<p>"Colleges are using their so-called generous financial aid packages to sort out applicants. The colleges first showcase their eleemosynary aid packages to ward off the anxiety of the applicants who need them. When the deadline to admissions closes, the colleges seem to revert their philanthropic policies to 'filtering' policies. Some colleges such as Stanford, UPenn, Northwestern, et cetra send out an email to the applicants before the admissions result phrasing 'many qualified applicants would not be provided admission to the college as due to our limited resources'. And every one knows what follows next: 'We are very sorry to state that we cannot provide you admission to the Class of ...................' Financial Aid matters. If you want to get enhance your chances of getting in, ask for no aid or if necessary ask for 20% or less of your actual need." </p>
<p>This is part of an email I got from one of my high school seniors cautioning me to think before I leap. What do colleges have to say about this, Stanford in particular, since he mentioned Stanford.</p>
<p>That’s patently wrong - at Stanford, admissions and financial aid are distinct and don’t communicate. Admissions officers have no idea whether you applied for financial aid or whether you have need. That’s why Stanford is “need-blind”: it is blind to your need status in making its admissions decisions.</p>
<p>Also, Stanford doesn’t have “limited resources” when it comes to financial aid; it has ~$1.8 billion endowment dedicated solely to financial aid, and a large portion of additional aid (25%) comes from resources like the president’s fund and the Stanford Fund, which gets donations from alumni. The Stanford Challenge, the largest fundraising campaign in collegiate history, has raised over $5 billion and will finish this year with an increased goal for financial aid (over $200 million). Last year the financial aid budget was over $160 million. There would be no reason for Stanford to limit who it accepts because of financial aid concerns. And in fact 80% of the student body is on some form of aid.</p>
<p>Where your friend got his facts is a mystery, but he shouldn’t be spreading such nonsense without doing some research.</p>
<p>On second thought, he may have just misinterpreted the message that Stanford sends out, which is to ‘prepare’ students for rejection by offering reasons like “Stanford has only so many spots and we can’t accept everyone,” etc. because it does have limited resources. By “resources” they don’t mean financial aid, but rather every resource that makes a university: faculty, classes, dorm rooms, etc. Those can only support a certain number of students at the quality they are now. Of course, Stanford could take on more students and have a larger student body, but that would mean upperclassmen wouldn’t be guaranteed housing, classes would be larger, a lower proportion would receive research grants or study abroad, etc. This was discussed a lot when the president suggested that Stanford increase the student body by ~800 students, to which many responded that Stanford’s various resources would need to increase to support these additional students at the quality we have now. (This was set aside after the recession hit.)</p>
<p>I think my confusion is being warded off (60%). But my friend isn’t alone to think like that as I have seen some students on CC thread do comment that it’s due to their financial aid, they got rejected. So isn’t that a common trend? Or is it something else they don’t want to tell?</p>
<p>Yeah, I don’t know where your friend that idea from. Like phanta said, Stanford is need-blind, along with most other prestigious schools, meaning your need doesn’t affect your admissions. I know some schools (Stanford included maybe? i’m not sure…) are need-aware for internationals, maybe that’s where your friend got the info?</p>
<p>Acknowledging a common misconception doesn’t make that misconception true. Just proves that it’s common. ;)</p>
<p>IMO the students who are saying that are attempting to rationalize why they got rejected. You see this over and over and over again - students asserting that it had to do with their race, or that they were from an overrepresented state, or that their high school had too many applicants, or that their interviewer was biased, or whatever. You even see parents doing this: one parent recently posted a diatribe about Stanford, complaining that her daughter was rejected in the RD round, instead of being waitlisted, after being deferred from SCEA (something along the lines of “Stanford is disingenuous because they didn’t tell us up front that applying SCEA means that if you’re deferred, you have no chance of being waitlisted in RD, only rejected or accepted”). Those who are “stung” by admissions often have to find some way to explain away their rejection, chalking it up to factors they couldn’t control rather than face the uncomfortable reality that they themselves just weren’t qualified enough. It’s brutal but true.</p>
<p>edit: exactly what Francaisalamatt said (in a less wordy way). :)</p>
<p>OP, if you don’t believe me, consider that Stanford actually loves for students to be on financial aid. It goes to great lengths to increase the proportion of students who are on need-based aid (currently 50-60%), and even pays another organization $50,000 a year to recruit needy students from all over the US.</p>
<p>The financial aid office is completely separate from undergraduate admissions. In fact, from the FAQ on Stanford’s site (emphasis mine):</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the more I think of the message that your friend is talking about, the more I think he’s just misinterpreting it: they send out those messages to prepare the 30,000+ applicants for rejection. They know that it’s nerve-wracking, waiting for the decisions to come out, but it’s a way of saying “we really would love to accept all of you but there’s just no way that we can; Stanford doesn’t have the resources to educate all you great applicants, so please don’t be sad if you don’t get in. We heart you but we just don’t have the resources for all of you.”</p>
<p>Here’s a similar message that the admissions office sent out this year. Along with explaining when admissions results would be announced, they added some ‘comforting words’:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you see the tone of such messages? It’s not so much that they’re retracting their ‘philanthropic’ statements, but rather trying to lessen the blow soon to come to tens of thousands of students.</p>
<p>So question: did this senior you know get in? I think I know the answer. Who other than a student bitter over rejection would ignore overwhelming evidence contrary to his belief, come up with some conspiracy theory based on a single, simple wording in an admissions email, and then send out an email ‘cautioning’ students from experiencing the same sting?</p>
<p>Yeah, may be you are right: Stanford does not sort it’s students by FinAid. Perhaps he was too disappointed by Stanford’s decision. Or may be not as he is an international (now leaving for an ivy). He always said that Stanford was his prime choice and that most probably made him advise us in such a tone.</p>
<p>Hope no such thing happens when I apply this fall. :)</p>