<p>Aritct: I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.
The high school I is literally filled with students as such. And the stats you listed aren't enough to get your into upenn or cornell unless you have a really special condition.
The schools you listed are NEED BLIND. Money does not play a factor.</p>
<p>Last year,
One of my close friends, a senior in high school scored a 2270 in his SAT (730 CR 730 W 800 M). He also scored above 750 in all of his SAT 2 exams (Physics, Chemistry, Math 2).
He had stellar ECs, stellar grades, stellar recs and really good essays.
He applied for almost a full scholarship to UPenn.
He was waitlisted, and the letter stated that they could not take him because they did not have enough aid left to give out. (I have SEEN the letter)
That's NEED BLIND for you.</p>
<p>Need blind is really more of a clause than a statement. When colleges say that they are "need blind" all they mean is that when they review your app they won't see your financial status. Now what happens after your app is accepted?
It gets sent to the fin aid office and they distribute their <em>limited</em> fin aid. budget amongst the best applicants. Even if the college is Princeton, its impossible to have an unlimited financial aid budget for intl. students.</p>
<p>For fall 2004, 2162 international students applied to MIT and 101 were accepted (most if them with aid), an acceptance rate of 4,7%. In the same year, 1908 intls applied to Stanford and 147 were accepted (about half of them with aid), an acceptance rate of about 7,7%.</p>
<p>aritct, I am pretty sure though that more than 100 students applied to Stanford without asking for aid, and definitely more than 10 or so students applied to MIT without asking for aid, so why weren't they accepted?</p>
<p>Not applying for aid does by far not mean an automatic acceptance, not even at less selective schools: The University of Arizona, for example, has an overall acceptance rate of 80%, but in 2004 only 575 out of 1300 (44%) international applicants were admitted. Since it does not give any fin aid to international students, all of them would have paid full tuition.</p>
<p>That quota you mentioned doesn't exist that way. Most schools want to have as many countries as possible represented in their student body, which makes admission easier for applicants from small countries than for Indians and Chinese, for example. But I don't think a school cares if it enrolls 10 or 15 Chinese students, or 2 or 4 French.</p>
<p>Why are you quoting the statistics of schools like Stanford and MIT?
I have already mentioned that I don't know much about Stanford admissions.
The schools I am talking about are schools like Carleton, UPenn and to some extent Cornell.
And neither did I mention an "automatic acceptance" anywhere.</p>
<p>As for MIT, that's one place even I know people don't have a chance of getting in with only "money".</p>
<p>Consensus if possible:</p>
<p>Applying to a Need Aware for Internationals University, while asking for aid is going to be tougher than applying without aid.</p>
<p>Basically:
Difficulty:
Applying for Aid (Int'l) > Applying without Aid (Int'l) >>/= Applying (US).</p>
<p>Note: Doesn't apply to HYPM.</p>
<p>Agreed?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Need blind is really more of a clause than a statement. When colleges say that they are "need blind" all they mean is that when they review your app they won't see your financial status. Now what happens after your app is accepted?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>^ I don't think that's true. Colleges that aren't need-blind for international students say so.</p>
<p>UPenn is not need blind for international students. Their website says competition for international aid is very very competitive or something to that effect. I know because I crossed it off my list for precisely that reason, I didn't even bother to look further, which means it must've been pretty strongly worded. That's how I remember it, anyway.</p>
<p>EDIT:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The University is able to offer financial assistance to very few students who are not citizens or permanent residents of the U.S., Canada or Mexico. Therefore, most non-citizens should plan to meet expenses for their entire schooling before applying for admission. Because the offer of admission for non-citizens is directly linked to their ability to meet these expenses, candidates whose families have the financial means to afford educational costs are urged not to apply for Penn-sponsored assistance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is what it says. (<a href="http://www.sfs.upenn.edu/paying/paying-international.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.sfs.upenn.edu/paying/paying-international.htm</a>)</p>
<p>I don't think Cornell is need-blind for international students either.</p>
<p>when did UPenn become "limited need-based aid"?
Wasn't it need-blind last year?
or is it my mistake?</p>
<p>and yeah Cornell isn't need-blind that I know.</p>
<p>Aritct, of course you did not use the term "automatic acceptance", but you implied it:
[quote]
Since the applicants who apply without aid are <em>generally</em> much less competitive than those who apply for aid, the admissions process for them becomes a lot easier
[/quote]
So if an international student who applies to Stanford or Cornell or UPenn without need has the same credentials as the average applicant with need, he would be accepted, and I wanted to show you that that is not true. I simply quoted the statistics of MIT and Stanford because other schools like UPenn or Cornell don't publish their numbers.
But I just found the numbers for Carleton: For fall 2004, 1000 international students applied and 80 were accepted. Were there only 60 "qualified" students who did not apply for aid, or were 920 students simply not "qualified"? Or might there be another reason after all?</p>
<p>
[quote]
when did UPenn become "limited need-based aid"?
[/quote]
?????????????????????????</p>
<p>As far as I know, UPenn has never been need-blind towards internationals.</p>
<p>I think both Upenn and Cornell r ''limited need-based'' unis...</p>
<p>Anyone mind telling me what "limited need-based" unis are?</p>
<p>I completely disagree.. In my previous school (the british school new delhi), people who were just ABOVE average.. got in .. nothing special anywhere (1800 SAT I, 650 SAT II type) ..except that they were rich or were legacies.. it makes all the difference in the world.</p>
<p>I think being wealthy AND a legacy makes all the difference in the world... Just being rich does not.</p>
<p>You see 3-4 people get in with ridiculously low stats and you think it's the norm. Why would you still talk about 'the people I know OR the people from my school' when you can see the figures for everybody that applied.</p>
<p>As b@rium showed us, even if you can pay - it does not guarantee you admissions everywhere.</p>
<p>@ "limited need-based unis" -- I meant schools which offer limited need based aid to intl students.
@ UPenn - I apologize then, its my mistake.
@ Carleton - even if 1000 intl student applied, do you know how many applied without aid?
Anyway, my said "assumptions" about Carleton are based completely on the fact that I have seen average students get admitted without aid while high-achieving students were rejected.
As Lakshya said, I am stating this without any statistical proof. But that is ONLY because I could not find any statistical proof AGAINST it.</p>
<p>@ Cornell -- same as Carleton.</p>
<p>@ HYPMS -- I will state this again, I do not know much about their admission policies, and I will not comment on them. </p>
<p>@ OP's post -- he's a legacy and is applying without aid. 2 HUGE hooks right there. That's why I said he's practically "in".</p>
<p>@ "Since the applicants who apply without aid are <em>generally</em> much less competitive than those who apply for aid, the admissions process for them becomes a lot easier"</p>
<p>I said this before, and I will say it again. The process becomes a lot easier, but just because its easier doesn't mean that ALL the applicants will get accepted will they?
(And I'm sorry, I never mentioned or implied anything close to "guaranteed admission" for those without legacy)
(And again, this does not apply to HYPMS)</p>
<p>In general, what I was trying to say in all of the above posts is that, if you apply without aid to MOST elite unis (excluding HYPMS....and some others), you have a much greater chance, and I repeat, and MUCH greater chance of being accepted than another candidate with the same stats, but who needs a lot of fin aid.
And, students who apply without financial aid, are considered in a different applicant pool in ALL schools which provide need-based aid.</p>
<p>With the exception of maybe three or four major universities and a dozen or so LACs, most top universities are NOT need blind to international applicants. Penn and Cornell are definitely NOT need blind, neither are Stanford or Columbia. State schools like Cal and Michigan and other good private universities like Duke, Northwestern, Chicago, Carnegie Mellon, Brown, Dartmouth and Johns Hopkins give international students very few scholarships and very little financial aid. In short, with the exception of a handful of universities, like Harvard and MIT, most universities will seriously evaluate an international student's financial situation as part of her/his admission process.</p>
<p>This said, an international student's ability to pay for tuition will only be evaluated if that applicant is qualified. Most top universities listed above have enough international applicants to ensure that those they admit are, first and foremost, academically qualified, and only then do they look at whether or not those students can afford paying tution. Then, and only then, are most internationals who unable to pay tutition crossed out and those that can afford to pay tutition admitted. </p>
<p>Of course, in the case of a highly talented applicant (the top 50 or so international applicants out of the thousands applying) and in the case of very rare applicants (female Afghani applicant or Mongolian applicant) exceptions are made.</p>
<p>Thank you for that. :)</p>
<p>I don't want to prolong this argument any further but I just have one last point to make.</p>
<p>Alexandre said that the elite schools give fin. aid only to students in the top 50 out of a 1000 applicants and to other rare exceptions.
That just proves that it is MUCH harder to get in with aid than without aid.
and that's what I've been trying to say all this time.
I never said that those who get in without aid aren't academically qualified, but all I said was that those who do get in with aid are <em>usually</em> more competitive than those who get in without aid. This does not in any way mean that those who get in without aid don't deserve admission.
(Of course, all this said and done, you NEED to be really competitive if you want close to a 40k scholarship at an elite school)</p>
<p>
[quote]
all I said was that those who do get in with aid are <em>usually</em> more competitive than those who get in without aid.
[/quote]
You have to be REALLY careful with that statement. It most likely holds true for schools like... let's say Mount Holyoke, but when talking about Ivy league and similiar caliber schools (where you need to be at the very top of all students to be admitted at all), you cannot simply make such an assumption. I am still waiting to see the international kid who got into one of those schools MAINLY because he offered to pay full tuition, with nothing else on his application being outstanding. No outstanding grades, or test scores, athletics, other ECs, recommendations, essays, relationships to important people... and btw, you never know if someone cheated on his/her application. How do you know that someone you know is (or looks like) an "average" student (to the adcom)? Have you read their applications?</p>
<p>That's why I said before, that statement isn't valid for HYPMS.
But is valid for schools like Cornell and UPenn who actually pay a lot of attention to whether the student can afford college or not.</p>