<p>^The school that also described itself as need blind until that final round. </p>
<p>To digress a tad…did you check out this year’s admit video while you were on 2014? Loved it. Could do without the over-the-top bios though. </p>
<p>Just to be clear, I wasn’t suggesting dropping school names at this point. I agree, that horse has long left the barn. I was simply saying that if the conversation had started hypothetically, we could have looked at the numbers posed and discussed what they indicated without any digression into personal feelings or experiences.</p>
<p>For example, if we could agree on a definition for dryness based on average annual rainfall, and I were to say that a state recorded 1.5 inches of rainfall last year, we could probably agree pretty easily on where that state falls on the dryness spectrum without having to know that state’s name or wondering just how it managed to have so little rainfall or asking someone to prove that it only had 1.5 inches when the scenario was posed hypothetically. Then, if someone were to find a state where the record showed 1.5 inches of rainfall last year, we’d easily know how to categorize it. But, alas, we can no longer even see the tail of that departed horse, so the name issue is moot at this point.</p>
<p>Does it strike anyone as odd that the school that no longer calls itself need blind gave almost two million more in FA? I mean if this is SAS then they have a class size that is much smaller than Andover. Could it be that they take students in much lower SEC? I meant students with greater need. Or is this school Exeter? Maybe you should just keep the names but a $2million spread seems like a lot of $$.</p>
<p>Doh! How I wish I could turn back time…</p>
<p>@SharingGift - Turn back time, seriously?!?!? Don’t withdraw yet, after all you started this. Anyways, along which dimension is E higher than A that results in $2M more FA?
-
of Admitted?
- % on FA?
- Avg $ size of FA grant?</p>
<p>@grx567 - Given the significantly fewer # of SAS Admitees, the $7M of FA is can’t be coming from them. Since SAS entire student body is 300, let’s assume they need to enroll 75 new students every year (300/4) and since their yield is 70% then this means they need to admit ~100 kids. This would put the avg aid at ~$70K which means the entire class not only gets to attend for free, but they are getting paid.</p>
<p>But, I too found it interesting that a school that does not call itself need blind ends up giving out more FA then a school that claims to be need-blind. AND they don’t market that fact either with a message like “For 5 years in a row, School 2 continues to be the most generous secondary school in the US”</p>
<p>@ChoatieMom. I think the problem is not so much that the horse has left the barn as that there are too few horses in the race. When you’ve got so few prep schools using the term need blind, how is it possible to really come up with a firm, across-the-board comparison of who is what? Or to use your other metaphor, we don’t have enough data to come up with a good definition of dryness.</p>
<p>Some takeaways from this endless thread for any future applicants is this: </p>
<p>Need blind doesn’t particularly mean you have a better chance of being admitted as an FA candidates. It mostly just means the school is really, really selective and that it’s probably harder for FP applicants to get admitted there than at other schools. </p>
<p>Need blind, in short, doesn’t really matter when you’re an FA applicant. So what probably does matter when looking at a school? </p>
<p>Schools meeting full need
Schools with a significant number of students on FA
Schools that are a good fit for you, including some where you would be the big fish
Schools providing grant-based aid (taking out loans for high school strikes me as a Really Bad Idea)</p>
<p>What else?</p>
<p>@classicalmama Don’t you think the missing variable here is the average size of FA award per admitted FA student? So, if I come from a very low SEC and I will need full FA to attend plus travel, clothing etc allowance than which school will provide the best chance? I doubt this information is made available. I mean like the BS review provides an average SSAT for each school than for a FA student the best indicator might be the number of students given the amount of FA to cover all of your costs. Travel can also vary widely. If you are living in NYC your travel budget would be less than the student traveling from a small TX town.</p>
<p>Agreed–but I think “meets full need” covers that. Most schools that meet full need will cover travel for their free-ride students. OTOH, average award in a non-need blind situation would give you a sense of whether the school is more likely to award aid to parents who need less of it than parents who need more. So yeah, I’d add average FA award to the list. </p>
<p>The attempt to shift the burden of proof in this argument reminds me of Bertrand Russell’s famous teapot. Russell argues that it is illogical to claim that a tea pot is orbiting the sun and then assert that this conjecture must be true because your interlocutor is incapable of disproving it. </p>
<p>Teapots do orbit the sun, though, since they’re on the earth.</p>
<p>Sorry I did not chime in earlier about SAS. I can confirm that they no longer use “need blind” language on their outward facing marketing materials.</p>
<p>Here’s some language from the SAS site:
“At a time when many boarding schools have become accessible only to the affluent in America, St. Andrew’s commitment to socioeconomic diversity and fully meeting demonstrated need enables us to develop a truly distinctive student body and School culture.”</p>
<p>Commitment to socioeconomic diversity = “youth from every quarter”
Fully meeting demonstrated need = “Andover meets 100% of a family’s demonstrated need.”</p>
<p>That’s good enough for me to put SAS in the same conversation with Andover on their relative “need blindness”.</p>
<hr>
<p>FWIW, I have not checked this thread in a while because I feel that the topic has been discussed ad nauseam. Surely I’m not the only one who feels that way?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I couldn’t agree more. By now, I believe most of us have pretty good understanding of what “need blind” means. And some of the latest replies are just…full of hot air. As the OP, I wouldn’t mind if this thread gets suspended and made read-only until new admission cycle. How about that?</p>
<p>@Maine, thanks for the chuckle. </p>
<p>Here’s the exact Bertrand Russell quote:</p>
<p>“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense." Bertrand Russell</p>
<p>@SevenDad, hopefully, this tempest in a tea cup will conclude this thread.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>I think I can answer this big question in one or two paragraphs. Here goes:</p>
<p>If being need-blind only means not looking at financial papers and buying the chosen class, it’s really easy to stay under budget. My guess is that most of the time, the AO can tell whether or not an applicant needs FA, and whether it’s a lot or a little. By paying attention to hints in essays and so on, the office can easily split the class between FA and FP. </p>
<p>Okay, okay. Say they don’t consciously draw that line. Even so, FP students have been exposed to many more opportunities, and their participation in eclectic activities makes them very appealing to a school. </p>
<p>I think this thread should be posted on the college side of CC as a general discussion about “need blind” as a practice in higher learning institutions. Posters there are much more resourceful/knowledgeable about these things and may provide more data such as percentages and FA budgets over time in need-blind institutions as some posters here requested. </p>
<p>I see nothing wrong to ask questions about how need-blind works in the context of holistic review process and with so many institutional needs fulfill, but it’s wrong to accuse Andover of lying/misrepresenting itself when they say they are “need-blind”. Chances are that they are following the “industry standard” of need blind institutions. If they are lying, I don’t see why they couldn’t tweak the percentage and even FA budgets to make them more “reasonable” as well so their story would be more convincing. The argument that the fact Exeter has an equally robust FA program but is not claiming need-blind is evidence that Andover is not need-blind does not stand. Need-blind is an initiative individual institutions need to take voluntarily. If for some reason (which could be what SAS thought of the process when they dropped NB), they decide they are not or will not be need-blind, that’s a choice even if they are “effectively need-blind”. You can say Andover has found an effective “marketing tool” by going NB. If so, I hope more schools will follow suit.</p>
<p>As someone suggested, if you feel so strongly, take it up to Andover or at least NYT, and see where you can get. For the general public or even the prospective BS consumers, IMO, not many would care. NB or not, Andover being what it is, will remain a school highly chased after, and as a result the low admit rates will upset many applicants, FP or FA.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Bertrand Russell is neither a Mathematician nor a Statistician. Isaac Newton’s quotes might have been more relevant. :(|) </p>
<p>To further mix metaphors, I think it was important to get the tea back into the teapot, but psterling has done that nicely, so yes, with SevenDad, I agree that this thread should be left to languish. Don’t think it needs to be close. I just need to stop posting. So it’s back to miscellaneous ramblings for me. :)</p>
<p>To throw things up in the air again…</p>
<p>It occurred to me that the last six years have been tremendously stressful. PA announced it would be need blind in admissions in 2007 (I think), and then the financial crash hit in 2008. </p>
<p>In contrast to usual practice, I seem to recall that many schools increased financial aid to enrolled students, even to students who had previously been FP. I think I recall PA’s former admissions director stating that not one child had left PA due to sudden family financial reversals. To refresh everyone’s memory, there were parents who lost jobs and savings during the crash; some went from being able to be FP parents to being unable to meet the mortgage.</p>
<p>So as of the 2008-09 year, PA spent much more on FA than would have been predicted the previous year. As the years have passed, each new class has been admitted under need-blind admissions, and the students enrolled during the crash have graduated. </p>
<p>“Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.”
Michael Corleone, Godfather 3</p>
<p>Graeba, Russell’s philosophical principle applies to all arguments. Simply put, Russell explains why it’s illogical to claim that Andover is not need blind on the basis of incomplete statistics and then shift the burden of proof to require others to establish that conjecture false. If that were a proper form of argumentation, I could contend there must must be aliens at Area 51 because you cannot prove there are not aliens at Area 51.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I understand the desire for certainty because admission decisions have perplexed me on more than one occasion. But I believe admission is a black box process whether one is applying to prep school or college. As a result, I think it is a quixotic pursuit to demand certainty about a process that is ultimately a riddle. </p>
<p>If this demand for certainty begins with need blind admission at Andover, where does it end? Should we also doubt all admission data from every prep school that is based on information not accessible to us? Or should we give Andover and other reputable prep schools the benefit of the doubt by declining to adopt a radical skepticism where we believe nothing we can’t independently prove? </p>
<p>As the cosmologist Martin Rees says, “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” On this thread, it may just suggest that no one has access to all the data on Andover’s need blind admission policy. Nevertheless, the Andover admissions office has this data. And it reliably says it admits students and provides them full demonstrated financial need “without regard to a family’s ability to pay tuition.”</p>
<p>To be sure, some people will challenge Andover’s claim to be need blind. Others might doubt that Exeter is functionally need blind or claim that Deerfield’s new college matriculation report deliberately deceives prospective applicants. But let’s be fair and conclude that no one should accuse any prep school of misrepresentation without first meeting the burden of proving their case. </p>