<p>Interesting the points about targeting HYPS even if probably not interested, just to get financial aid pre-reads.</p>
<p>We did find that some non-Ivy but great schools do give merit aid, and due to finances we may be going that route.</p>
@5amriser my son has had a pre-read for Y&P and we also used S’s FA calculator and S was much more expensive. Did S match the financial package of HYP?
Sure says a lot about the Ivies not giving athletic scholarships when they adjust the ‘need based award’ to meet that of another school, doesn’t it? Why not just give up the farce and award athletic scholarships?
It’s my understanding Ivies only adjust the FA award to match other Ivies. Usually non HYP coming up to meet the amount of aid promised at HYP. So in that scenario it isn’t an athletic scholarship, right? I don’t think HYP will increase award to meet S which from the example above may work out to be more expensive. My D is off to HYP this fall and unfortunately our final aid package fell well below the calculator’s estimate.
Cornell and Dartmouth are on record as stating they will match FA offers for students that are admitted to other Ivies, it’s not just athletes that are eligible.
For an athlete or not, money granted to a student just because some other school has decided it wants the student more is not need based, but merit or athletic. If Dartmouth decides a student needs $30k to attend based on a review of the student’s income, taxes, assets, etc., I have to assume that decision was fair and justified based on what this student really needs and what is being offered to other students with the same income and assets. But then Harvard says this student is worth $40k. How is Dartmouth’s original judgment suddenly faulty? The extra $10k is not due to need because Dartmouth has already determined what the need is. Now suddenly this student ‘needs’ more, yet another student with the same financial stats ‘needs’ less? Further, if Harvard doesn’t want the student, his need is still $30k, not $40k,because he has no competing offer?
It’s a business decision and the schools can do whatever they want, but it seems a little disingenuous to pretend it is all ‘need based’ and not a merit or athletic based award dangled in front of a student that the school really wants, and if it is ‘athletically motivated’ then the Ivies should have to follow the same athletic caps that other D1 schools have to follow.
So, using the same schools in the example posted above - how does Dartmouth go about competing for enrollment of the students it wants to come to Dartmouth. If you’re a kid that qualifies for between $30-40K in aid, there’s a pretty good chance the extra $10k per year will be a determing factor in your school choice. What if you’re a kid who hates the thought of an urban environment and much prefers a more rural setting. Are you suggesting that Dartmouth shouldn’t have the opportunity to land a prospective student that prefers their school, just because Harvard is net cheaper?
Maybe a kid much prefers the athletic program at Cornell (or a particular coach) than he/she does at Princeton. Shouldn’t Cornell have the chance to land that kid? If the kid qualifies for that much aid, whether its 30 or 40k, I would suggest that kid is going to Princeton. Cornell will lose that battle more often than not, because an extra $40k over 4 years is a pretty big nut for most families to crack. I think Cornell should have the opportunity to compete for that kid on equal financial footing if they so choose.
Nope, Dartmouth can attract students any way it wants to, including offering more money. I just don’t see that as financial need money. They don’t up the offer because the student is more needy, they want the student because of his academic record (should be called merit money) or because of his athletic ability (should be called athletic scholarship). Sure the student wants more money, who doesn’t, but has the need changed? And it has to be a school that Dartmouth thinks is better. If the student is offered an additional $10k at Emory or Tulane, Dartmouth doesn’t care and stands by its original ‘need’ determination.
If the school admits two students with identical financial need, and suddenly one is more attractive to Dartmouth because he also was admitted to Yale with more need $$, how can Dartmouth call the new offer to the second student entirely need based? The determined need was the same for both students just a month ago, nothing changed except Dartmouth wanting the second student more. When UMass does this, or even USC does this, it is called a merit or athletic or alumni award. Want has changed, need has not.
Thanks Rose, S won’t match FA to HYP’s. Is it correct? My son is recruited athlete for Y&P and already had done FA Pre-read. About S, we couldn’t get offered athletic scholarship and has to apply FA if he wants to go S. We haven’t done pre-read yet but I just went through the Net price calculator and the amount was much higher than YP. So I thought if S would match up, it would give my son another choice. I just wanted to get advice from someone who knows better before asking the coach or FA office directly.
@twoinanddone - So it’s just pure semantics then. You state you don’t care how Dartmouth attracts students or spends its money, you’d just prefer they attached a different term to the practice. I’m a baseball fan - each year in the MLB draft there are a handful of early picks that a few teams get called the “competitive balance picks.” Perhaps we could call it “competitive balance grants” and that would it make more palatable.
Just having a little fun here - I can’t understand why this is a source of annoyance. It’s basic human nature in the competitive landscape - the more people that want someone, the more you pay. If I’m trying to hire someone for my business, if I’m the person’s only opportunity, I offer one salary. If three other companies (think HYP) want the person, I’m willing to pay more to secure the hire. The fact that three other organizations want the person is suggestive that they are generally more desirable than the person with only one offer.
Semantics, yes, but isn’t the ‘honor of it’ important? The Ivies say they don’t give merit or athletic scholarships, but clearly they do ‘pay’ more for those athletes and geniuses they want, and it’s not based on what they’ve already determined is his need but on what some other school with different criteria has determined is his need. But only if a higher rank Ivy wants them! If a public school wants them, you are willing to let them go because you do have your standards. You could have identical twins, both admitted to Dartmouth with award $X, but one is also an athlete and gets admitted to Harvard to play tennis and the award is $X+Y, so now his match at Dartmouth is $X+Y too. How can this be anything but extra money to play a sport?
In your hiring situation, it would be the same but only if the employee you really want is going to a competitor ranked higher than you. If you own the Chipotle, you are willing to pay your prospect more if he’s got an offer from Qdoba or Moe’s, but not if he’s only got an offer from McDonalds. You figure he’ll be willing to work for you for less if his only other option is McDonalds, but dammit, you aren’t going to lose him to a direct competitor, even if your original offer was fair. In fact, you’d expect the employee to borrow money to work for you if it meant his only other choice was McD’s because you’ve determined his need and you’ve offered it.
I just want them to call it what it is, an award based on something other than need.
You make a coherent point and I don’t think anything you’ve suggested is incorrect, I just don’t see what ill re-naming the practice solves, I guess other than maybe some measure of transparency. I think they’ve been fairly transparent by openly stating they engage in the practice. In my view, that’s sufficient. I can understand your position that does not agree.
So is Brown. Not sure about Columbia or Penn, although both will match for athletes. I would imagine matching for athletes but not “regular” students would violate the anti trust decree from the 1990s which started this whole process, but don’t know for sure.
it is not an athletic scholarship because it is available to every potential student, albeit maybe less well publicized for non athletes. You have a point when you call it a “merit” award, because matching is only available as a practical matter to normal students admitted to more than one Ivy and athletes being recruited by more than one Ivy, but at the end of the day it is not a benefit based solely on athletic ability. That said, there are several things which make the Ivy process different from a scholarship model. The ability to quit and retain your financial award alone would make it virtually impossible to maintain NCAA scholarship roster caps in a lot of sports.
NCAA D1 athletic scholarships are contingent upon participation in athletics, while Ivy scholarships are not. I do not find that distinction farcical.
(Perhaps I am misreading your last question/comment, and you are advocating that Ivy scholarships granted to students who make a roster should be revocable if they leave the roster)
The NCAA scholarships can be kept by the athlete for the year they are awarded even if they never play a down, swim a lap, or swing a stick, and now that 4 year scholarships are ‘back’ in the power conferences there are some who will be able to keep them if they quit after 2 years; the Ivy league (and Div 3) are different in that aspect since once the student is ‘in’ the athletic hook has been played and the student gets to stay and keep the ‘need based’ money. Of course the athlete who just used the hook to get into any D1 school still gets to stay too, just doesn’t get to keep the athletic money past that first year. I know kids who signed NLIs to Georgetown and never played a minute but kept the admission (and the first year scholarship).
I have no dog in this fight, but have the opinion that these Ivory Towers are playing games too. They claim they aren’t giving money for athletic ability and yet clearly are if the aid is not based on need alone. There is an element of merit too, as they are giving more money to some students based not on their assets and income but on how much the school wants to ‘pay’ for their stats, which is no different than a school giving a $2000 bonus for NMF or a science prize -but of course only if some other school wants this athlete or genius. What bothers me the most is that the student is required to go out and get a better offer from Harvard even if the student really doesn’t want to go to Harvard. If the student really wants to go to Brown, is happy with the team, is happy with the coach, he is going to get less for being honest and not applying to Harvard just to get an offer to show to Brown.
I do get that this is a very small group of student and the schools aren’t going to change the practice because I disagree with it. I just don’t think it is honest to say they do not give athletic or merit scholarships, that everything is based on need and the needs test is the same for everyone when it isn’t.
When you say you “have no dog in this fight” and then go on to refer to Ivy League institutions as “these Ivory Towers”, and say how you are “bothered” by them, and you don’t think it is “honest” for them to say some things, it belies some credibility.
But that is no reason to avoid the point you are trying to make. I guess what I am missing derives from your statement that:
Each Ivy has its methods and its budget and comes up with a needs-based number. These numbers may differ, based on each school’s method and budget. If a recipient asks for a competitive read, it is typically granted and the award adjusted or not. I believe this applies to everyone. I think you are saying it does not, and that it just applies to athletes or geniuses. Did I get the issue right?
Of course, the need-based financial aid system implemented by the Ivies can result in larger awards than some D1 athletic scholarships. Is that bothersome to anyone? It is not to me.
Applying to Harvard just to get an offer to show to Brown could never happen in real life for the 80+% recruited athletes at Brown who apply ED.
I do not understand how “the student is required to go out and get a better offer from Harvard…” when in fact ED and SCEA rules typically say they are prohibited from doing that.
According to the NCAA, currently an athletic scholarship can be terminated during its term (whether four year or a shorter period) if the athlete 1)becomes ineligible, 2)commits fraud, 3)is guilty of misconduct or 4) quits the team for personal reasons. Granted, things are in flux right now because of the Power 5 autonomy issue, and probably the Northwestern NLRB ruling, but I haven’t seen it reported anywhere but here that a scholarship athlete can quit the team and retain an athletic scholarship. I don’t see how that would work given the current roster and scholarship limits. People think that schools abuse the medical exception now, I can only imagine how much shuffling would go on with rosters if a red shirt sophomore all of a sudden found themselves 4th on the depth chart behind a couple freshman after summer camp.
I agree with this, and think it is a flaw in the system. I do think this has more to do with the anti trust case than any effort by the Ivy schools to “back door” athletic aid though. Not sure how to get around that, other than going to battle with the Department of Justice. Quite frankly, my personal dad goal heading into my son’s recruitment was for him to get enough recruiting interest from H, Y or P to allow him to get a match from another school, because the difference in aid in our circumstance was dramatic. Turned out for him that the school he liked the most also had the best aid, so it wasn’t an issue for us.
‘No dog in the fight’ means my child isn’t playing for an Ivy, so what they give to other player doesn’t matter to me personally or financially.
“Each Ivy has its methods and its budget and comes up with a needs-based number. These numbers may differ, based on each school’s method and budget. If a recipient asks for a competitive read, it is typically granted and the award adjusted or not. I believe this applies to everyone. I think you are saying it does not, and that it just applies to athletes or geniuses. Did I get the issue right?”
The competitive read applies to everyone who has what this school thinks of as a competitive offer, but not to students who are financially similar who don’t have such an offer. If student A gets an offer from Brown and only Brown, that’s the offer. If student B gets and offer from Brown and from Harvard and asks Brown to match Harvard’s offer, isn’t Brown reconsidering the offer because Brown now wants the student even more for some reason (grades or athletic talents) just because Harvard also wanted this student? Student A may be just as smart or as talented as Student B, but suddenly Student B gets more money just because he’s now deemed a ‘catch.’ Nothing has changed on the application for FA for Student B. What was wrong with the original number Brown came up with? Was Brown unfair, if is so isn’t it unfair to Student A to be stuck with the original offer just because he doesn’t also have an offer from Harvard? Brown isn’t treating all applicants the same, isn’t considering the financial need of all students under the same formula, it’s using Formula 1 for students not also accepted to HPY, and Formula 2 for those who are, and formula 2 is not based on need only, but based on competition with HPY.
OhioDad hit my point: " Quite frankly, my personal dad goal heading into my son’s recruitment was for him to get enough recruiting interest from H, Y or P to allow him to get a match from another school, because the difference in aid in our circumstance was dramatic." He recognized that need is not the only factor in the ‘need based awards.’
Maybe the oft-repeated line that “All aid in the Ivies is need based”, should be revised to say, “All aid in the Ivy League is need-based. Upon multiple acceptances, we may, at the student’s request, use the institution’s need-based formula that is most beneficial to the student.”
Fair to the kid with only one acceptance? Probably not in his eyes, but then again no one is forcing him to attend.