decline an early decision acceptance offer?

<p>

</p>

<p>We are getting far, far more phone calls from rolling schools trying to “lock down” my son’s acceptances including calls from state schools. The colleges and unis are very nervous this year compared to 3 years ago. They know darn well the the financial boat has tipped, it’s not “turtle” yet but definitely tipping. Locking down and knowing who is actually attending so the financials can be figured out is going to be very important to schools this year I suspect. My son applied RD to one school and hit apply over a week after the EA date and they shifted him into the EA pool. Crazy stuff going on. It’s also not surprising that people are scrutinizing closely finanical agreements and documents.</p>

<p>notcompletely momofthreeboys. regarding post #698 </p>

<p>We found out the OP is awaiting to see if they get into MIT after they already got accepted ED to Penn and also got a full ride at state school. There are a few offers now on the table and the OP has not declined the state offer or the Penn offer and is awaiting the MIT offer if there is one. This changes a lot as has been discussed in this thread. BTW it is stated very clearly that you don’t enter in an ED app if the school is not your first choice school. Sounds to me like the OP’s first choice school is MIT.</p>

<p>Whether some like it or not there is a split on this thread between some that think this is not unethical and some that do. Again, I think this makes for a good case study on ethics.</p>

<p>I have read the entire thread. I think it is a mistake to apply ED if financial issues are involved unless you are a Questbridge student. All schools and college counselor advise students that RD is the best option for students requiring comprehensive financial packages. The ED is for people who are 100% (not 95 not 99%) committed to attending. It is not meant to be conditional. Thus, I still say that this is a matter of one’s integrity</p>

<p>And yet again I agree with CRD. If in fact Penn has a crack allowing students to have a short window of opportunity to discuss the finances and bail if necessary Penn is, in fact, assembling a strong class. They have a less fearful ED group, they get first crack at a group of kids who are highly likely to attend, they choose the students expecting some small fall off and then assemble the remainder of the class from the strongest deferred and strongest RD. Strongest students, strongest payers doesn’t matter after ED they can craft the class they need institutionally. There is no downside to Penn here in the least and less “downside” to parents who may have been fearful of ED. I agree with CRD that it’s quite a brilliant strategy for Penn. We parents might think we’re brilliant and have dissected what might have been their intent all along.</p>

<p>I read about the idea that one is able to back out of an ED agreement for financial reasons, but I took that to mean CHANGES in one’s income after the time of application (loss of job, etc.). I thought this was obvious. Otherwise ED would be no different than RD. I think it’s wishful thinking that Penn added one sentence because they want FA needy kids to apply. Right. Also…my S applied to our state flagship in August also. If one is willing to go to one’s state school (even on a full ride) then one should not apply ED to an ivy. They seem rather mutually exclusive to me. In other words–either money is a major consideration or it’s not.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>So you think its o.k. for the ED schools to deliberately lie to financially needy students to trap them into attending a school that is beyond their financial means?</p>

<p>mummom, what part about applying for financial aid don’t you understand? </p>

<p>Students who need aid apply to schools based on the hope or expectation that the school will meet their need and make attendance possible. In many cases, after the aid is calculator, it becomes less expensive to attend the Ivy than the state public school… but the applicant has no way of knowing what the financial aid will be until they are admitted and the college provides the information.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Ah so you believe ED is for the very poor and the very rich. Righto. I’m sure the vast majority of kids are committed when they apply. I’m sure the vast majority hope beyond belief that it can be swung financially by their parents. The cost doesn’t become transparent until after the acceptance. The world of college financing is not so black and white unfortunately. The colleges also want a diverse class and diversity encompasses more than just race. To obtain that there are trade-offs. Believe me most parents wish it were as simple as you present. As a parent doing the right thing or being moral might mean having to say to a college that you cannot afford to make the purchase.</p>

<p>Why are some of you stricter about ED than the schools themselves?</p>

<p>

Penn itself mentions and allows for the condition of financial feasibility as a reason for release.</p>

<p>

This is absurd. Penn explicitly permits ED students to apply to rolling admission and EA schools.</p>

<p>calmom,</p>

<p>The schools that offer ED would have absolutely no reason to lie to the financially needy students. Obviously we have all agreed that schools are not going to take someone to court over this. And, I think we have all agreed that if the applicant truly can’t, “isn’t possible” to attend than they just back out of the agreement. Can you accept that if the applicant is possible to attend than they should???</p>

<p>Yes, Calmom, the applicant has no way of knowing…which is why they do not apply ED unless they are ready to fork over whatever amount the school says they must when they agreed to attend the school should they be accepted (somehow the focus is not on that particular sentence) unless their financial situation has changed radically since they submitted the app.</p>

<p>I think the problem for many posters is the suggestion that release from an ED agreement is as simple as writing a letter declining acceptance. I don’t believe Penn is the only one to release for FA reasons. Many stipulate that a change in circumstances (such as health) or FA that precludes the student from attending are reasons that a student may be released from an ED agreement. I also agree that the state merit offer may be of lesser concern, but I would urge the OP to work with Penn and her guidance counselor to bring a satisfactory resolution for all involved. </p>

<p>This stuff wreaks havoc in counseling offices. Even at our public HS, the overworked guidance counselors take these ED commitments seriously. I personally know another story of an ED student several years ago who also received notice of a top merit award from an OOS top public school around the same time of his ED acceptance, and he had to turn down the OOS Merit award to honor the terms of his ED obligation. I’m sure it pained his parents to have a peek at what might have been (though their S is happy at his first choice).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Trapping needy students in attending a school? Isn’t that a bit hyperbolic? Given the economic condition in this decade, should we really qualify the attempt by schools such as Penn to offer 100% of demonstrated needs, no loans, and blind admissions as an … entrapment? Is Penn trapping the many students it accepts under programs such as Questbridge? </p>

<p>Are we REALLY debating the ability of the OP to decline the financial aid offer submitted by Penn with the acceptance? Are we REALLY debating that the OP should have the right to decline that offer and be able to accept the full ride at her state school in Beaver State? </p>

<p>The answer to that is a RESOUNDING no! What we are debating here is if the student has the ability to “negotiate” or “discuss” a better package. I believe that the consensus is that she SHOULD have that right and should NOT be obligated to withdraw the other applications (such as the one to MIT … or more) while a determination is made. </p>

<p>The real issue should be about what constitutes a legitimate and reasonable period of time to submit additional data to the ED school. However, the notion that this reasonable period of time should include sufficient time to obtain comparative “packages” and ask the ED school to meet such “offers” is what remains offensive to many. </p>

<p>The only question that is not trivial is how long is … reasonable enough for the OP to HAVE TO accept or decline Penn’s offer. We know that she CAN be released by Penn to attend her state school … but is that what this “incredible loophole” is all about?</p>

<p>Talk to UPenn. If they don’t ease the financial burden, then don’t go. End of story. You can’t go to a school you can’t afford, though if I were you, I would rather take out a loan instead of going to the state school. A UPenn degree will take you much further than a state degree, usually.</p>

<p>3ks, I want to know which school would not let a student out of ED to accept a full ride.</p>

<p>Which one?</p>

<p>CRD, your posts have so much common sense. Great to read.</p>

<p>Another thing I find interesting about this thread is that there seems to be a bitterness towards colleges. It’s as if some here resent that colleges need to take paying customers as well as non-paying customers. Need I remind everyone that whether wer like it or not college is a business. From what I can tell these colleges do everything possible to help many financially challenged students attend. They post document after document showing the amounts of aid they give out(in fact they brag about it) and yet I feel as if there are people here that begrudge the school it’s right to also attract paying students. These schools would not be great in terms of endowment and their bottom line if they did not do this eh???</p>

<p>“What we are debating here is if the student has the ability to “negotiate” or “discuss” a better package.”</p>

<p>There is no debate. </p>

<p>The answer is yes. </p>

<p>Xiggi, there are a lot of posts on this thread.</p>

<p>“However, the notion that this reasonable period of time should include sufficient time to obtain comparative “packages” and ask the ED school to meet such “offers” is what remains offensive to many.”</p>

<p>I didn’t read one post on this. Looks like a strawman argument to me.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s NOT what the colleges expect.</p>

<p>Here’s a hypothetical – forget the financial aid. You are able to pay full pay at a school where tuition is $35K annually, overall costs around $55K. You apply ED. Your kid gets in. Along with the admission letter, the college sends you a notice that their tuition for the following year has gone up to $75K – so your overall costs will now be $95K instead of $55K. I take it you think that you should be bound by the agreement, even though the overall cost of attendance is 75% more than what you thought it would be.</p>

<p>oh gads, no…the story I was relating was the choice of the parents to honor their ED obligation. The parent works at the HS and shared his experience as a warning regarding the challenges of applying ED. In other words…they understood the stakes and made their choice.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Dstark, you must be kidding! Again, do you want to debate if the OP has the right to decline her ED acceptance to Penn to attend her state school? Or do you want to debate about how long she should be able to drag and delay “negotiations” until she gets the financial aid from MIT … if she gets in.</p>