<p>I am from Brunei (i consider myself from an underrepresented region).. would not applying ED really hurt my chances big time? thanks</p>
<p>Why not ED?</p>
<p>because it's binding.. and for some personal reasons..</p>
<p>You should apply ED to a school if it's your first choice and you're sure you want to go there. If you're worried about the fact that it's binding, or if there are other personal reasons making you nervous, then ED probably isn't the right choice for you.</p>
<p>One important thing to keep in mind is financial aid. If you'll need aid, it's better to wait and apply RD so you can compare offers. This is especially important in your case because aid policies for international students vary widely.</p>
<p>I think that, financially speaking, applying ED to need-blind institutions like Williams won't make much difference except the fact that it "won't let you compare offers".</p>
<p>Well, "need-blind" just means that applicants who seek financial aid aren't at a disadvantage in admissions. It does not mean that all applicants' need is met once admitted, and even schools that do promise to meet 100% of need (like Williams) have different ways of assessing demonstrated need. So even if you only apply to need-blind colleges that meet 100% of need, you can still get different aid packages from each one.</p>
<p>(Let's see how many times I can use the word "need" in three sentences...!)</p>
<p>
It does not mean that all applicants' need is met once admitted,
Yeah but all "internationally" need-blind schools meet 100% of an accepted students' demonstrated need, so it practically means full financial assistance.</p>
<p>It is true that their way of assessing and meeting the need differs; the difference is mainly reflected in the percentage of loans or campus jobs that the school gives as part of the financial aid package. By the way, it ranges from 3%(Princeton) to 19%(Middlebury) with an average of 13% and if getting like 6% less in loans is of great importance to you, then try NOT ED.</p>
<p>The differences between schools' aid packages are more than just the balance of loans to grants. The overall size can also vary quite a bit, because even the schools that meet 100% of need can have drastically different methods of assessing that need. For example, Williams expects my family to pay $6,000/yr more than either Amherst and Midd would have, because they use a different formula for EFC.</p>
<p>I think it makes some sense.
So Midd expects you to pay $6k less and offers a package of 19% in loans/jobs while Williams reckons a larger contribution and offers a package of 14% loans/jobs. You're paying those money anyhow.</p>
<p>No, I was talking overall EFC. The jobs/loans were pretty much the same in both packages. Midd just offered $6K more in grants than Williams did (actually more than that cause I think Midd costs a bit more to start with). It didn't stop me from coming to Williams anyway, and I'm glad I'm here, but I just wanted to point out that aid offers <em>can</em> be significantly different.</p>
<p>another thing to keep in mind as far as ED and financial aid concerns go is that many schools with large endowments that promise to meet 100% of demonstrated need will let you out of the binding decision if you tell them you can't afford it. Make sure you read the fine print for different schools, but I know this is the case at Williams.</p>