when? When was this convention established? I’ve been following college admissions closely for 9 years now and have never heard of any such convention. And in any case. I don’t understand the need to defend Middlebury’s lack of transparency in this matter. It would be so simple for them to just plainly state the full truth. The simple fact is WSJ outed them for making claims that weren’t entirely true, or that were true in most circumstances but not all. And we should be happy that the full story is getting out. And by no means am I convinced that Middlebury is the only offender here. As I’ve long said, “need-bind” schools in general are as need-blind as they can afford to be. Middlebury just happened to get caught.</p>
<p>^If they are on the border between needing and not needing aid, then they can withdraw their FA application when they receive waitlist notification and explanation of the now need-aware process.</p>
<p>I’ve only been following college admissions closely for the past three years, but I figured out pretty early on–without needing colleges to spell it out for me–that “need-blind” doesn’t include waitlist, transfer, or international. Middlebury wasn’t “caught” by the WSJ because they have nothing to hide; I’m sure if you had called their admissions office a year ago and asked whether waitlist decisions were need-blind, they would have said no.</p>
<p>This “convention” is equivalent to the convention that each college “meeting full need” gets to use its own determination of need. Savvy marketing, but not grossly unethical and not meaningless. (I’ve heard recently that a few colleges do claim to “meet full need” with PLUS loans, but again, “convention” excludes PLUS loans from aid resources to meet need–federal and school-originating student loans, however, are included.)</p>
<p>Do you in fact know that Middlebury (or any other “need-blind” school) actually does inform applicants in the waitlist letter that need-blind consideration is now over and from here on in needing aid will decrease their chances? Or are you merely asserting that an applicant theoretically <em>could</em> withdraw their FA application <em>if</em> Middlebury happens to tell them about this change in the ground rules?</p>
<p>Between the two of them, my daughters got four waitlist letters from “need-blind” selective schools (not Middlebury) when they applied. And not one of those letters breathed a word about any shift to need-aware. So they were not aware of any necessity to withdraw their FA apps if they wanted to boost their chances. I haven’t seen a Middlebury letter but I doubt it is any different. The shift to need-aware is just the schools’ “conventional” little secret.</p>
<p>Colleges don’t make any waitlist decisions “blind” – they take individual students from the waitlist as dictated by institutional need. If they have money left in their financial aid budget, they may very well take financially needy students at that point – but again, they are looking to fill their class by the students who best meet their late-in-the-game priorities.</p>
<p>The students on the wait list have already been turned down for admission. </p>
<p>As I posted above, “need blind” is a term of art in any case – no college is truly “blind” to the individual circumstances. It just means that they aren’t going to reject a student because the student has applied for financial aid, although they might reject the student for any of a number of other reasons.</p>
<p>The waitlisted students are essentially a pool of already-rejected students. The college has offered them the potential of a second look, but that is a very different process than the initial admissions decisions.</p>
Of course I don’t know, I said earlier that IF Middlebury did inform applicants in the waitlist letter, that would satisfy my own ethical sensibilities. If Middlebury “happens to tell them about this change in the ground rules,” then applicants CAN freely withdraw their FA application. I can’t fathom an applicant not applying to a school because it is not need-blind for extremely borderline “waitlist admits”; furthermore, the type of applicant who would NOT apply to a need-aware school would also likely be high-need and not in any position to avoid checking the box.</p>
<p>
Then that is the problem, rather than schools “lying” about being need-blind or a lack of obvious online disclosure.</p>
<p>
QFT. A college could theoretically waitlist EVERY applicant who is not accepted. Costs them nothing except another, later notification of final rejection.</p>
Well, actually I don’t think that most colleges bother with a later notice to waitlisted applicants – one assumes rejection unless one hears otherwise. </p>
<p>Some colleges do in fact put a large proportion of non-admitted applicants on their waitlist. </p>
<p>I don’t think colleges need to “disclose” how they will weigh need in the waitlist round. On the contrary, i think it is naive for an applicant to view a waitlist as if it were subject to the same rules. And I don’t think that the admissions committee really knows whether or not need will be a factor when they send out notices – at most schools it probably depends a lot on the overall status of the financial aid budget. The ad com probably gets a report from the financial aid office around May 1st, at the same time that they learn of any shortfall in filling the class. At some schools it might be very precise: financial aid notifiies admissions that they can handle another 5 students if necessary, but there are 25 slots to be filled. So the school can be “need-blind” for the first 5 needy student to accept a spot, but not for the rest.</p>
<p>“Well, actually I don’t think that most colleges bother with a later notice to waitlisted applicants – one assumes rejection unless one hears otherwise.”</p>
<p>No. Every college I am familiar with ultimately sends rejection letters to applicants who do not get off the waitlist. You can see it every year on CC on the RD waitlist threads. Here is an example from Penn’s waitlist thread. Scroll down a bit and you can see the disappointed kids reporting that they got their rejections after having sat on the waitlist for some months. There are many other threads like this from other schools.</p>
<p>Well, I know my d. accepted a spot on Brandeis’ waitlist, and I don’t recall there ever being any further correspondence one way or another from Brandeis. I could be mistaken – the reason she accepted that spot was that it was an early-write offer, in February, before she had heard from other colleges. She ended up accepted at other colleges, and perhaps she removed herself from the waitlist without telling me. But you’ve provided an example from one college, an Ivy, which very likely has very few waitlist openings – that doesn’t mean that the same procedure is followed with other colleges. Some colleges have waitlists that are fairly fluid, and they may be contacting students late in the summer.</p>
<p>As a business the goal and objectives of a school is to educate the masses. Functionally, it has school board (board of directors), president (president/CEO, big huncho, etc.). The product of a school is brighter and better kids with the right mindset and knowledge to change the world for the better.</p>
<p>I didn’t apply for FA and I’m interested to see if that helps. I always wonder if colleges actually don’t look at aid during admissions. If they solely accepted kids who needed FA, their endowment would shrink SUBSTANTIALLY that year.</p>
<p>The right business decision to make for a school is to get the best and brightest student they can get. On average, these kids are more likely to be successful in their careers. Again, on average, successful alumni are more likely to donate to the school 20-30 years down the road, when they made it big in their lives. The huge endowment Harvard, Yale, etc. are getting today is the fruit of labor from trees planted 20-30-50-100 years ago.</p>
<p>IIRC, waitlisted posters have indicated here that they have received notification when waitlists were closed and no further movement fromt he waitlist was going to occur.</p>
<p>Calls from guidance counselors to admissions can be beneficial in shaking someone from the waitilist to the admit status. It isn’t just a matter of filling the spot of the one-armed basoon player majoring in Ancient Greek Mythology,</p>
<p>The right business decision is to have enough students who could afford to pay. Every school only set aside $X for FA each year. It shouldn’t be hard to figure out how they hit that target every year.</p>
<p>As far as HY’s applicant pool, there are no shortage of brightest people applying there, even if they should stop giving out FA.</p>
<p>Harvard is (in)famous for keeping HUGE waitlist. And I know from recent experience that they do ultimately send a rejection letter to kids they do not accept off the list. They are also one of the schools that keeps accepting people until late in the summer. </p>
<p>I’m not sure every school sends a physical letter like Harvard. Dartmouth sends out an e-mail to everyone still on the waitlist informing them that the waitlist is closed and they won’t be taking any more. Some schools may well say nothing, but it seems pretty lame of a school to just let the waitlist fade away without providing the remaining kids any closure.</p>
<p>^^^I think some may be just announcing it on their admissions site blogs now. At least, that is the impression I got from friends with kids on waitlists last year.</p>
<p>“I didn’t apply for FA and I’m interested to see if that helps.”</p>
<p>You’ll never know! :)</p>
<p>“The right business decision to make for a school is to get the best and brightest student they can get.”</p>
<p>Yes, but “best” involves providing a stimulating and vibrant educational environment where bright, motivated, talented students collectively bring diverse backgrounds and interests, which makes schools attractive.</p>