Everything we think we know, may be wrong

<p>The Atlantic Monthly's annual college issue (the November issue) is now out to subscribers. There is one article in particular that everyone should read - it's called "The Best Class Money Should Buy." The article is about how 3/4 of colleges are now using sophisticated enrollment management tools and strategies that determine everything from who gets targeted for marketing materials, to which students get accepted, to how financial aid and merit money is doled out. </p>

<p>"The 'gatekeeper' model of admissions has been dead for some time," asserts the article. In it's place: managing enrollment to keep revenues high and build ratings. While we all knew the latter, it's the first one that I think is most important to understand: managing enrollment to keep revenues high.</p>

<p>The well-researched article notes that at many schools, it's not enough to be a high scoring student. You have to be a high-scoring student who can afford to pay. One example from the article: A school can decide to give a $20,000 full tuition need-based financial aid grant to a low income student. Or, the school can break that down into 4 $5,000 merit scholarships for "welathier students who would probably go elsewhere without the discounts but will pay the outstanding tuition if they can be lured to your school." Net result for the school: an extra $240,000 in revenues over the next four years, which "can be used to buy more rich students - or gifted students who will improve the school's profile and thus its desirability and revenue."</p>

<p>Low income kids may be accepted, but many schools practice "admit deny" - offer admission but give them a fraction of what they would need to attend, even after the maximum possible contribution from their families.
"Admit deny is when you give someone a financial aid package that is so rotten that you hope they get the message: don't come," says one enrollment management consultant in the article. "Unfortunately, they don't always get the message." </p>

<p>Some other interesting highlights: most colleges and universities now know exactly how much your family income is likely to be before you even apply. The College Board and ACT, as well as other consulting firms, are selling lists of students that combine demographic data and other information with test scores so that schools know with some amount of accuracy which "prospects" are not only likely to succeed if they're admitted (remember grad. rates are a chunk of the USNews rankings) but likely to be able to pay all or at least a good chunk of the cost of attending. </p>

<p>"The ACT and the College Board don't just sell hundreds of thousands of student profiles to schools; they also offer software and consulting services that can be sued to set crude wealth and test-score cutoffs, to target or elimminate students before they apply...[Says one consultant in the article] "It's a blunt object, a pre-sorting mechanism and it's a great labor-saving device. What a convenience! I can look and say you're an 1150, you're going to be all right - instead of having to pore over this thing and wring my hands and justify taking a chance becasue this kid's got an average of X but I'm seeing things that make the case as an individual. That takes work. The real opportunity costs are not the billions we're thowing out in marketing. It's the opportunity cost of looking past literally millions of kids who would do a great job."</p>

<p>In short, merit money isn't just being used to buy higher test scores, it's also being used to make sure the school can manage it's budget. At many schools, the latter is the primary goal.</p>

<p>One other fascinating tidbit: merit money and good financial aid packages (i.e., those with more grants than loans) are LEAST likely to go to students that the school has identified as MOST likely to attend. In other words, demonstrated interest may be a double-edged sword. It may get you in, but if you need money showing too much demonstrated interest may hinder your chances of getting it. (One thing that caught my eye in particular: the suggestion that the College Board and ACT actually tell schools whether you listed them first or farther down the list when you order your test scores sent - according to the article, that's used by many schools as one measure of being likely to attend.)</p>

<p>And, this quote is for Mini: "That students are rejected on the basis of income is one of the most closely held secrets in admissions; enrollment managers say the practice is far more prevalent than most schools let on. 'Good luck getting any institution to tell you exactly how the handle the ability to pay as a driver in their admit decision,' said one enrollment manager who requiested anonymity. 'What they will say is "We're need blind." That's bull*****. They would never tell you exactly how they do it, but they do it all the time."</p>

<p>Finally, don't think that enrollment management is only being used by private schools. Public institutions are using it as well. The article quotes enrollment managers from the U of Wisconsin, Ohio State, and the University of Alabama. Here's one quote from the article, from the enrollment manager at the University of Alabama:</p>

<p>"At the AACRAO [the professional organization for enrollment managers] confersnce two members of the University of Alabama's enrollment management team deomonstrated how, in their campaign for out-of-state prospects, the overlaid income data from the U.S. Census on maps of high schools in Texas to target wealthy students. (Alabama's data mining strategies are inspired by the success of the credit-card company Capital One) After the presentation I sat down with Roger Thompson (Alabama's enrollment management director) and asked him how he approached recruiting at rich private secondary schools.</p>

<p>"'Oh, if you're in enrollment management, those schools are fantastic!," he said. "There are some kids there that we'll buy. The National Merit kids, they're going to get a full ride. But if you're dsitting at a private high school in Florida, where they pay twenty grand to go, we don't even bring financial-aid material. What's the point? You don't even need to talk about cost."</p>

<p>Finally, schools acknowledged as having ambitious and aggressive enrollemnt mangaement strategies: USC, Carnegie Mellon, Tulane, WUSTL, NYU, Syracuse, Boston College, and Boston University. But, note, not all of them are buying numbers, many are buying revenue streams.</p>

<p>Perhaps this explains why USC gave my son a relatively small scholarship (small compared to USC's costs), which we did not apply for and is not advertised.</p>

<p>Carolyn, thanks for such a great post. I keep hoping Mini is wrong on this stuff, but am finally realizing that she's dead-on . . . :(</p>

<p>Now how true is this for Ivies and other need blind schools?</p>

<p>thanks carolyn.</p>

<p>BANANAS,
We are a financial need family to the max. (Including fee waivers for apps.) My D got into every Ivy applied to & the only (top) Public applied to, and with full rides everywhere.</p>

<p>She is not URM, not recruited athlete, btw.</p>

<p>
[quote]
merit money and good financial aid packages (i.e., those with more grants than loans) are LEAST likely to go to students that the school has identified as MOST likely to attend

[/quote]
Thanks for posting this summary. The above comment also mirrors my experience with my son, who was shafted for financial aid at his first choice college, despite the fact that he was a very strong candidate (top scores & grades)... but was given very generous aid from a college that I had discouraged him from getting enthused about because I was sure we couldn't afford it. So at college 2, the app was sent late, the application fee sent even later, and the interview blown off... and he was getting ready to attend UC Berkeley when the admit letter and blow-your-socks off financial aid offer came, requiring very quick arrangements to fly to the opposite coast to see a campus he had never visited. </p>

<p>At this point, I just want my daughter to be prepared for disappointment on the financial aid front. The comment about "admit deny" is important - if a financial aid award comes in low by comparison to other colleges, it is useful for the kid to understand the message being sent. In my son's situation, I don't think that was the case for his first choice college that had "run out" of financial aid funds and was going to put him on a finaid "wait list" -- I think they believed erroneously that there was more money to be shaken out of the family somewhere, because the finaid department had been particularly and unusually challenging in terms of seeking additional information from me. But the point is, they figured he'd come anyway - send the dollars to someone else.</p>

<p>How does this article explain the fact that a private LAC gave my D a merit scholarship when she applied binding ED? Her class rank is a little below their 25th percentile at an average h.s. which was unknown to the college (she was in top 2% of her class and 26% of ranked students at her college were in top 1% of their class), her SATs are 50 points above their average (with Math slightly below their average), and she is not a URM or athlete. We did not apply for financial aid. She had a great interview, recommendations, has done independent academic work, has good ECs and varied personal interests, and apparently is the type of student they hoped to have on their campus. The fact that she was awarded a four year merit scholarship (a little less than 20% of total cost - room, board, tuition) does not jive with the discussion in the Atlantic Monthly article. The college states that these scholarships are given only to the top 10-15% of admitted students, so they don't give them to everyone, obviously. Can anyone explain this to me?</p>

<p>I am very confused by this article. How does the college assess the financial situation during the admission process when the parents have not submitted financial information? I can imagine that this might be possible for a small number of applicants - for example those attending expensive private high schools.</p>

<p>Carnegie Mellon...it figures! And explains a lot.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I am very confused by this article. How does the college assess the financial situation during the admission process when the parents have not submitted financial information? I can imagine that this might be possible for a small number of applicants - for example those attending expensive private high schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Street addresses yield 9-digit zip codes for which marketing companies cheerfully sell extensive demographic analyses, for starters.</p>

<p>Then too, a family that does not submit financial information is presumably not applying for need-based aid, so that fact tells the college something about the family's financial situation in and of itself.</p>

<p>edad - for starters, they use zip codes; the socioeconomic info is out there for the picking.</p>

<p>
[quote]
We are a financial need family to the max. (Including fee waivers for apps.) My D got into every Ivy applied to & the only (top) Public applied to, and with full rides everywhere.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Like everything else in college admissions, there are a handful of schools (HYPSM + AWS and a couple of others) that can afford to play by different rules. Not to say that these schools don't manage their enrollment because they do. But, they have the financial strength (as measured by per student endowment over a very long period of time) to offer the "extras" that attract the high SAT scores and long line of willing full-price customers as a matter of course. Thus, they can play the game a little differently and often use their enrollment management techniques to achieve other institutional goals (such as diversity). Of course, it doesn't hurt that these extras perpetuate prestige that in turn tends to attract even more high SAT and full-fare customers down the road.</p>

<p>
[quote]
We are a financial need family to the max. (Including fee waivers for apps.) My D got into every Ivy applied to & the only (top) Public applied to, and with full rides everywhere

[/quote]

Ivy's and other colleges are looking for diversity - and very low income is diversity. Your D might have actually received an admission boost by being considered "low-income". (I am not trying to imply that she would not have gotten in if she was a higher income student. I'm sure she was/is a terrific candidate for admission at any school - but just that colleges WANT economic diversity, and that this can be a "hook" in a way.)</p>

<p>MotherofTwo - some colleges will give very generous aid for ED applicants precisely to encourage students to apply ED - it really depends on the college. Read the article (or Carolyn's excellent summation) closely -- the colleges are not withholding aid dollars, they are leveraging them. It is more cost effective to give out 3 $10K merit awards to top students than a $30K need based award to a financially needy student -- and ED by definition weeds out the vast bulk of students who must rely on need-based financial aid. So by entering the ED pool, your daughter was telegraphing the fact that she was exactly the type of student the college wants to spend its money to attract.</p>

<p>You might have been pleasantly suprised at a merit award - but you might have a very different view if your daughter had waited out the process and ended up with an array of competing awards from other colleges. I mean, I thought the $15K financial aid package from the first college to admit my son was nice, too... until I saw the $24K package from the college he ended up attending. </p>

<p>The thing is, the ED candidates can't say no - so the college can reward them with very modest awards. Those kids and their parents are going to let others know -- word will get out -- and the following year there will be even more ED applicants. Exactly what the college wants.</p>

<p>Banannas, The article made a point of saying that many of the Ivy schools don't need to be quite as aggressive with enrollment management strategies --- although keep in mind that even the Ivy schools DO use some form of enrollment management.</p>

<p>Edad, try to get the full article. It explains in painful detail how schools get - and manage - this information. Yes, some of it involves using the same demographic modelling used for years by sophisticated marketing firms, but there's more to it as well. And, information is also used after decisions are sent out to decide who gets what form of financial aid and merit money. (MotherofTwo, this is likely why your daughter was awarded money even though she applied ED). </p>

<p>Here's another quote from the article:</p>

<p>"To decide how to parcel out financial aid, the enrollemnt manager puts admitted students onto a grid with need on one axis and academic ability on the other. This is called "segmenting the class" or "table analysis." The school then adjusts financial aid for students by group, with the goal of increasing the 'yield rate' for the most desirable prospects - typically academic stars and those willing to pay most or all of the tuition ("full pays"). A school with a revenue problem puts its money toward rich students; a school that is going after prestige pushes it toward students with high SAT scores. Where the school might be paying more than is necessary to attract a candidate...aid is cut accordingly...More advanced enrollment managers and all the major consulting companies, use a statistical method called logistical regression to determine how each group will respond to a different award, based on how students have behaved in the past."</p>

<p>anxious mom & interesteddad, You should address your replies to the poster who inquired, not to me. (I think most of us parents already know the drill in this respect.) And the poster inquired specifically about whether the same enrollment strategies discussed in the Atlantic would apply to Ivies. Whether an applicant is hooked or not hooked by being "of need," the (implied)question was, Does it hurt admissions chances at Ivies to have & assert financial need? No, it does not. Now, it might also be a hook, but it is definitely not a sufficient hook without major academic excellence on a par with other admitted students.</p>

<p>Carolyn's most recent post illustrates this reality. That second paragraph about "segmenting" [based on the applicant's value to the school] is what some of us have suspected & discussed on CC for quite some time: that there is rarely such a thing as "need alone." Somehow merit figures in, & qualitatively as well as quantitatively. How much so depends on the institutional needs in part & in whole. This reality has also been our experience with private high schools, who similarly segment & have hierarchies of worth/desirability.</p>

<p>FWIW, both my D and I have met students at her Ivy within a wide range of "ability to pay." We've met plenty of middle-income, non-URM, non-athlete students who did not have a "reverse" financial advantage. Be careful about assuming too much when it comes to finances as a hook, including at an Ivy.</p>

<p>I think that family income is asked on the ACT & SAT registration (optional)</p>

<p>I may not have been clear in my reply to Bannana. I didn't mean to say that Ivy and other high selective schools DONT use enrollment management techniques that take need into account when they're building a class --- just that some of these schools can afford to be a little less aggressive and obvious about it. Yes, yes, I know they say they are "need blind" but it is clear by using gap measures in financial aid packages, some of them are still managing who enrolls by the way they structure their financial aid.</p>

<p>I'd suggest reading another article in the same issue, "Does Meritocracy work? which discusses how even Ivy's like Harvard, Yale, and highly competitive schools like Swarthmore, Amherst, etc. still need to manage who ultimately attends. This doesn't mean that lower income students shouldn't still take a shot at these schools, but they should be aware up front that enrollment managers - even at the top schools - are at work behind the scenes.</p>

<p>I don't have time to do a full write up on that article, but here are a few relevant quotes from the meritocracy article - I think the message of both articles is that anyone who needs substantial financial aid needs to cast a very wide net, and not grow too attached to any particular school UNTIL the financial aid package is in hand.:</p>

<p>"It's true that more low-income students enroll in college now than in the 1970s - but they are less likely to graduate than their wealthier peers...Through boom and recession, war and peace, the proportion of the poorest Americans obtaining college degrees by age twenty-four has remained around six percent...This is not something that most colleges like to discuss - particularly elite schools, which have long taken pride in their supposed diversity...</p>

<p>...In the past several years schools like Harvard, Princeton and Brown have shifted financial aid dollars from loans to grants, helping to ensure a free ride for the neediest students once they get in. Such gestures make for good public relations, and they do help a few students - but they don't make it easier for low-income students to gain admission...</p>

<p>...The benefits and limitations of moving from loans to grants can be observed in the "AccessUVA" program at the U of Virginia...In 2004 UVA announced it would eliminate need-based loans and would instead offer grants exclusively [for families falling below the poverty threshold]...It's too early to judge the program's success, but the first years results are instructive: the number of low-income freshmen increased by nearly half, or to SIXTY-SIX (my emphasis) students out of a class of about 3,100..."</p>

<p>Other details from the second article:</p>

<p>Over the 1990's, the average private school grant to students from teh top income quartile grew from $1,920 to $3,510, the average grant to students from the lowest income quartile grew from $2,890 to $3,460...</p>

<p>In 1980, 41 percent of all financial aid dollars were in the form of loans, today 59% are..."The burdens associated with loans may be part of the reason why only 41 percent of low-income students who enter four yera colleges graduate within five years, compared with 66 percent of high-income students....</p>