<p>I know that most colleges, especially top colleges, abide a need-blind policy when it comes to acceptance into the college, but I can't help but see in decision threads that students with less than average SAT/GPA/ECs but have significantly low income brackets are able to get into top schools. Some of these students are not even an URM. Just wondering if there is a possible correlation and what it might be due to...</p>
<p>Ecs: no money, can’t pay for Ecs
GPA: Home life could have an affect
SAT: once again, home life could have affect</p>
<p>Lower income students have many fewer advantages than affluent students. No “prep courses”, no tutors, high schools that frequently offer very few AP classes, fewer ECs, many have to work to earn money… there are lots of things. When disadvantaged students get a 1900 on their SAT, that’s in some ways a greater accomplishment than an affluent kid at a competitive suburban high school with many opportunities getting a 2300.</p>
<p>Also, schools don’t want a completely homogeneous student body. They want students with different backgrounds together in the classroom. It makes for a richer experience for all students.</p>
<p>I’m surprised to hear that. Why would an unhooked candidate with unimpressive stats who also needs lots of financial aid be attractive to top colleges? Wouldn’t it be more likely for it to swing the other way; for full-pay candidates to have an edge over non full-pay candidates with similar statistics and hooks? I’m not saying that the former case would never get in; it just seems unlikely that the weight would be in their favor more often than it would be in the full-pay family’s favor.</p>
<p>so then you would say that income is a factor for colleges. i am a low income student and the need-blind policy kind of seems unfair to me…</p>
<p>^ top universities are handsomely endowed, so they could take either or without batting an eye</p>
<p>Why do you think need-blind policies are unfair? All it means is that a student’s ability to pay (or lack thereof) is not a factor when making admissions decisions. Better put, I think, is how one top LAC puts it; “being disadvantaged will not disadvantage you in with regard to admission.”</p>
<p>Do you think it should? Or do you think it’s unfair that full-pay students don’t get preferential treatment?</p>