<p>Do top Universities pay attention to income bracket, which I believe you must report in the application process? I understand that this is mostly for financial aid, but would colleges decide to admit someone from a higher income bracket when tied with someone else, just because they think "genetically speaking", since their parents were successful, they might end up similarly?</p>
<p>I doubt it</p>
<p>They don’t consider the “genetics” part of it because it has very little credibility, if any at all. It would be absurd for them to do so.</p>
<p>You do not have report that in college applications, although you do report it in your FAFSA application. At most, you may report your parent’s education level because first-generation college students are often able to get certain scholarships. </p>
<p>Please, take your social darwinism elsewhere.</p>
<p>Schools that are not need blind indirectly will, as in applicants of a rich family most likely will not apply for financial aid, which helps them, and applicants of families low in the income bracket may be hurt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please cite a study where genetics correlates to future success (I’ve never heard this assertion before). If you mean environment, that’s another story.</p>
<p>There is a box to check on some applications if you are applying for financial aid. It did not seem to have any major effect for my son this year.;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would make sense in this economy that some probably do, not because they think rich kids will be smarter, but because they think rich kids will pay more to attend and they are interested in the money.</p>
<p>Colleges might find higher-income students a little more attractive because they can pay in full ( [Clashes</a> of Money and Values: A Survey of Admissions Directors | Inside Higher Ed](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/admissions2011]Clashes”>http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/admissions2011) ), although I have no idea where you’re going at with that “genetics” junk.</p>
<p>When I say “genetics”, it is based off of some random college discussions, where some people thought that since their parents did well, and had achieved masters level or doctoral level status, that colleges assumed that their progeny would follow in their footsteps. And I suppose as an extension, will colleges tend to favor those who can provide for themselves, even thought sometimes they state otherwise?</p>
<p>@cc123sb - I also do partially mean environment.</p>
<p>@DavidSSabb94 - I’m sorry if I made you think that these were my views, but they’re not. I was merely parroting a rumor that I had overheard and was hoping that some of you could put to rest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I agree that SES influencing success (however you want to define that) is largely an environmental factor, there’s plenty of evidence that intelligence is heavily influenced by genetics. But it’s also influenced by environmental factors.</p>
<p>As for the original question, schools that are need-blind will not consider the anticipated need for financial aid in admissions decisions and thus aren’t going to admit someone just because he/she has more money. However, low SES can help a bit (affirmative action, while typically race-based, is really more designed to combat the disadvantages of low SES than anything else).</p>
<p>On the University of Michigan supplement, it asked for which income bracket you are in: <50k, 50k-75k, 75k-100k, etc., 250k+. I don’t know if it matters or not for admission.</p>
<p>Colleges would actually admit the student from the lower income bracket because they would assume the student had a much tougher time participating in activities/ doing well in school considering his family doesn’t have much money.</p>
<p>That only applies to high level schools you have no shot at though, so I guess it doesn’t matter in your case.</p>
<p>^ I can confirm that. I’ve heard a lot of admission officers (primarily from good, private schools) say that they are usually pretty sympathetic to students who come from a really low income bracket, plus it adds diversity so that there’s more than rich, preppy white kids and talented, well-off Asians at the school.</p>
<p>So pretty much: people who can pay in full are a little more attractive although underprivileged kids are a little more attractive, but income shouldn’t really affect anybody in-between either extreme, I’d imagine.</p>