You are right, you are purely speculating, and in one aspect you are clearly wrong.</p>
<p>As was pointed out above, the common app ED form specifically makes an exception for financial aid shortfalls. This is the standard practice among universities. AU is the exception if they send this letter when ED accepted students decline for this reason. And this is the only thing we are talking about. If a student declines for nearly any other reason (I am assuming AU would not send such a letter if a student were, for example, paralyzed in an accident or in a coma or some other extreme personal tragedy, despite KBJ’s statement to the effect that the letter is sent if anyone declines ever for any reason. I really wouldn’t have expected him to have to enumerate those kinds of exceptions), then I could see a school voicing their displeasure over the breaking of a moral contract, if not a particularly enforceable legal one. No one said otherwise.</p>
<p>
No such picture of the admissions counselors was being painted, and your statement about mocking ED acceptees is just weird, no one said that either that I remember. We said that in the scenario under discussion, they are being made to feel even worse than they undoubtedly already do, but not by mocking but instead by unfairness and insensitivity. In fact I can tell that KJB seems to be a very nice guy and no doubt a fine admissions counselor. Just because I find a school’s admission policy(ies) mean-spirited doesn’t translate into my thinking the admissions counselors are. But I feel pretty confident that the way AU is handling this FA issue with regard to ED applicants is not the way most other schools handles it. Otherwise how do you explain the wording in the common app?</p>
<p>First, you openly describe the letter as “vengeful” - that’s making a lot more assumptions than I did about its intent, because none of us know what this letter actually looks like. </p>
<p>The way the common app words it is that if you are not able to afford the school, you are released from the commitment to attend. For AU to be an exception to this rule, they would have to somehow force people to attend, which clearly they don’t do. I fail to see how sending this letter somehow forces people to attend. In no way does AU violate the spirit of the common app. It’s not punitive. Again, you’re making assumptions that are more baseless than my own.</p>
<p>Your reasoning skills are…well, beyond description. First of all, try to read more carefully. vossron used the word vengeful, not me.</p>
<p>It’s not punitive?? KBJ himself calls it a letter of reprimand. It is sent to a 3rd party, the student’s high school administration, potentially causing embarrassment and repercussions that would be undeserved. I am making no assumptions at all, I am going strictly off of what KBJ says and what the AU web site and forms say. One does not have to know the exact content of the letter to know that a “letter of reprimand” is negative. That’s not an assumption, that’s knowing what words mean. I’ll tell you what, if AU did that to me or my child they would be in court for defamation. Knowing what the common app says, knowing what common practice is, knowing that they give no specific instruction (in light of the common app statement) that one cannot decline without penalty even for FA reasons, knowing that they give no specific instruction that one must or even should get a preliminary read on the FA to be expected, and finally knowing that there is no indication of this penalty in the agreement, I would very much like my chances. My action of turning down their offer for financial reasons would be perfectly reasonable and is decidely the norm, and their lack of adequate and clear statements explaining they do not follow this standard practice leaves them in the wrong.</p>
<p>FYI, the definition of punitive. It decidely is NOT defined as forcing an action.</p>
<p>pu·ni·tive –adjective
serving for, concerned with, or inflicting punishment</p>
<p>We can debate forever how much of a punishment the letter might be, but it is clearly intended to be a punishment. Reprimands are always a punishment, virtually by definition.</p>
<p>rep·ri·mand –noun
a severe reproof or rebuke, esp. a formal one by a person in authority</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but I left out an important point as to your reasoning shortfall</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sending a letter of reprimand surely does not qualify as being released. Being released should mean no negative actions and no penalties result from the ending of the agreement, especially since nothing along those lines were specified in the contract.</p>
<p>I just wanted to put in that I really didn’t mean to start a debate on the practices of the AU Admissions Team.</p>
<p>Personally, I can understand why a school would send a letter of reprimand. A student applies to early decision with the notion that it is a binding contract. Even if a student backs out for financial reasons, they are still backing out of a contract and a simply written letter isn’t that bad of a ‘punishment’.</p>
<p>As much as I would hate to be in the situation, I must admit that I don’t see AU’s Policy as drastic or vengeful.</p>
<p>fallenchemist, I think we disagree on a few definitions here. I doubt that this letter actually DOES anything, therefore I don’t see it as particularly punitive. For example, the letter to the high school probably tells the guidance counselor that they should be more careful about advising students to apply ED, not a judgment call against the student. Of course, again, we don’t know that for sure. But ultimately, the letter is merely words on paper and has no other repercussions, and therefore I don’t see how that is a failure to release someone from the ED agreement (and probably wouldn’t hold up in court as a case of defamation). However everyone is obviously entitled to their own opinion on it, so I respect yours as your own. </p>
<p>Finally, I am almost positive that this is common practice among most schools, but it seems that there’s a (somewhat odd) assumption that the only one that does it is AU. </p>
<p>Either way, I agree with AUGirl that it’s not terribly productive to debate about it. Hopefully KBJ comes back and clarifies things further. AUGirl, best of luck with your decision!</p>
<p>Well, considering that I’m a current undergraduate student who didn’t apply to any schools ED, I don’t know of any. Of course, I didn’t even know my own school’s ED policies until I read this thread yesterday, so it’s a bit of a stretch that I would know other school’s policies. That question would be far better directed to KBJ, who is an admissions professional. That being said, I have a hard time imagining that AU would be the only school to have such a policy, it seems like something that would be pretty common practice, yet rarely comes up because it is not a big deal. That’s all I’m trying to say, so now that it’s said, I’m stepping out of this so as not to beat a dead horse. Hopefully KBJ will come back and clarify things to put your fears to rest.</p>
<p>I think it is a rather big deal, and the evidence we have from the common app application is that the standard is to NOT penalize students that have to back out for financial reasons. Besides, if it isn’t that big a deal, why do it at all? AU must think it is important. AU might not be the only one that does this, but I have never heard of another school that does this and I have been around this game for some time.</p>
<p>With regard to your statement
</p>
<p>I can easily see a scenario occuring after the school gets the letter whereby the student is put in the very uncomfortable situation of having the administration demand he explain why he “misled” them and why he is not doing what he promised. Now he is put in the unenviable position of having to share very personal information regarding their family finances. You might not think that is a big deal, but many families consider their financial situation a very personal matter. In addition, the student depends on these individuals of authority for at least another semester, and their reactions to this “embarrassment” that they might believe is his fault could have repercussions. So yes, in fact it is punitive and can cause harm. You can disagree on definitions all you want. I gave you ones straight out of the dictionary. Therefore for you to disagree you must be making them up.</p>
<p>As far as holding up in court, you clearly know little about this area of law. Here is the first paragraph from the Wiki article on defamation:</p>
<p>
Given their lack of disclosure and their contrarian practice, I could absolutely make a case against AU here.</p>
<p>You know Joshua, you really know virtually no facts, while I have cited what KBJ actually said and what AU says on their web site as well as what is stated by the common app and some other schools. Therefore you really are coming across as an apologist for the school. No school is perfect. I am not saying AU is a bad place. It is a great school where thousands of students receive a fine education and have a wonderful experience. It isn’t clear to me at all why you wouldn’t want to see it get better by discontinuing this practice. Obviously other schools have, otherwise that wording in the common app wouldn’t be the standard. The point of these discussions, for me at least, isn’t to bash a school. It is to discuss issues and, when certain things are found to be lacking, bring those things to light. Through KBJ, I would hope the AU admin would take a fresh look at their policy in this regard.</p>
<p>fallenchemist, I still disagree with a few of your points, but it’s truly not worth arguing about. I’m not anyone’s apologist, just a student. On that note, I’d prefer if you refrained from personal remarks (my handle is iamsirjoshua, not Joshua, and that is not my name), as I didn’t make any sort of personal judgment call against you.</p>
<p>It isn’t a personal remark, it is an accurate observation based on the fact that you are “supposing” practically everything. It is the very definition of an apologist.</p>
<p>OK, today I called every school in the USNWR top 20 that offers ED and asked about their policy. There was only one school in that group where I could not reach an admissions counselor. That’s 11 schools. Every single one said they do release the commitment if it is for financial reasons AND NOT ONE SENDS A LETTER. I specifically asked each and every one if there were ever letters sent, and they all said no. Only one, Emory, said they send a letter if they determine the student was not adequately informed when applying, but not for financial reasons since the FA package is only “an estimate”. One even said “Goodness, no. Who would do that?”. There were a couple of “Absolutely not” and “Of course not” replies.</p>
<p>So you can see this is not the norm. Again, personal financial information is supposed to remain confidential. I am quite sure that when submitting the financial details to the school, American agrees to keep this information confidential. It is probably required by law. By sending this letter, a foreseeable result could be that the student will be asked why. In answering truthfully, the student is then revealing information about their family’s financial situation that they may not want known. It may not be detailed information, but that is not the point. They are not supposed to have to reveal ANY financial information to these high school officials. I admit having all these things falling into place to create this situation is unlikely, but certainly not impossible. The principle remains the same. It is unfair to penalize a student in this manner for being in an unfortunate financial situation.</p>
<p>Back in the 1960s, there were some people who valued the saying, “Don’t trust anyone over 30,” implying that anyone over 30 years old did not have the same interests/values as younger or “average” people. Perhaps the 2010 corollary to the sentiment is, “Don’t trust anyone who has more than 100 CollegeConfidential posts”…implying that those who are constant posters are similarly disconnected from–or disproportionately interested in topics that are of interest to–prospective students today.</p>
<p>Yes, some of us with experience (due to kids having just gone through the process, and knowing something about their respective schools) have time to try to be helpful to the HS kids and parents who know little about the college application process, and are grateful to those with experience who helped us a few years ago.</p>
<p>What I find most entertaining are the HS kids who chance each other. :)</p>
<p>pswilla - I don’t even understand how your post makes any sense. It isn’t of interest to you to have the correct information, rather than pure speculation? After all, iamsirjoshua was just SURE that other schools did what American does. I have demonstrated with a high degree of probability that it is, in fact, not the norm. Now you may not care if American does this or not. Personally I think their policy is wrong, I know an AU admissions person is reading this, and I hope that given all the facts and arguments they will change it. Won’t change my life, sometimes it is worth doing something just because you think it is the right thing. If I didn’t think others should be aware of the facts, I could have PM’d KBJ instead. But that shuts out other opinions, and the chance that someone aware of practices at other schools can add to the discussion and correct me if I am wrong on the facts.</p>
<p>You don’t have to care about this topic at all. That is what your mouse button is for, to move on rather than make fairly useless comments.</p>
<p>BTW, you act like only students should be using this site, and parents are intruders. Parents that are about to spend huge $$ are reading this too, and this situation might be of considerable interest to them. If you want a students-only site, create it. You might make money.</p>
<p>My son really wants to apply to AU early decision. Since finances are a concern and our circumstances are unusual and problematic [both parents lost jobs in bad economy then went through costly divorce last year], I am interpreting your May 2010 answers to mean that ED is not an option.</p>
<p>If that is the case, and he applies RD, will he still be considered for scholarships and financial aid in the form of grants, or will AU’s pot of financial aid be used up by ED applicants?</p>
<p>My son applied RD and was admitted to the honors program and got a good sized merit scholarship in 2009. BTW, he loves the school, says almost everyone in the honors program wouldn’t have gone there without the money but they all love it.</p>
<p>My D had the same experience as katytibbs’ son. I think it may be quite the opposite from what you’re assuming, suddenlysingle–AU knows its ED applicants are already sold on the school and may not feel the need to tempt them with money. And while ED is still an option when finances are an issue (an ED acceptance can be turned down if the aid doesn’t make attendance possible), it’s just not the best strategy (see my earlier post).</p>