<p>My friends who are in selective college admissions at need blind schools tell me that that they absolutely do not use need as a criterion except as an advantageous factor. Michele Hernandez who worked as an adcom and others who have written their “tell all” books have said the same. If anything, adcoms are prejudiced AGAINST those silver spoon kids whose parents can so easily afford the cost of colleges that cost more than what these admissions folks make.</p>
<p>However, the entire system of admissions is slanted towards those who make more. Test scores are directly related to income. Taking rigorous courses also is. The type of activities that make the high marks are often the sort of thing that low income kids are not going to be able to do. Heck, even the idea of applying to these schools is something that low income kids are not going to think about doing, much less building their resumes and practicing for the the SATs, taking the right courses. So, absolutely, there is a built in mechanism.</p>
<p>In every single scholarship program where I have seen the inner workings, the majority of truly low income kids who are the ones whose parent or other adults have really helped the kids even be aware of what is available, the test scores are not there. Not to say there are not exceptions, but overall that pool has the lowest test scores. THis is a constant in every educational study done. </p>
<p>That accepting lower test score kids does not decrease the average for the whole group does not mean that those kids have the test scores. That can easily be done by simply accepting more kids with high test scores. The most selective schools can easily do this. </p>
<p>The so called “Asian” method of getting their kids into the top schools is truly the most effective way to increase ones chances. If your kid gets close to 4000 on the SATs, has taken the most rigorous courses, is at a rigorous school and gotten straight A’s, s/he is certainly going to get into a highly selective school even with few top ECs and even if the GC and teachers don’t have the most glowing recs, which they generally do for such kids. That those kids who have this profile are rarely the lower income kids is a fact.</p>
<p>You cannot tell from the application alone if someone is PELL eligible. Gotta look at the financial aid info. That is a deliberate seeking of information that does not escape notice if done as part of admissions. I believe those schools that say they are need blind do not look at that information except when the time comes that they are told they need to be accepting more PELL eligible kids. They then have to find out who those kids are and which ones they can accept to bring up the number. </p>
<p>As for kids needing aid, about half the kids in most highly selective schools qualify for some financial aid. Even more families take out loans in order to meet what the colleges say they have to pay, and the stats are not available for those taking out private loans or PLUS. The loan burdens reported in any of the services like College Board and USNWR are way low because of this omission. </p>
<p>NYU gets a lot of flak for gapping kids. The reason they do is because they accept on a need blind basis but make no attempt whatsoever to meet the need of most of the kids they accept. Fordham U does the same thing. Columbia will meet full need as they define it. Plenty of full pay kids denied at all three of these schools, and our GCs will tell you that absolutely they see no prejudice against those who have need in applying to those schools. For some schools, even though there is no outward claim one way or the other, it is pretty clear to those in the field, that need can make a difference in admissions. Gettysburg and Dickinson are two schools that fall into that category. Wash U of SL has come right out and said that they are not need blind, as have a number of need aware schools. Still many stay mum on the subject but if you ask admissions directly they will usually tell you that they are mostly need blind but after whatever percent, they are not. I have found admissions officers forthright about this subject.</p>
<p>International students are a whole other story at most schools, and that policy is also made clear. </p>
<p>The process to get a nomination to a military academy, by the way, or even a ROTC scholarship is construed in a way that a kid without an adult to help him/her in the process is at tremendous disadvantage. As someone from a family who did qualify for financial need, and have members who have and are ROTC and military academy material, the pool of those who are PELL eligible is very small. There are a lot of rich kids at WP and Annapolis whose parents could easily have afforded to send them to full cost privates. </p>
<p>But severe economic need is a hook factor in an application for the most selective schools, not something that is ignored. It is one of the few things that will give a kid with slightly lack lustre stats consideration.</p>