@wisteria100, are you referring to a hypothetical school with the example of “45 Jan admits, plus 33 WL admits, plus 30 Intl admits” as I am not aware of any school that conforms to this specific basket of need aware admits?
@Chembiodad, it’s pretty close to Hamilton’s profile for last year.
“around 40” January admits (may have been 45 FAIK but didn’t find the exact # listed online)
31 International
33 Wait list
That doesn’t include the 17 transfers.
There’s nothing wrong with considering the finances of those admitted but @wisteria100 does have a point.
@Sue22, sounds like there is merging going on here as Hamilton isn’t need aware for waitlists - I mentioned Bowdoin regarding that type of admit. Also, the student newspaper editorial mentioned 6 transfers, how does that become 17?
Need Blind admissions and ability to meet demonstrated need is an important discussion, and one that has occurred on many highly selective school campuses.
Here’s another important editorial from Wesleyan, a peer school, that made the decision to switch from Need Blind to Need Aware in 2013 http://needblindfocus.group.wesleyan.edu/
@Chembiodad I was referring to numbers for Hamilton based on this year’s first year class. Don’t get me wrong, Hamilton does a great job with aid and with trying to reach out to disadvantaged applicants, but was surprised the need aware covered that percentage of students.
@wisteria100, understand and agree that Hamilton, as well as many, many other peer schools do a great job providing Need Based financial aid.
That said, Hamilton isn’t Need Aware for Waitlists, so this isn’t an accurate statement in Posting #119.
To narrow the scope of the discussion, only 5 US universities and LAC’s are Need Blind for International Students, including; MIT, Harvard University, Princeton University, Yale University, and Amherst College.
From a logistical perspective, January admission seems to require a high degree of matching between student and program, which, as discussed on this thread, apparently does include financial considerations:
The options to not considering financial ability for January admit cases may be limited to 1) somewhat coldly offering a program to students that some would not be able to maximize, or 2) fundamentally re-establishing a London program so that it would be directly under Hamilton’s auspices, or 3) changing a financial aid policy that currently limits funds to certain abroad programs.
Considering the challenging nature of the above options, it can alternatively be recognized that the January program appears to have been administered well for, and to the benefit of, a reasonable number of students through time. Any proposed changes to the administration of the program, then, should be considered cautiously.
Disclosure is another issue, and seems to have been discussed fairly on this thread.
@Chembiodad, the transfer number comes straight from the 2017-18 Common Data Set, as does the WL number. The “around 40” Jan admits is from Hamilton’s website. If the WL is need blind that # should be pulled out, but according to this site Hamilton IS need aware for the waitlist.
http://www.signaturecollegecounseling.com/hamilton-college/
@Sue22, that reference regarding WL applicants is not from the school; it is form a college counseling service - I am not going to spin in a world of undocumented information.
Once again, here’s is what Hamilton has published to date https://www.hamilton.edu/admission/finaid/needblind
https://www.hamilton.edu/admission/finaid/faq
Here’s a great piece on Hamilton’s transition in 2008 from Need Aware to Need Blind https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-one-top-college-ended-a-policy-that-weeded-out-poor-students_us_5671dfcee4b0648fe302101e
Vanderbilt, a self professed Need Blind school https://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/financial-aid/facts.php, is actually Need Aware for Waitlist Admits https://admissions.vanderbilt.edu/vandybloggers/2013/04/im-on-the-wait-list-now-what-2/
Seems like more needs to be done by ALL to make it more transparent.
There has been much healthy discussion about Need Blind acceptances on many highly selective LAC campuses over the last handful of years; here’s two more pieces, one from Wesleyan http://wesleyanargus.com/2013/09/12/class-of-2017-demographics/ and another from Haverford http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20160626_In_a_financial_pinch__Haverford_College_will_cap_financial_aid_and_expand_the_freshman_class.html
Attached is a great editorial response from a Jan, about Jans https://spec.hamilton.edu/letters-to-the-editor-re-jan-25-january-admits-not-granted-need-blind-status-in-admissions-62782bdf3e8b.
I also attached the editorial response from the school which clarifies much https://spec.hamilton.edu/letters-to-the-editor-re-jan-25-january-admits-not-granted-need-blind-status-in-admissions-e7286f8a8722
Not sure this is such a compelling argument.
And for those that aren’t reading the student response to th editorial, here’s the rest of the paragraph “Such affluence is not exclusive to Jans. The way the facts are presented in the article leads readers to believe that January admits are different from the rest of the Hamilton population; this is untrue.”
And this, “Like all students on the Hill, the Jans have worked incredibly hard to get here and continue to work hard while on campus. The difference is that they were so willing to attend Hamilton that they did whatever it would take to be here.”
And to provide additional content, this is the preceding sentence to the reference in posting #131
“I personally know many Jans who have taken out student loans, or who are on financial aid. They do not consider themselves “overwhelmingly affluent and rich.””
Though the potential for some good points may underlie the student response, the writer seems to have failed to be consistent in her own reasoning. For example, she fairly notes the small sample size that formed much of the basis for the initial Spectator editorial:
However, she then counters this with a presumably even smaller sample size, her own acquaintances:
Though the personal elements of the writer’s story could be compelling, I see her as having missed her mark for not quite finding any deficiencies in the original data – though they may be there to be found – yet also not quite conveying the differentiating aspects of the January experience. Though in terms of the latter, this line indeed does come close, and I wish she’d concluded with it:
My Jan student just finished his semester in London. It cost SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than a semester at Hamilton, but true no aid unless you go to private lender, and you have to agree to no aid from the school for first 2 years at Hamilton. If you have questions about Jan life, ask me. I was nervous and skeptical, and after the fact feel like it was by far the best outcome for my son.
For some students, it might not be right, but for my son it was perfect. I was totally skeptical and wanted him to go to Oberlin as a regular admit, but he really wanted to try London. He matured so much, learned about himself, and got to know 30 other Hamilton students, and 30 Brandeis students. Traveled with friends to other countries, and had some really life altering experiences. Came to Hamilton with a boatload of very close friends, and has made more in the few weeks since school began. Plus, a full semester of coursework. For him, and for most (but not all) of the kids he was with, it was a really fantastic choice.
@123France let me know if you have questions. My son just returned from London - had an amazing experience and so far so good at Hamilton.
@MomInSB, sounds like your son had an amazing experience! Our Freshman DD’s got to know several Jans during their Orientation Adventures in August, kept in touch while they were in London, and now are making them feel at home and building deeper relatiomships - just like any other Hamilton student, cause that’s what makes it a Hamily!
I found the article from Hamilton very nuanced and balanced. It gave me great insight into how much thought Hamilton has put into the program- far more than I gleaned from the website- as well as how carefully they choose candidates for the program.
@Sue22 I think that all LAC’s have an affluent population relative to the overall college landscape. Amherst would be the only exception of the schools we toured, but I don’t think any blame can be given to Hamilton for lack of socioeconomic diversity. In fact, we felt in to fit in right about the middle of the LAC’s toured.