<p>George</a> Washington University Misrepresented Its Admission Policy : The Two-Way : NPR</p>
<p>I saw that article. So wrong to claim to be need blind and then not be. Sets students up who otherwise may not have even applied.</p>
<p>There’s not a school in the country that is “need-blind” - the only question is how they make use of the information. At my “need-blind” alma mater, they actually count the “social-ecs” as they admit them (they don’t want too many, or too few.)</p>
<p>I think it might be a distinction without a difference.</p>
<p>As each school interprets need differently, a school could claim to be need blind and to meet full need–but then define need in a parsimonious fashion.</p>
<p>And to admit a student that will not be able to pay is really no more than an admit/deny. it doesn’t do the student or the school any good.</p>
<p>Also–there are a lot of schools that claim to meet need with lots of loans…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Open admission community colleges are trivially need-blind at their admissions office. So are colleges that admit by strictly by a formula on grades, rank, and/or test scores.</p>
<p>Of course, such colleges may not meet full (or any) need, which can result in “financial rejection” (getting admitted, but not being able to afford to attend).</p>
<p>Every community college counts - carefully - the number of students they admit who will qualify for Pell grants - it is a major part of their budget. They need those Pell Grant students in order to survive.</p>
<p>Just the opposite of a GW that needs to find a way to cap them. (Same with most of the Ivies, etc., unless they can expand the number by accepting low-income athletes.)</p>
<p>There is quite a bit of difference between wanting to know how many Pell grant students come, versus being non-need-blind in admissions. Open admissions implies being everything-blind at the admissions office.</p>
<p>Some times they have to count to make sure they get enough. I remember being on a scholarship committee where need was a compenent but not necessary for the award. None of our top choices were needy, and we used a point system with heavier points assessed for need than any other single criterion. We had go back and change the selection to a more holistic style, to get at least half needy winners, because it would have been politically incorrect not to do so. </p>
<p>GW is full of bull with their explanations on not being clear that they are not need blind in admissions and deserves to be “slapped” for this. The admissions officers at some other schools have done the same and I’ve jumped on a few of them for this. It chokes in their throats to say this, because they would all love to go the process on need blind basis.</p>
<p>The only reason this is important is because GW lied and yes, they should be “slapped.” Potential students weren’t harmed in any way since you can’t attend a college you can’t afford. Being put on a waitlist because your family can’t afford the college or being rejected because it’s clear that your family can’t afford the college is really one of those no harm no foul situations.</p>
<p>Tufts says they are need-blind for about 95% of their applicants. I think they accept kids until the financial guys run out of money and then become need aware. I imagine there’s some juggling if there are needy kids in the last 5% that they like much better than some in the first 95%, but who knows!</p>
<p>GW has been making a lot of -mistakes- recently, stoked to be graduating soon.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Spoken like someone of wealth. :)</p>
<p>Perhaps if they refunded the application fee, including the costs for transcripts and test scores. A marginal candidate is wasting their time and money to apply to a need-aware school if they need financial aid. And for someone who needs financial aid, $100+ in app fees can be a weeks worth of family meals.</p>
<p>Carleton was open about being need-aware. I think it is the honorable thing to do.</p>
<p>I wonder how many other schools claim to be “need blind” but are actually “need aware” or “need sensitive”. Much like the schools that get nailed for misreporting SAT scores of admitted students as enrolled students, the cynical side of me thinks it is much more common than we think.</p>
<p>^^ I would guess most colleges are aware. Only a few of the wealthiest colleges in the country can afford to give financial aid to anyone who needs it and are both need blind and meets need. Need blind (but not necessarily meets need) , is what most public universities, community colleges etc. fall into - they accept who they want to accept and families decide whether or not they can afford. </p>
<p>Most colleges probably have a budget for the year and they spend it as wisely as they can so are “need aware”…meaning they meet the need for the kids they really, really want the rest are either gapped, or turned down for admission. The kindest thing would be to simply be need aware, manage your budget, gap kids and let families make the decision how much they are willing to pay or not pay. </p>
<p>And no, I’m not so fabulously wealthy that it doesn’t matter…but really what “good” comes of admitting a kid when it’s clear the family can’t afford for that kid to attend?</p>
<p>Some students will not apply to certain need aware schools. One has to carefully use the waivers for getting test scores, PROFILE and app fees. So you pick very carefully as to which schools are more likely to accept you and give you the aid you need. A need aware school is not a good bet, if your stats are not “up there” as you risk being cut for needing aid, whereas a school with a similar student profile might be worth giving it a go if it is need blind., especially when the school does meet a good percentage of need for accepted students. So yes, there is harm when a school is not being honest about whether it is need aware in its admissions policies. </p>
<p>Very, very few colleges in this country are need aware for admissions. They simply do not meet the full need of the vast majority of the students they accept. The schools that are need aware are schools like GW, F&M< JHU (though with the Bloomberg money, they are hoping to become need blind) that are very yield conscious, and they don’t want to waste an acceptance on those students that cannot afford to attend. Better they accept some kids that are another wave below those, that can pay, and probably will be overcome with joy at being accepted at that school as it would have been a reach. The very top candidates at a lot of these schools are accepted on a need blind basis, It’s the kids that are not picked in the first rounds that are subjected to Need aware policies. </p>
<p>So it’s a big deal when looking a bunch of schools–which ones to take the time, trouble and expense to apply to them? The need aware nature of the school adds one more impediment to getting accepted, so all things equal, pick the school that is not need aware. You can then get in the door and have a shot at what aid they might offer. My nephew certainly used that strategy as he knew he needed aid for the private schools, but he also knew he had to get accepted to get the aid. He did get accepted to two such schools, and though neither met his FAFSA need, one was close enough that it was doable. The other was not. Forget the school that where the need was a factor given the same chances of acceptances. It’s one more obstacle.</p>
<p>Now for kids well within the mid stream of accepted students in terms of stats or higher, I would tell them to go on ahead and apply to need aware schools because if accepted there, the aid at some of them is often very good, and they are in the running when they have a half a chance of getting in. Since a lot of those schools are need aware only to the bottom X% of the applicants, if the student is well above that, his need would not be a factor. </p>
<p>Some counselors have told me that they suspect some schools are need aware as they track the acceptances , WLs, and Rejections over time, even though the schools say they are not. The same counselors have also told me that a lot of upset parents and kids will claim some rejections were due to need, when the counselors stats over time for some such schools tell a whole other story. These folks have been doing this for over 20 years, so I think they have a pretty good handle on this. Especially when they keep records, much like Naviance with even more data like appying for fin aid, and other factors. I’ve seen those records as two of my kids went to a school that did this.</p>
<p>I did not note GW as a school that was need aware, but then I did not check for that specifically. It’s a very popular choice at my students’ schools. ALways has been.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That it not the correct question, IMO. The correct question is, ‘why did GWU flat out lie about its policies?’</p>
<p>S2 was admitted to GW in 2008, at least that’s what it said when he checked online. Five days later, a skinny envelope arrived in the mail that said he was waitlisted. Getting this straightened out was nightmarish and could only be done by his school counselor since she could get the personal phone number of his admission rep. We never got an explanation from GW about what happened, and, since they admitted him, we didn’t pursue the issue further and just chalked it up to an administrative error.</p>
<p>When I saw the news about GW being need-aware and not need-blind, my son’s experience made more sense. In the first round of application reviews, he was probably waitlisted. In the second round of application reviews, since we weren’t applying for financial aid, he was probably moved to the admit pile. That’s probably how he was both admitted and waitlisted, but ultimately admitted.</p>
<p>Our experience at GW is that they’re not always forthcoming about policies, not just admission policies.</p>
<p>I feel like Captain Renault in Casablanca who was “shocked to find gambling at Rick’s Place.”
I am shocked to find a school that claimed to be need blind was need aware. Shocked!</p>
<p>I agree that the issue is that the Admissions Director out and out lied. Shame on that person and shame on GW.</p>
<p>Many schools, however, that are need blind for admissions to the mainstream undergraduate pool are not for certain categoreis. International students, transfer students, students for certain schools within the university, especially those with a lot of non traditional students may not be need blind or not be covered under the “meets full need” guarantee either Waitlisted students also fall under that category. </p>
<p>Schools are using that waitlist loophole aggressively, IMO. Large waitlists are becomng more common, and by going that route, yield and need blind status can be favorably reported by using the waitlist.</p>