My daughter was waitlisted at Wesleyan in the ED round. We were asking for a lot of financial aid. I have heard that schools like Bates and Wesleyan are looking for students who can pay full fare.
I read this recently in an article entitled, “The Three Biggest Lies in College Admission”
"Today, more and more college admission officers want – and need – to know whether the kid can pay full-freight. And if there is a choice between two virtually-identical applicants – one who needs financial aid and one who doesn’t – the fat envelope is going to go to the kid who can pay full tuition. Some very good schools – such as Wesleyan – are coming forward and admitting that they can’t afford to be 100% need-blind. “More than a handful of schools are not being honest however,” states Muska. “So kudos to them. Families need this transparency from colleges.”
I have also heard that an “unhooked” student has a much stronger chance of getting off a waitlist or being accepted is if they can pay full fare. Can anyone comment on this?
Some are need-blind. Some are not. Some meet full-need. Some do not.
You definitely can assume that schools that are not need-blind . . . are not need-blind.
It’s possible that some of the schools that say they are need-blind actually aren’t. Most likely the schools that are rich (have huge per capita endowments) are.
Google “per capita endowment ranking”
My personal opinion is that colleges know the demographics of high schools whether or not they are need blind or not. At the end of the day, colleges are big business and they need to make sure that they don’t accept a class of 100% full financial need based freshman.
I’m most cases, being full pay is a positive for the colleges. For example, full pay close friend of D’s was given spring admit At BU with less than stellar grades and test scores. I’m pretty sure her full pay status got her an acceptance.
An article titled “3 lies” gives a mighty big hint of its slant. And no hint of any accuracy. Anyone can cut and paste bits of detail in innumerable ways, depending what “perspective” they’re selling. (Little better than clickbait.)
Wes dropped Need Blind in 2012, so we’ve had 7 years to get used to that idea. At the time, they released plenty of info explaining why and how their version of NB works. I’d bet a good Google search would bring up enough background. (Different colleges apply it differently, at different stages, whatever. Diversity, including socioeconomic, remains very important to top colleges. But all this background can be found elsewhere.)
Why would a school pretend to be need blind if it isn’t? There is no advantage. If a school doesn’t want to be need blind (like Wes) then they just tell the applicants that they do consider need.
Many schools that are need blind for most applicants are need award for internationals or from the wait list. They are open about that too.
Frankly, this has always been the case at most schools that cover 100% of need. Only a few schools both cover 100% and have need blind admissions, and those schools that do pretty much shout it from the rooftops.
The policy followed by schools like Wesleyan and Bates can be described as partially need aware (or you could say partially need blind). The class is primarily composed need blind, but when the FA is expected to be close to running out it switches to need aware. That means if the applicant is in, for instance, the top 80% of the admitted class whether they can pay or not won’t make a difference. It’s only in that last 20% (or whatever the cutoff is for the particular school) where full pay students or those with minimal need have an advantage.
How is Wesleyan open about it now, after the change has been made? It’s not on their admission or FA webpages, unless I totally missed it (possibility). Only a google search gets you to a FAQ on the president’s webpage, and it’s not really obvious what the policy is, just that need blind is no longer being practiced.
Who cares if a school is need blind? NYU is need blind but gives poor financial aid. It’s irrelevant (or should be) to deciding to apply if a school is need-aware or need-blind. If you like a school, it’s a good match, and the NPC suggests it’s affordable, apply. Meeting full need is more significant if you can land it.
If a school does not specifically state that it’s need blind you have to assume it’s at least partially need aware. If you do a search for “need blind” on Wesleyan’s website a dozen links pop up, including the aforementioned President’s FAQ page, student newspaper stories from when they switched the policy, extensive links to the school’s 2012 need blind policy focus group, the school’s strategic plan and updates, and an accreditation report which states,
The 2014 update to the strategic plan indicates they were meeting this 90% mark.
I don’t blame the OP for not knowing Wesleyan is need aware, at least for 10% of the class. As @vonlost asks, why does it matter? Wesleyan offers excellent financial aid, including a high ratio of grants to loans.
@vonlost: “Who cares if a school is need blind? NYU is need blind but gives poor financial aid.”
It matters as much as admit rates and hooks matter. People look at admit rates and hooks because they are trying to ascertain their odds of getting in. Need-blindness matters for the same reason.
BTW, meeting full-need matters for a similar reason. NYU provides poor fin aid to many but provides good fin aid to some.