<p>“I would disagree about “slightly smarter.””
Would you agree they are “slightly richer” for this year as they dropped the need blind policy? :)</p>
<p>But Andover did not!</p>
<p>they arent need blind, but sitll provide alot of money. and yeh, the interviewers tell you about the school then say “tell me about yourself” they want you to talk for a while. they will make a few comments during your speech about yourself, but they mainly let you describe your views and your experiences… then they ask if you have any questions… make sure you have questions!! they have 5 or 10 minutes for qeustions, dont just end it awkwardly.</p>
<p>…No school is need-blind! They just say that to encourage candidates to apply. When schools receive your applications they place you into one of two piles. One FA pile and one non FA pile. It’s so unfair. I know!</p>
<p>75% of students apply for FA, and 25% don’t. Only 30-40% of admitted student will get FA. Andover acceptance rate was 16.6%. </p>
<p>Say 3,000 students apply to Andover. If the acceptance rate is 16.6%, 498 students will be accepted. Only ~35% of them will get FA, so 174 will get FA. ~65% of accepted students won’t get aid, so that would be 324.</p>
<p>So now we have…</p>
<p>FA-------174
Full Pay–324</p>
<p>If 75% apply for FA, that means that 2250 applied for 174 spots which is just 7.7%
If 25% are full pay, that means that 750 applied for 324 spots which is a totally unfair 43.2%.</p>
<p>So</p>
<p>FA acceptance rate = 7.7%
full pay acceptance rate = 43.2%</p>
<p>Wow, some stats! If that’s true then FA applicants who made it, be VERY VERY proud of yourselves! :)</p>
<p>I agree! The FA applicants who made it ought to be very pround of themselves!</p>
<p>Haha, even the non-FA applicants should be extremely proud. It’s super hard to get in Andover, regardless of financial situation.</p>
<p>Needing FA just makes it a “bit” harder…</p>
<p>My guess on the FA/FP thing is this:</p>
<p>FP people will tend to go into prepp for the app process VERY early. They know that in 5 years, they can apply to BS. FP applicants TEND to think of BS rather close to the deadline (just a few months). Becuase of this, FPs just TEND to be more prepared, be it ECs, or anything else. </p>
<p>THIS IS JUST A GUESS. DO NOT RIP ME TO SHREDS IF IT IS WRONG!</p>
<p>Haha, obviously if you’re richer you have more opportunities (usually). By opportunities, I mean like… being able to pay for extra-curriculars and extra tutoring and stuff…</p>
<p>Bleh. 7% though, is pretty sad. That’s like… Harvard’s acceptance rate! ;A;</p>
<p>of course. parents that are FP rich can afford the best for their children.</p>
<p>I agree with your theory for the most part.</p>
<p>More than anything, they know that they can go in it headstrong because if they get in it will be a yes; their family does not need to worry about financial aid packages and such. </p>
<p>I do not know if this is true or not but I would think that the % of people who knew that BS was for them (thus making them more prepared) would be higher within the FP than the FA. Especially for the NE ones (no stereotype intended, just that BS are situated around here).</p>
<p>This page clearly states that Andover is need-blind: <a href=“http://www.andover.edu/Admission/TuitionAndFinancialAid/Pages/default.aspx[/url]”>http://www.andover.edu/Admission/TuitionAndFinancialAid/Pages/default.aspx</a></p>
<p>I don’t see why they’d lie about being need-blind. You guys can continue with your conspiracies though. And Benevolent, it’s not as if all the schools say they are need-blind.</p>
<p>Ehh, Izzy Busy, I guess I can agree that it’s like that for a lot of people, but I’m full pay and I didn’t even consider boarding school until the Late November. I had to rush to get through my applications and interviews as a result though. I didn’t finish my applications until about January 12, and didn’t even get to Mass. to do my Andover interview in state, I had to do it with an Alumni.</p>
<p>And also, I went into it totally humble, thinking I wouldn’t get in anywhere (but once again, I may be different than most.)</p>
<p>I’m sorry benevolent, but for the moment, ANDOVER IS FULLY NEED BLIND. They don’t place applicants into two piles. That’s what need blind is. They can’t lie about it. They advertise themselves as need blind - they are need blind. Don’t you think they’d get some serious **** if they were lying?</p>
<p>This year, 35% of accepted applicants at Andover received financial aid. 75% applied for it. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE OTHER 40% DID NOT GET ACCEPTED. THEY SIMPLY WERE DENIED FINANCIAL AID.</p>
<p>Soonto look at bene’s post. The stats are compelling! That does not mean that they are not on the forefront of diversity anymore, the parity at Andover will be far lower than that at St. Marks or such.</p>
<p>The stats are not compelling because they are not stats! There is no page or statistic anywhere that says that there were any specific allocations of spots for full pay and FA applicants BECAUSE ANDOVER IS NEED BLIND. Just because 75% applied for FA and 35% of accepted applicants will receive FA, that does not mean that the other full 40% got denied admission - they got denied financial aid! How is this such a tough concept?</p>
<p>Andover openly advertises itself as need blind - therefore, until it retracts this policy, it MAY NOT SEPARATE APPLICANTS BASED ON ABILITY TO PAY. They are bound to the policy until they drop their need blind status! I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - do you seriously think that Andover would receive no scrutiny for misadvertising its admission policies? Come on, guys, we’re going to boarding school - drop the completely unfounded conspiracy theories…</p>
<p>honestly i think that you dont have to be “perfect” to get in to good schools
i mean you dont even have to be close to perfection…</p>
<p>i think there are lucks involved as well in big part</p>
<p>but i guess if you really want it and try your butt off, you will get good results…</p>
<p>good luck!</p>
<p>Tom, chill.
we’re not saying that Andover is setting out to subvert its policy. Just that FP candidates tend to be more prepared in the long run. Andover’s admins have nothing to do with it.
Also, for most FA applicants, an admission w/out FA is basically a rejection.</p>
<p>not in the long run, didn’t mean to say that. Just that their parents could afford the best to get them in: private tutoring and the like.</p>
<p>Do you know how elitist you just sounded? And… where the **** on this board has anyone other than you even insinuated that the boarding school rich are smarter than the boarding school poor? Just thought you’d throw that little bit in because you felt like it?</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but when you insult or demean FA students, you’re insulting and demeaning ME. I don’t appreciate it, and I’m sure that the other FA students on this board don’t either. Just because our daddies can’t necessarily afford “the best” as you said, or to send us to private tutors and on years abroad, that doesn’t mean we’re any “less prepared” than those of you who have enough money to spend upwards of 50k a year on education. Again, I take great offense to that. You’re welcome to your opinion, but I sure as hell don’t have to respond positively to an opinion that stereotypes me and other FA students as “less prepared” purely because our parents can’t afford “the best” for us. We didn’t choose our parents’ careers, and you’ve never even met any of us, so what gives you the right to say I’m not as well prepared for boarding school as you are? You are living proof that money doesn’t buy class.</p>
<p>Oh, and NEVER, EVER tell me to chill. There is NOTHING that I hate more than being told to chill.</p>
<p>Well I can see why you’d be mad but I can also see what she is saying. Its simply that because FP applicants have more, they can spend more on extra things. Also, that super rich people are more exposed at a younger age to ideas like boarding school, because their parents probably went to boarding schools when they were super rich kids, and therefore start thinking about boarding schools for their children when the child is at an early age. She wasn’t saying ALL people are this way, she was just trying to be rational.</p>
<p>I mean, you can’t say it’s wrong that people with less money tend to save more to provide for their family and spend less (unlike the super rich) on much less necessary things like private tutors, high end computers, donations to schools that will help when their child is applying, expensive educational camps over the summer, etc.
She was not insinuating that you had a lower intelligence, or at least it didn’t seem that way to me. If she did though, that was wrong because environment does not decide intelligence. I know a VERY LARGE amount of very rich, very unintelligent people who have more resources. She was being empathetic by saying “It’s harder for the less rich to succeed if they need help, or want to expand their knowledge (not intelligence) because they have less opportunities to get extra help.” this does not mean the following: " The less rich are less intelligent because they have less resources." Intelligence is something you are born with and it develops and changes very little after that development. </p>
<p>I guess that’s up there with my pet-peeves, especially when I’m winning an argument but then someone says, “chill”. But my biggest one is people making more work for others.</p>