Do Colleges Actually Prefer to Admit Wealthy Students?

Applying to College
101

<p>Nice-try:</p>

<p>Actually very few schools outside of HYPSM have the endowment to admit an unlimited number of students on financial aid. All colleges (including HYPSM) have a financial aid budget that they try to stick to at the beginning of each admissions cycle. When that budget starts running out, they will definitely favor full freight students as opposed to those with heavy financial needs. </p>

<p>Most endowment funds are restricted funds meaning they have to be allocated for specific purposes such as funding a new department, a new building, a research program as specified by the donor. Most large contributions are effectively restricted. The smaller contributions from alumni are typically those that make into the unrestricted pools. </p>

<p>I know for fact that several Ivy League schools are currently scrambling to match the aid program announced by Harvard in the fall and subsequently emulated by Yale, Stanford, Princeton and MIT. When you ponder the fact that the annual endowment increase at Harvard is greater than the TOTAL endowment at Brown for instance, you realize that few colleges can truly compete with the big boys. A billion dollar endowment may sound like a big number on paper, but funding a new state of the art science building for instance, which may be required to attract top faculty and research dollars can easily cost several hundred million dollars. Most colleges will want to fund any increase in operating expenses such as financial aid from the interest accrued by the endowment not from the principal. </p>

<p>Much of the colleges endowments are also tied up in long term investments that cannot be easily be liquidated. With big positions in stocks and real estate, many endowments are currently taking a beating. Many have invested in heavily leveraged hedge funds some of which have collapsed. The major growth in endowments from the past few years has come to an abrupt halt for many colleges and the road ahead looks very rough.</p>

102

<p>
[quote]
most colleges these days are need blind

[/quote]

or so they say.</p>

103

<p>I haven't read every post on here but I get the jist of the discussion. I think low-income families and wealthy families have the best opportunities to attend private colleges. Although this is how I feel, the number of low-income students that attend private colleges is lower than it should be. This is due to the fact that many don't realize they CAN afford to go to a private school. Most see the price tag and immediately rule the schools out because they don't understand or have the knowledge of their options.</p>

<p>I think most schools, if not all, are "need-blind" as everyone has said before. (if they aren't it should be against the law haha) Which means the application is reviewed and the student is either accepted or rejected. From that point the students who have been accepted have their information sent to the financial aid office or whatever. People are accepted based on performance and ability first. Then the finances are taken care of after. Since the school has already accepted you they will try their best to accommodate your financial needs. Schools with larger endowments obviously fair better than those with smaller endowments. Someone of low-income could, and usually will, pay less at a private college. Their packages would consists of something like this;
university scholarship- 23,000
fed. pell grant- 4,000
fed. sup. educ. opp. grant- 4,000
state grant- 10,000
fed. work study- 2,000</p>

<p>That totals up to 43,000 roughly. Which covers pretty much everything and usually = a free ride. The key to getting a financial aid package like this is making sure the school has a large endowment. That's for low-income families as we know.</p>

<p>For middle class families they usually only get 1/4, 1/2, or 1/3 of their schooling paid for. Which leaves them with a ton of loans. This is why the middle class has it the worst. They make too much to qualify for a good financial aid package but not enough for the high price of private colleges.</p>

<p>And, as we all know, the wealthy just cut a check and that's the end of that story.</p>

<p>The numbers I put up for the financial aid package for the low income family was from an actual FAP.</p>

<p>I think we all know that most private schools have their abundance of wealthy students. Despite the stereotypes, anyone's attitude is a reflection of their upbringing. So if wealthy kids are snobby it's their parents faults and a reflection of their upbringing. There are good and bad people of all socioeconomic levels.</p>

<p>Another thing to look at is how much the school gives out for merit scholarships and need scholarships. That is a whole other topic and it really shows what kinds of students the school is really looking for.</p>

104

<p>I disagree with the idea that lower income means disadvantaged. I have read countless posts of kids that have much lower scores and are also a low income or an urm and have gotten into a school when another with much better scores, gpa have not. So you can say to me that the first kid is not necessarily poor but you are implying that kids with the money to get sat prep or to pay for ap exams are better off in money and chances. I just do not believe that. Maybe 20 years ago when I did this and the better off kids "knew" about sat prep classes or such but now everyone has access to these things. There are free sat prep classes at the library, books to be checked out and free tutoring at many schools. If getting into a school like Cornell or UVA or UNC or Yale or ... with 600,600,600 it is not fair but not to the kids you are talking about on this thread. Maybe, just maybe, it is unfair to the middle class that can't be the break from colleges but can't find the money either for the classes or the tuition. One young lady two years ago posted on this site that she made a 1530 on the 2400 SAT and got into Vanderbilt. She was also a jamaican and American Indian. Now show me any case like this and then try to convince me that anyone is at a disadvantage.</p>

105

<p>"Does anyone here think Bush got into Yale on his own merits?"</p>

<p>Of course not. They just wanted to please his influential daddy.</p>

<p>Anybody could see that the kid would never amount to anything!</p>

106

<p>2007mom -- because what you see, cases like that, are still rare exceptions when compared to the vast majority of underpriviliged or URMs who don't go to Vanderbilt or college at all. But rich kids whose parents place priority on going to Harvard (this is often not the case with low income kids) and get in are still a dime a dozen. Sure, those who get rejected are a dime a dozen too, but you have to look at overall numbers. </p>

<p>And books at libraries are often outdated, can't be checked out, and free courses are almost never as good as personalized expensive ones. Try to convince me otherwise on that one.</p>

107

<p>I felt the need to insert my .02</p>

<p>My opinions are biased, being first-generation college student, first generation immigrant, low-income and come from an unstable, unemployed single mother home (I have attended 4 different high schools in two different countries and 3 different states). </p>

<p>Now, my merits do not even compare to those of the most affluent classes. I never received an A before 9th grade and my mother never read to me when i was young. For this reason i have had to play "academic catch-up" to all my middle class peers for the last 3 years. To say that i have been disadvantage is a truism.</p>

<p>Now, do you seriously consider that i should be looked at in the same light as students who receive tutoring only from grad students, students who have been told that an education is a vital element to any path of life since they were 5, students who by the time they are 13 were reading The Republic, students who knew the name Harvard by age 3 and students whose parents are college professors?</p>

<p>I don't believe so...</p>

<p>However, don't believe that RACE alone should be an admissions factor. There are many middle class blacks who have received the same opportunities as middle class whites. Socioeconomic status should become the new form of diversity: if you have a student body whose 40% of students consider themselves "students of color" and yet all make above 100k, then how diverse is the student body in actuality? How will this humble the affluent classes who have had everything handed to them? (Is this not the ultimate objective of diversity?).</p>

<p>However, race, together with many other indicators, show the different barriers students have had to overcome. </p>

<p>I don't necessarily believe that tests like SAT and ACT are inherently biased towards the affluent socioeconomic classes (WASP, rich), it is simply a matter of fact that, overall, they are the ones that academically prepare their kids the best. I have no doubt in my mind that if admissions were based on academic merits the affluent socioeconomic classes would be the ones exclusively admitted-with the exception of a few outliers. </p>

<p>I read that someone here labeled the system semi-communist. I don't disagree. But, above all political correctness, i am a pragmatic: If these kids were not in school, where do do conjure they would be? Lower crime rates justify the political biased system.</p>

<p>I'd love to hear some criticism-make it meaningful, please :-D</p>

108

<p>I actually thought lower income was a plus
not an advantage
but simply b/c if you score low on the SATs or something and you come from a low income family, they know its b/c u had less resources</p>

<p>I think rich ppl have an advantage when they are SUPER rich like able to spare a couple million. Harvard is a rich school, they don't need your 100,000...
I don't see how else being rich would be an advantage</p>

109

<p>As a low income student myself, I felt really stressful when I read the stats of what some CCers posted. I always thought I would have somewhat of a chance at schools like Harvard simply because I have made all A's and decent SAT, but when I saw those people who have been doing research since middle school and other great things that reveal their passion I felt like I have no chance at all.</p>

<p>My parents did not even finish elementary school, and I managed almost everything on my own since 6th grade when I moved to the U.S. We moved four times in 4 years just to make a living. On my application, I show no passion at all, maybe one or two leaderships which I was elected merely because of my luck. I was never taught what to pursue for (except money). I think it is really a disadvantage when you have nothing in the world, but shelter and enough money to make ends meet. Thanks to the free public school system I was able to attend high school.</p>

<p>I don't think they should expect those students to be involved in a stem cell research, or have tons of sports and community service records when they can barely make their ends meet. In a biased way, I hope the admission is simply number based. I did everything I could to excel at school, and not until this year did I know how important your 'passion" and volunteer works are. I was never provided the opportunity to have a passion as a low income. I told my parents I wanted to play sport, you know what they said? " No, we need you to work at restaurant. You ain't going nowhere."</p>

110

<p>My son got into University of Michigan, but cannot afford even with the scholsrship. He has to go to state university</p>

111

<p>Why should colleges lower their standards for someone who is less qualified? I know it sounds harsh, but if a wealthier student can get good grades, play the harps accord, and have 750+ SAT scores then why shouldnt they be admitted over a poor, less qualified person who plays basketball and gets a mixture of A’s and B’s. It sounds harsh but the poorer person in that case is less qualified and has a narrower skill set.</p>

112

<p>What if the definition of “qualified” is “able to make best use of the resources in the student’s environment”? Anyway, there is considerable evidence (see above in this thread) that many colleges prefer today students who are LESS qualified, by your definition, if they are richer.</p>

113

<p>This is why I believe the whole claiming “need-blind” admission is Bologna! It is very easy to claim “need-blind” admission since the applicants and the rest of the world that they lie to aren’t in the room when they are choosing whom to select, reject or waitlist.</p>

114

<p>

</p>

<p>The Common App does not ask for income, but it does ask if you will be applying for Financial Aid. It also asks for parents’ job titles and places of employment. The college can also deduce typical household income levels from the HS identity.</p>

115

<p>This thread previously had its last post on 05/09…</p>