<p>Regarding post above, I’m not exactly sure what nitwitoddment meant, but I interprete it as students caring more about grades than going into deeper philosphical discussions regarding a certain subject. It really depends on the people you hang out with. I care about grades, obviously since I’m premed, but I also care about learning, and I have found many other people who don’t mind but actually quite enjoy having an intellectual conversation with me for an hour or so. (though it usually gets sorta weird… :P)</p>
<p>“Intellectualism is basically dead here.”</p>
<p>Sorry if you found this confusing, I may have a tendency to avoid explaining things when I’m having fun sensationalizing. I did not mean that nobody here cares at all about what they are learning, or that people will not talk about their classes beyond what grades they got on a test. You frequently find people working together to figure out concepts, ie lots of people will try to figure out how quantum mechanics works, esp. during the beginning (my friend tried to explain it to me in 5 dimensions, which did not quite work).</p>
<p>What I meant is that you will be very, very hard-pressed to find anyone talk about “the bigger picture” with anything; no one seems to want to take what they learned in chemistry and try to think about it on a macro-scale, or have an intelligent discussion about ethical dilemmas, and political discussions I’ve personally had here have been pretty pathetic. One went something like this:</p>
<p>Me: Hey, did you vote?
Him: Yeah, all REPUBLICAN.
Me: I don’t know, I don’t think it’s right just to vote down party lines.
Him: But the liberals are messing everything up, man. (rambles)
Me: I get being conservative, but I really don’t like the Republican party.
Him: But they’re awesome. (rambles)
Me: I mean, I did vote for a Republican…
Him: I voted all Republican.
Me: Did you vote to keep all the judges?
Him: I voted for them all to have to be re-elected.
Me: Oh really?
Him: Yeah,
[quotes some random obscure ruling he disagrees with]
Me: I don’t think that was all of them…
Him: Yeah, the judges in this state are all racist.
Me: Ok…</p>
<p>I think 5 people out of my hall may have voted, most people were happy to say they don’t care about politics. If you ask people about issues, most will just spout off a party platform. Take from it what you will.</p>
<p>Edit: Sorry, forgot about the comparisons to Wake Forest, UNC-CH, Davidson and Washington & Lee.</p>
<p>Overall, I would say that south has quite a different vibe than the midwest. I see the midwest more as just open and (overall) friendly, whereas with the south, there’s a much stronger sense of tradition and compelled-hospitality that factors in. But anyway…</p>
<p>Wake Forest has a MUCH bigger party culture.</p>
<p>UNC-CH…I only really know it’s enormous and people from my school went there for sports. (It’s really not a place you hear people saying "Yeah, I was debating between __ and WashU)</p>
<p>Davidson is a liberal arts school, so I would say more close-knit (but I haven’t heard anyone here talk about it)</p>
<p>Washington & Lee…(I’m actually just pulling this offline, since I’ve never looked closely at it), much more small town/Greek-focused</p>
<p>Someone else may be more familiar with some of these schools…</p>
<p>(Note: quite often the __ is Northwestern, Michigan, or a great deal from a state school)</p>
<p>nitwitoddment- I’m sorry that’s been your experience.</p>
<p>However, I’ve had countless discussions that were pretty much the definition of “intellectualism.” You may need to meet more people.</p>
<p>As a Junior majoring in Computational Biology and Genomics, I wish I could agree with nitwitoddment that students do not want to apply small concepts to macroscopic principles, as that is very mature, and I learned that with time. However, I think most WashU students are very intellectually ambitious and initially come in ready for deep discussions using simple answers based on their limited experience. WashU really opens doors to allow people to make much more complex arguments and discussions.</p>
<p>My first physics class at WashU is a perfect example. This class was on the Physics of US Energy, and was full of people who wanted to fix the US Energy problems with alternative energy. Over the course of the semester we studied a variety of alternative energies and how they were being applied. At the end of the semester, we had to calculate how feasible it would be to apply one of the current alternative energies to replace our dependance on coal/oil for energy (I made the case to the class that hydroelectric power could not solve, or even make a dent on our use of fossil fuels…the rest of the students one by one mathematically showed nothing short of magic would allow the current technologies to replace fossil fuels at any price on a nationwide sense). This lead our class to decide that a diverse, local approach should be taken to helping us reduce our energy consumption and emissions. As you can imagine, everyone in this idealistic class came in imagining a solar, or wind powered world, yet we saw that it was currently not possible, which lead us to a more practical argument.</p>
<p>Further, when I studied biology, I wanted to think that understanding how a single gene worked could allow a researcher to know everything he needs to know about an organism. Find an essential gene, kill an organism, save lives. In college, I learned it is not that easy. One has to make small discoveries, work in a logical manner, and then use data to make theories. </p>
<p>On the liberal arts side, it is exactly the same. The class that all freshmen are required to take essentially teach the student to have facts lead to a conclusion, rather than make a conclusion and than support it with facts. </p>
<p>So, if our campus comes in with freshmen who are more hesitant to take tidbits to shape their opinions, good for them! As it took me two and a half years to reach this stage.</p>
<p>For students coming to WashU, you will be (based on my experience) surrounded by ambitious, intellectual students ready to change the world. The easy answers many of us have learned in high school should and eventually will be challenged at WashU. It’s a highly supportive atmosphere, and as one of the top couple of research schools, I would argue that intellectualism is alive and well.</p>
<p>Excellent post, jemarcus. One of the best I’ve seen in a while</p>
<p>agreed. excellent.</p>
<p>It’s nice to know that the people I know are not necessarily representative of the entire student body; hopefully as I try branching out from giant lecture classes I will get to know more people who genuinely care about thinking–which is the main thing that I have been searching for.</p>
<p>Probably more of a financial aid office question, but might as well ask, and this might be an obvious one but just curious:</p>
<p>Does WashU meet aid? That’s what I heard. Do they meet your need after your EFC?</p>
<p>And if so, then what exactly would the point be of 1/2 scholarships and anything besides full scholarships because if EFC has to be paid anyways and the school will be meeting the rest of the COA then isn’t a partial scholarship irrelevant? </p>
<p>(Or maybe I am totally not getting the big picture or I am mistaken. Please correct me or set my straight on this :p)</p>
<p>collegekang- you are missing the big picture. Those scholarships are merit based. Not need based.</p>
<p>There’s a HUGE chunk of the school population that needs 0 financial aid. Also, don’t be surprised when you also realize that a good chunk of that huge chunk completely prepays tuition/housing, so that they don’t have to care about tuition hikes (ie the 4-6% hike every year is waived if you pre-pay).
I can think of 10% of my freshman floor that prepaid… and those are just the people that told me themselves at one point or another.</p>
<p>And that’s true at all top schools.
For the record, although WashU falls into this like other top schools, it is still very laid back and lacks the preppy attitude that one would find at a school like Duke or Tulane.</p>
<p>How good is the need-based aid?
What are the qualifications of a typical Ervin or Rodriguez scholar?</p>
<p>I understand they are merit based. Sorry, maybe I’m still misunderstanding, but what I’m saying is that if a family is able to contribute their EFC, WashU will cover the rest of the COA, this is true right?</p>
<p>If so, why would the merit based scholarships be relevant? I’m not trying to sound ignorant, I very much have financial aid need, but I’m just saying that if I can cover my EFC via loans or however, than I am fine for the rest of my COA each year because WashU will cover that. </p>
<p>I’m also assuming the scholarships cannot be used to cover EFC, but if they are then that is definitely great and makes them all the more wonderful (Though this is not the main part of my question)</p>
<p>
I’m really not getting what you’re asking here, or in your above post. Are you saying that WashU shouldn’t give merit based scholarships? Because that’s the only interpretation I can come up with.</p>
<p>But yes, they do say that they meet your need. The general consensus is that the fin aid office is great and will work with you if feel like your need hasn’t been met 100%.</p>
<p>But no, any scholarship they give you does not cover your EFC. The exception to that is if your scholarships cover enough so that the remaining cost is less than your EFC anyway.</p>
<p>COA minus EFC = Wash U’s contribution</p>
<p>Wash U’s Contribution is usually around 7 thousand in loans and work-study. The rest is made up of grants.</p>
<p>I believe WUSTL meets either 100% of need or very close to it. 60% of students receive some sort of financial aid.</p>
<p>Scholarships have nothing to do with EFC. They go toward tuition no matter what your EFC.</p>
<p>Edit: This formula is by no means true for every student. It was true for me and several people I have talked to. Some need-based awards still have a merit-based factor.</p>
<p>For colleges like WashU who have good financial aid that meets need, for a student with a low EFC, there isn’t much difference between merit aid and need aid.</p>
<p>However, many families have a high EFC, but will have difficulty paying it, for a variety of different reasons. So merit aid can make a big difference for those families, as they aren’t eligible for need based aid.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Would you rather cover your need based aid through loans, which you will need to pay back (plus interest), or a scholarship, where you do not have to eventually pay back the money? </p>
<p>Does that answer your question? I also cannot really figure out what you are asking.</p>
<p>I guess sacchi hit the main point for me. I should’ve clarified, sorry. I am not for sure yet but I’m pretty sure my EFC will be low so I just didn’t realize the big difference a merit scholarship would make for me seeing as how WashU meets aid.</p>
<p>But obviously I wasn’t even thinking and of course WashU meets some of the aid with loans so yes I totally DO see the validity of merit scholarships, I guess my question was poorly asked.</p>
<p>Does WashU meet 100% of aid for all students though? Say my EFC is $5,000. That means that WashU will cover COA-$5000 for me all four years? (And if yes, does anyone know the breakdown of what is in loans, grants, workstudy, etc.?)</p>
<p>So basically, ‘need based aid’ is given to all students since (I’m assuming) WashU meets 100% of aid for everyone?</p>
<p>refer to my post 4 above to see the breakdown of WUSTL’s aid.</p>
<p>So I come from a medium size school of about 2200 kids (I guess medium for Illinois) and we have a VERY active social scene, i.e parties,concerts and such. I’ve been hearing conflicting things about WashU’s social life; some saying its deplorable while others say it’s not as bad as people make it out to seem. So I was just wondering what’s it honestly like.</p>
<p>Patsson- blunt answer here:</p>
<p>I’m from New Orleans. In my senior year of high school I’d go out to bourbon at least twice a month, often every week.<br>
I am perfectly happy with the social scene at WashU (except for the crap that St. Louis believes is Mardi Gras. They’re wrong, btw. That ain’t mardi gras at all).</p>
<p>But yeah, if you want to find a party, there will always be one to find. Even during finals (although if you have a final the next day, I’d of course suggest against it). Even outside of frat row too. If you’re into the club scene, a ton of people go out on thursday nights (I personally don’t like clubs, so I can’t speak more on that).</p>
<p>The reason why some people may find it lacking is because either a) they’re lazy or b) there are a handful of people who don’t party, so it seems like the social life is dead.</p>
<p>collegekang - I understand your confusion, it is actually fairly common. I think you got it towards the end. If you don’t get the merit scholarship, most likely more of your FA package will be in loans than it would have been with the merit scholarship. This is obviously a burden to you later. Also, the impact of merit scholarships vary with your financial situation.</p>
<p>Let’s say the COA is $50,000, and your EFC is $25,000. If WUSTL gives you a merit scholarship for $25,000, nothing changes for your family’s contribution, but at least there are no loans involved (presumably).</p>
<p>If your EFC is $5,000, now the FA package is $20,000 instead of $45,000 and hopefully less of that would be in the form of loans. Of course, if your EFC were $50,000, then the merit scholarship means that is $25,000 you simply are not spending and can bank for grad school, med school, law school, a house down payment, or your parents use it for that dream vacation, lol.</p>
<p>Finally, the other big advantage of a merit scholarship is they are good for 4 years as long as you keep up your grades, don’t get arrested, etc. FA packages can change. So even if the FA package your freshman year were entirely in the form of a grant with no loans involved (highly unlikely, of course), that might not be the case after your freshman year. Merit scholarships don’t have that uncertainty.</p>