<p>Wow. I’m amazed, and saddened, that so many people think it’s acceptable for a student to back down on their clear commitment. D’sMom has it exactly right-- the full ride at a lower ranked school changes nothing. Of course any student accepted at Penn could get a full ride at a lower-ranked school. They know that going in. They know that when they sign the agreement to attend Penn if admitted. Getting a full ride scholarship <em>that you know you could get</em> is not new information.</p>
<p>Deja, I’m sorry to hear you got conned into writing a letter for an applicant who was not sincere in her promises. If she backs out of her commitment, I suggest writing a letter apologizing, and emphasize that you were not a party to the shenanigans. If it were me, I’d feel deeply betrayed that I had acted in good faith while the student had not.</p>
<p>Written by OP on the MIT boards <em>after</em> her UPenn ED acceptance speaking of a visit to MIT as a junior. Sure doesn’t sound like someone in love with UPenn who would love to attend if only she could swing it financially.</p>
<p>BTW, FA papers at MIT are not even due until 2/15, even for EAs.</p>
<p>Excellent point wjb. The ED agreement is an exchange between the two party’s. You the applicant have chosen said school as your number one choice and if we accept you early you remove your app’s and attend our school unless you absolutely can’t attend. You find out early and then do not need to worry about finishing other applications and you don’t have to wait until the spring to find out. You can get on with your senior year and enjoy the second semester knowing that you got into your first choice school. The school gets to know early on that they have just admitted a student that they think is a great fit for the school. Both party’s are receiving something that is supposedly important to them.</p>
<p>Re post 282: Revolting. Admissions officers frequent these boards. I hope both schools figure out who the OP is and rescind her acceptances. Then she’ll be free to attend State U.</p>
<p>dstark, I also have a question, or two:-)
I agree that ED isn’t binding if financial need isn’t met, and in reality colleges won’t take a student to court. I have heard of cases though where a student loses all acceptances when colleges hear about a student reneging for non-financial reasons, or applying to two schools ED.</p>
<p>So my questions. Assuming OP’s financial need was actually met by U Penn, but OP simply doesn’t like the offer, do you think OP has a justified reason for declining U Penn’s offer? Do you think receiving a full-ride by Penn State means U Penn didn’t meet OP’s financial need?
Is your definition of binding only if a college takes you to court? What about the ramification of losing all acceptances if an applicant does something shady, during the ED process?</p>
<p>“Deja, I’m sorry to hear you got conned into writing a letter for an applicant who was not sincere in her promises. If she backs out of her commitment, I suggest writing a letter apologizing, and emphasize that you were not a party to the shenanigans. If it were me, I’d feel deeply betrayed that I had acted in good faith while the student had not.”</p>
<p>I agree. I also suggest sending a copy of the letter to the student involved.</p>
<p>wjb, I give straight answers. Of course there is a commitment with ED. And a student can refuse ED for financial reasons. We can argue what those financial reasons are.</p>
<p>I do believe that people who do wrong eventually pay the price. It may take time and it may seem like they get away with doing the wrong thing but eventially they do pay. </p>
<p>In this case, I believe that the kid will end up at the state U because Penn will recind their offer and MIT will not even give this kid a second look after what was pulled. I am really hoping Penn tells this kid that she is free to look elsewhere so the greedy kid and the parents are kicking themselves for a long time.</p>
<p>“So my questions. Assuming OP’s financial need was actually met by U Penn, but OP simply doesn’t like the offer, do you think OP has a justified reason for declining U Penn’s offer? Do you think receiving a full-ride by Penn State means U Penn didn’t meet OP’s financial need?”</p>
<p>What is the definition of financial need? The school’s definition? </p>
<p>d’s mom and ihs: Unfortunately, I think that many students who post on these boards that “I want out of ED because the financial aid makes it impossible for me to attend” are really saying “I want out of ED to attend a more desirable school.” The lack of integrity and sense of entitlement are stunning.</p>
<p>Why do you think OP is a fake? I glanced at other posts, and not sure what makes you state it isn’t real. She posted on Penn’s admitted ED threads, and some threads dealing with MIT…so, what is “fake”?</p>
<p>I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve always heard that a minor’s signature on a contract is not binding, and I’ve always understood that there is a good reason for it: they are too young and immature to be held to a signed contract, too inexperienced and too easily misled.</p>
<p>This often applies to ED applicants, who are not really very far along in the college process when they decide to go ED. They’re aware that ED will help their chances, and maybe moreso, just want the whole excruciating process to end as soon as possible. They make the kind of decision kids make.</p>
<p>My kids, both responsible and smart (one went to Stanford, the other Hampshire) knew a lot more about the whole application process, and about what various colleges had to offer to them, when they made their decisions in April than they did the previous October. Neither got very serious about making a college choice until late in their junior year of high school, so they were only a few months along in their thinking about making a choice when faced with the option of applying ED.</p>
<p>Colleges like the various forms of ED because it helps them juice their yield. Guidance counselors in high schools do too; There’s a lot of firepower involved in the system In my opinion it takes advantage of the poor 17 year olds in the crosshairs of these powerful institutions</p>