<p>Yes, he was. He’s a junior now. We don’t have loans now, but the loan portion as a frosh was $1500. I’ve been through this with another child at a similar school. The supported Stafford loans follow a formula that caps at $5500 for seniors. I don’t think they will exceed this as the loan portion.</p>
<p>If I recall the formula was: $1500, $2500, $3500, $5500, as the student progresses.</p>
<p>Williams offers Stafford and Perkins loans, but I don’t think the combination would exceed those amounts.</p>
<p>Even though it is not loan free, the loans were a VERY minimal portion of the award and the grants a VERY substantial part of it.</p>
<p>They still guarantee to meet full need so I don’t think there will be gapping.</p>
<p>13k loans sounds about right for the elites pre-no-loans. If you don’t take them, it’s equivalent to voluntarily swallowing a gap. But 13k is also not an insignificant amount of money for the middle-class… and if the family can just barely meet EFC but no more, for a student with a choice between Williams and Amherst or Swarthmore or Pomona, it’s a fiscally prudent choice to choose the 13k-cheaper option.</p>
<p>FWIW, Swarthmore is committed to no-loans only for the next three years, through Board donations. But they are also committed to “grandfathering” if policies change, so freshmen three years from now are safe assuming no other financial catastrophe occurs.</p>
<p>I have to say 13K is a pretty big swing. Were they upfront about the loans increasing in step fashion mythmom? I’m always learning new things- I would have thought the loan amount offered would stay relatively the same. My daughter is in a no-loan class and as generous as her grant is, it’s still tough coming up with the EFC. Kid #2 is a high school junior, she doesn’t want loans. I can see Williams losing some very strong middle class applicants over this.</p>
<p>Can you two hear yourself? They are going to lose some applicants because their FA package contains some minimal amount of loans? (Over 4 years 13K is minimal.) They meet full need and it is a fabulous school. Maybe your kid should be willing to pay for part of it.</p>
<p>Hey, I already have a kid at Williams who works two jobs over the summer to help towards our EFC. My point is that we already need the money she is contributing as is, kid #2 sees that struggle. I’m very grateful for the financial aid we receive, and I consider myself very fortunate to have the kind of kids who can get into these generous schools.</p>
<p>It wouldn’t have made a difference to me because Williams was his number one choice. It wouldn’t have made a difference if my daughter had gotten a loan free package because Barnard was her number one choice.</p>
<p>People with incomes under a certain amount will still be loan free at Williams. There are always folks who get their full need met through grants.</p>
<p>In addition, all textbooks are free for everyone on financial aid.</p>
<p>I would look at all factors because I concluded that there really will be a $13K difference, but this seems like a small amount across a $200,000.00 education.</p>
<p>But every family must decide what is best for them by themselves.</p>
<p>Pea - Just because a school meets full need doesn’t mean that it’s easy for a family to come up with their EFC. Personally–as a 2010 freshman who will be attending a no-loans school with a very generous package–I am immensely grateful that my college sees fit to allow me to take on subsidized loans to help pay my family’s portion of the costs.</p>
<p>The issue is not that Williams FA packages will contain minimal loans, but that comparable peers will offer significantly better packages without loans. And 13k out of 200k is misleading; e.g. if the family’s EFC is 20k, that’s really 13k on top of 80k to be ultimately paid.</p>
<p>For those with Williams or any other school as a clear top choice, it doesn’t much matter. But I think Williams is setting itself up to lose cross-admit battles for desirable middle-income students who have no clear preference–I know people who received early writes from both Williams and Swarthmore, for instance–in which case, why not pick the significantly cheaper school?</p>
<p>^^^ I also wonder if too much isn’t made of the “no loan” thing. So far, my son has received FA packages from three LACs - two from “with loan” schools, and one from a “no loan” school. His FA offers from the “with loan” schools are WAY more generous than from the “no loan” school. It isn’t even close.</p>
<p>^Interesting. I applied ED, so I never had the chance to compare FA packages across comparable elite LACs; however, we did use the Williams online estimator and came out with a very slightly (insignificantly) higher EFC than that of my package from a peer. FWIW.</p>
<p>^I agree with your second sentence and disagree with the first. Numerous factors will determine the ultimate bottom line; however, one can still GENERALIZE about trends.</p>
<p>It is not possible to tell a middle-class student that Williams will be more expensive than A/S/P, because that is patently false–no FA applicant can say that for sure about any college. It is possible to tell the same middle-class student a year later, after being admitted to both schools and comparing financial aid packages, that a package from Williams will be less generous than a package from A/W/S with equivalent EFCs–the exact difference, and the significance of that difference, is dependent on individual situation. Maybe four months of free room and board makes up for a significant portion of +/-13k; only that particular family can say. And of course, if the student has a strong preference for a particular school, families will often be willing to sacrifice for it.</p>
<p>A huge percentage of students at these schools continue on to grad school and for most it’s almost a given that this will give them huge amounts of student loans. Graduating undergrad with loans is very unattractive to students who are going straight back to another school, which means they aren’t working to pay down their debt and are getting even more student loan debt from grad school. </p>
<p>I would go to a school that doesn’t have me graduating with debt over one that does, especially if it’s a choice between similar schools. Not all families are able to sacrifice much, save try to take out more loans - which is difficult in today’s economy.</p>
<p>you need to be very careful in estimating the final cost of attending a college. For example compare williams, which ranks 6th for best value among private colleges and the University of Virginia, which ranks first for best value among the publics. The average level of indebtedness of a Williams graduate is ~($9,500) while the average for Virginia graduates is ~$19,000. A review of the data reveals that Williams has one of the most generous FA programs in the country. I doubt that dropping their no loan policy will serious impact the average level of indebtedness.</p>
<p>It’s disingenuous to compare Williams to UVA. I was discussing Williams in comparison to Swarthmore, Amherst, and Pomona, which are its peers both academically and financially. I would also be wary of comparing average indebtedness levels, since that includes private loans taken out by the student to cover EFC and thus varies with the socioeconomic status of the student body. Dropping no-loans is unlikely to lead to a significant rise in average indebtedness; more likely, more of the middle-class students who would take on those extra loans will simply choose to go elsewhere.</p>
<p>I agree w/Keilexandra.
I have a daughter who is a freshman at a great LAC but one that does not offer loan free financial aid. We pay alot for her to go,she has a Perkins loan at $5k/yr and next year will take out a Stafford subsidized loan. The subsidized Stafford loans btw are
•Freshman: $3,500 per year
•Sophomore: $4,500 per year
•Junior: $5,500 per year
•Senior and 5th year: $5,500 per year She earns $5k a summer working and uses this $ to help pay for her room at board (and she is a coop student so that is about $3k less than if she were in a dorm). We are pretty tapped out. ANd she will still owe $35k once she graduates. Daughter 2 goes in one year and you bet we are looking at loan free schools. From looking at loan free financial aid websites, it looks to me they pretty much replace the loan w/a grant. I don’t see how you can say dropping no loans is unlikely to lead to a siginificant rise in average indebtedness??? Looks pretty straightforward to me!</p>
<p>radannie – One point people have been trying to make was that financial aid packages vary quite a bit so a financial aid package from one school that includes loans might still be better than the package from another school that with no loans. And you do realize that next year with two kids in school at the same time your EFC will be the same but will be split between the two of them, half for one and half for the other. This might help you get more need based assistance.</p>
<p>I apologize for my earlier rather insensitive post. I wasn’t considering that kids were already working and taking out loans just to meet the family’s EFC. I can see how loans on top of that would get to be a bit much.</p>
<p>Can some one give me an example of a school that offers no loans where their fa package is worse than a school w/loans as part of a package?<br>
I thought the whole point of the no loan policy was to make it easier on the college graduate’s indebtedness?
That is ok Pea!</p>
This is a good question and gets to heart to of the matter. In general, with-loan schools that offer merit aid, even small amounts of merit aid, may be better than no-loan schools. The reason is that scholarship money usually reduces loan and work-study first. A $10,000 scholarship can eliminate the loan and work-study altogether. The same applies for outside scholarships or grant money offered by some states.</p>
<p>OK, so not everyone can benefit from scholarships. There are also limited-loan schools–Williams will be one next year–that may be better than a no-loan school. The University of Richmond is a good example. UR limits loan and work-study to $4000/yr. However, they use FAFSA, not CSS/Profile, to determine need and do not include home equity as an asset. Depending upon ones situation, a no-loan school using Profile and including a healthy portion of home equity as an asset can end up being more expensive.</p>
<p>D has applied to 6 no-loan schools, including Williams, and Richmond. I should be able to provide some actual comparisons in a couple weeks.</p>
<p>Thanks standrews…would be interested in seeing a list of schools w/limited-loan policies and how limited those are.
I am sure I could go to school websites and check it out. Interesting that Williams has an example of financial aid packages on their website here [Williams</a> College | Admission | Financial Aid](<a href=“http://www.williams.edu/admission/finaid_samples.php]Williams”>http://www.williams.edu/admission/finaid_samples.php), we would fall close to the purple family income. I don’t see loans here. Is this example from the no loan days of Williams FA?</p>
<p>Radannie, they haven’t updated their examples or the calculator for the with-loan future. Of note regarding the purple family, don’t miss that there is an older sibling in college. Double the family contribution portion for an estimate on what Williams would expect a family to pay for one child. I have to say, our financial aid award is more generous than the examples cited though, not sure why.</p>
<p>Pea, thank you for the apology. It’s a sensitive issue.</p>