Can Andover be truly need-blind in admission even if it wanted to be?

<p><a href=“http://oldexonian.com/2012/09/27/news/admissions_resists_switch_to_shared_app”>http://oldexonian.com/2012/09/27/news/admissions_resists_switch_to_shared_app&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>To Gary, applicant interest is more important than applicant quantity. “Gateway is an easy way to increase the number of applications we receive and therefore make our application that much more selective, [but we have] never been driven to increase applications just for the sake of increasing applications,” he said.</p>

<p>“We are driven to attract the right applicant and make our school easily accessible at the same time. We believe our online application accomplishes both,” Gary said.</p>

<p><a href=“http://oldexonian.com/2012/04/12/news/admissions_seeks_all_quarters”>http://oldexonian.com/2012/04/12/news/admissions_seeks_all_quarters&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Read the whole article.</p>

<p>I do not believe Andover is truly “need-blind.” They clearly have a budget cutoff, so that means that they have a system that we do not completely understand. This claimed need blind policy has also significantly helped their applications. I think that they’re numbers are greater than Exeter, though, because they are closer to Boston, say that they have a need blind policy, and they offer online applications. The fact that Andover also has a much larger town than Exeter is probably a plus for many (not me) but I think the largest contributing factor is the online application because an online application is much easier than mailing an application for people in obscure parts of the country.</p>

<p>I don’t think applying through Gateway is such a big deal. I did apps for both A & E, and neither was more difficult. (I enjoyed E’s more, but that’s because I love writing.) Applying through Gateway really only made it easier for the teachers (one rec for many schools) but no two schools have the same app, even through the portal. Gateway just organizes the questions a school chooses, it’s not a common app. </p>

<p>Where is anyone’s evidence that Andover has a budget cut-off?! </p>

<p>Based on the article above, it seems clear that the budget is the same at A and E because both students accept the same percentage of top tier applicants–FP and FA–on a need blind basis. Then Exeter jumps back into its pool and accepts a few more full pay students–which does not in any way affect its FA budget. Exeter’s admit rate is thus higher and yield rate lower–because of those “second tier” full pay students that Andover is NOT admitting. </p>

<p>Don’t forget the handwritten essay too, Stargirl. Exeter was my kid’s first choice, but he cursed his way through that whole painful handwriting process. The point is that Exeter isn’t trying to encourage applications by making the application easier to access and complete, which is the whole point really of Gateway (as the article above that no one seems to be reading(!) says.</p>

<p>Grrrr…why is it no longer possible to delete a comment?</p>

<p>But don’t you think its the slightest bit odd that they use around the same amount on FA every year for newly admitted students? </p>

<p>@classicalmama that was a very good point you made about accepting FP applicants. I never thought about that.</p>

<p>@stargirl3, you live in the Boston area where you could drive to Exeter and personally hand in your application to the admissions office. Think about that applicant from [insert obscure country here] where getting a package to America is A) difficult and B) expensive.</p>

<p>@needtoboard You do make a good point. I’d like to think that E would make an exception for a student who couldn’t afford expensive postage, but I don’t know.</p>

<p>@Periwinkle My numbers for admit rates are correct. The only assumption I made was 2:1 ratio for FA:FP among applicants. I was most surprised to see that FA yield had been 100% or very close. I expected lower. FP yield has been around 70%. </p>

<p>@SharingGift wrote:</p>

<p>

This is only an assumption, nothing more. It really is quite a leap of faith to assert that the difference in admission rates between FP and FA is that large (18%). Do you have any sources to verify 1) If the FP/FA ratio for applications is indeed 33/66? and 2) that the yield rate for FA applicants is close to 100%?</p>

<p>I’ve “heard of” such a ratio on CC a few times, quoting AOs from top BSs, but I can’t really confirm. That ratio is the weakest link in my analysis. Why don’t you ask Ms. Mallick? You’ll know for sure then, and help the rest of us become better informed.</p>

<p>I’m sure everyone would agree that it’s important to create a baseline when evaluating raw numbers. For example, the fact that California has more teachers than Arizona lacks a meaningful context unless we also establish a population baseline that takes into account the fact that California has a higher school-age population than Arizona and thus a greater per capita need for more teachers than Arizona. </p>

<p>Some people on this thread make much of the fact that Andover’s financial aid percentages and expenditures have remained constant. But the relative constancy of these numbers proves nothing unless one also knows the relative financial aid needs of each applicant pool class. For example, if the baseline of financial aid remains relatively constant, the financial aid percentages from year to year would stay relatively constant as well.</p>

<p>My point is that the question of whether Andover is a need blind school requires complete data, not conjecture. Apart from creating a financial need baseline for each entering class, we would also, for example, need to know how the percentage of full-pay day students and full-pay foreign students fit into this financial aid calculus. As no one on CC has access to all the hard data, all we are left with are conjectures that recall Churchill’s dictum about there being “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” </p>

<p>I don’t pretend to have this hard data either, but I can say, on the basis of ample personal experience, that the honorable financial aid people at Andover do what they say and say what they do. So, it rankles me when people on CC anonymously challenge their integrity on the basis of mere conjecture. I could engage in conjecture about why some folks do so. But I won’t because I have no definitive basis for impugning their motives. It would be nice if some people applied that same standard to Andover. </p>

<p>@classicalmama, I few years ago there was an article linked from the Andover website that mentioned their FA budget. It got attention because it was published SEVERAL weeks before decisions, implying that there was a budget. But that’s it for “evidence.” You’re right. I think that most eyebrows are raised simply because the dollar amount stays so consistent from year to year. And while that may imply that there is a budget, it doesn’t mean that there is. </p>

<p>I first doubted this whole “need blind” thing about five years ago when I had to call the FA office at PA for something. I apologized for calling when I was sure they were busy and the lady was nice enough to satisfy my curiosity on two points. I asked her how many FA apps they process and she said, “over 2000.” Then I asked her how the need blind thing worked and she told me that admissions sent the kids they wanted and they created the package. That simple. But what raised my eyebrows (and still does) is how a little over half of the class is taken from 1/3 of the applicants. Even with the need blind policy, wealthy students are admitted at over twice the rate of FA apps.</p>

<p>@neatoburrito Thank you! You saved me. ^:)^ @sgopal2 There’s your answer. Five years ago, application count was less than 3,000 (2,784 for the class entering 2009-2010 year), so 2,000 would make more than two thirds. </p>

<p>@SergeantFriday‌ What I did was to merely reconstruct a more balanced picture with the data provided by Andover, and I’ve never ventured into speculation or conjecture, except the ratio of FA:FP applications, which is consistent with what neato heard from Andover AO. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ve heard of this quote before… unfortunately, usually when some one ran out of rational argument. I guess Churchill wasn’t a statistician, not even a mathematician. But I don’t know whether he would have believed global climate changes in the face of overwhelming statistical evidence. </p>

<p>Uhh…wait! The above quote is not attributed to Churchill; it was Mark Twain, who is also known for saying:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“it rankles me when people on CC anonymously challenge their integrity on the basis of mere conjecture”</p>

<p>2 things:

  • They are opening themselves up to scrutiny by crowing about their uniqueness
  • Would LOVE it if someone with the authority and resources openly challenged Andover on their claim (lawyer? the press? some educational association?). Bet you would see a lot of tap dancing in New Hamphire!</p>

<p>@SharingGift, actually, we are both apparently wrong about the lies, damned lies, and statistics quote. Mark Twain himself “attributed" this remark to Benjamin Disraeli who reportedly said, ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.’" But Twain himself may have been wrong because “Evidence is now available to conclude that the phrase originally appeared in 1895 in an article by Leonard H. Courtney.” <a href=“Mark Twain quotations - Statistics”>http://www.twainquotes.com/Statistics.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Speaking of quotes, I have another one worthy of Mark Twain for you: “When you are a hammer everything looks like a nail.” You attempt to ‘hammer’ your point by arguing that you “merely reconstructed a more balanced picture with the data provided by Andover.” Yet, you candidly admit that you “ventured into speculation or conjecture” about “the ratio of FA:FP applications” at Andover. But, even if that “speculation or conjecture” were correct, you still have no hard data about the relative merit of these FA and FP candidates. </p>

<p>In short, color me unimpressed. But hey, that’s your story, so I guess you want to stick with it.</p>

<p>@Jersey, your anticipatory schadenfreude is impressive. </p>

<p>^^ Not as impressive as your blind faith in someone’s ‘words’. Do you always just take things at face value?</p>

<p>My goal is not to see the downfall of anyone. I would just like them to ‘come clean’ as they appear to be playing with the fragile egos of teenagers to fortify their exclusivity label. More than a few young posters here admitted to latching on to their need blind message.</p>

<p>There’s a difference between “need-blind” and “meeting full need.” Being need-blind means the school will accept their “yes” pile without paying attention to or knowing their need. Meeting full need means they will buy their chosen class. So Andover can, technically, have a budget and still be need-blind, unless I’m missing something here. </p>

<p>@pd100 It’s true that a need-blind school doesn’t always meet full need. Take a look at the second bullet point: <a href=“Tuition and Financial Aid”>Tuition and Financial Aid;

<p>Also, check this out.

Andover doesn’t offer aid to low income students, it offers aid to low-middle income students. (Around $35-40K, I would say.)</p>

<p>@Jersey386 et al, this seems like an issue about which you feel passionate. Why don’t you take it up with Phillips Academy directly? </p>