<p>Hmmm. I’m going to have to think about this one …</p>
<p>Carleton does not want to say what percentage admissions are need blind anymore. So I thought about this and looked up numbers from the following websites:</p>
<p>National Center for Education Statistics: <a href=“College Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics”>https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/</a>
USnews: <a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-liberal-arts-colleges</a></p>
<p>Do I agree with Carleton on NOT putting their need aware policy in “percentage need blind”? Yes, clearly this is the right decision. Take for example Middlebury and Carleton Stats. Carleton says they are 85% need blind while Middlebury says they are 100% need blind. However, look at the stats…</p>
<p>Carleton </p>
<h1>Students-> 2055</h1>
<p>Endowment(millions)-> 645.7
Tuition-> 46167
Grant/Scholarship aid-> 59%
Average aid-> 26419
on Pell grants-> 14%</p>
<p>Middlebury </p>
<h1>Students -> 2516</h1>
<p>Endowment(millions)-> 879.7
Tuition-> 45314
Grant/Scholarship aid-> 41%
Average aid-> 33226
on Pell grants-> 10%</p>
<p>Carleton has a lower endowment(per student), but is giving more aid per student. So it is not really fair (or smart) for Carleton to have to call themselves only 85% need blind while Middlebury calls themselves 100% need blind.</p>
<p>The tricky part comes when comparing Macalester and Carleton. </p>
<p>Carleton </p>
<h1>Students-> 2055</h1>
<p>Endowment(millions)-> 645.7
Tuition-> 46167
Grant/Scholarship aid-> 59%
Average aid-> 26419
on Pell grants-> 14%</p>
<p>Macalester </p>
<h1>Students-> 2070</h1>
<p>Endowment(millions)-> 625
Tuition-> 45388
Grant/Scholarship aid-> 74%
Average aid-> 29760
on Pell grants-> 18%</p>
<p>Macalester, another liberal arts schools just a few miles away, has less of an endowment but clearly gives more aid. Will these new policies bring us close to Macalester’s level of aid? Should Carleton give the same aid as Macalester? I think Carleton should have more students on Pell grants…personally. This type of “income” diversity is, in my opinion, the most important type of diversity. I think the article mentioned that these new policies might help this. As for whether Carleton should be as, in general, as generous as Macalester, I honestly don’t know. Maybe it is not wise to be as generous as Macalester. I also don’t know whether these policies will push Carleton to be that generous.</p>
<p>Just a note - need blind and amount of aid per student are two different things. Carleton still covers full need for admitted students. It apparently has determined that in order to do that, it cannot admit the entire class in a need blind manner. Another approach might have been to be “need blind” but to “gap” the need covered for admitted students. </p>
<p>You fail to mention one major difference between financial aid at Middlebury and Carleton. Yes, Carleton offers financial aid to a larger percentage of students, but that’s primarily because they offer merit awards. Middlebury does not offer any merit awards–all financial aid is need based. This accounts for much of the discrepancy. </p>
<p>Carleton Merit awards are very very small. They offer 3 small $2000 awards in very select cases. This has no effect on anything.</p>
<p><a href=“http://apps.carleton.edu/admissions/topics/merit_scholarships/”>http://apps.carleton.edu/admissions/topics/merit_scholarships/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The amount of aid given doesn’t really matter when you’re determining the percentage of students receiving financial aid. You say these awards are given in “very select cases.” According to the college, “Carleton sponsors 71 or more National Merit and National Achievement Scholarships in each entering class.” That’s a significant percentage of the class, no?</p>
<p>And as you pointed out above, the average financial aid package at Middlebury is almost $7,000 more than the average award at Carleton. </p>
<p>Arcadia, not sure what the case is that you’re trying to make, or how you disagree with me. I’m saying Carleton gives better aid than Middlebury. Is this what you don’t agree with?</p>
<p>jack63–yes, I disagree with you that Carleton’s aid is noticeably better than Middlebury’s. In the numbers you’ve provided, Midd is cheaper and provides more aid ($$ on average) than Carleton. The one figure that you mention that shows that Carlton is superior is the percentage of students receiving aid. What I’m saying is that figure presumably includes the ~16% of every incoming Carleton class that receives one of the 71+ merit awards. Carleton uses these merit awards to attract students who otherwise would attend another school. Middlebury doesn’t offer any merit aid, so it makes sense that Carleton’s percentages are higher. A student who has demonstrated strong financial need is likely to receive similar aid packages at both schools.</p>
<p>Arcadia, we actually don’t disagree all that much. Certainly, Middlebury’s aid is similar to Carleton’s overall. I think perhaps Carleton is “slighlty” better in terms of aid taking into account all things both percentage and average aid…not noticeably better. I’m a Carleton alum and was actually making some of the same points you are in a thread I’ll reference…and getting s&*t for doing so. Carleton was making lots of small awards raising the percentage, but not raising the overall average aid. In fact, some of these issues are likely why Carleton is changing their policy.</p>
<p>Just FYI -><a href=“Appealing Financial Aid Offer - Carleton College - College Confidential Forums”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/carleton-college/1632869-appealing-financial-aid-offer-p1.html</a></p>
<p>…and yes I actually agree with you on the ~16% merit aid. Without this, Middlebury’s aid and Carleton’s need based aid would be even closer. Giving merit aid is likely not going to do anything to help the economic diversity of a class.</p>
<p>My only point was that even Middlebury and Carleton gave overall similar aid Carleton has to call themselves 85% need blind while Middlebury calls themselves 100% need blind. I’m not knocking Middlebury. I’m just saying if Carleton says they are 85% need blind, it makes them look bad. Why should they have to do this when their aid is similar or “slightly” better than other schools that are 100% need blind. Carleton is trying to refocus and redefine how they address financial aid. I think this is clearly a good idea…for Carleton.</p>
<p>I just want to point out that it is possible to receive both merit and FA at Carleton; my ds does. </p>
<p>Yes, it is probably not accurate to conclude that 100% of the merit awards went to students who did not otherwise qualify for and receive aid. </p>
<p>I can’t imagine merit aid hurts the income diversity of the class. Likely is might even slightly help the income diversity of the class, but not at the same level as giving straight needs based aid. I don’t know though. It would be interesting if their were a study somewhere.</p>
<p>Another interesting question is do Carleton’s new “guardrails” include or not include this merit aid. I’m pretty sure the numbers I quote do include this merit aid grants. Certainly 6-7% of the class could receive one of these merit aid gifts of $2000 and no needs based it, and it could entirely throw off the way the “guardrails” are calculated.</p>
<p>By the way the same argument could be used by Carleton as to why Macalester gives better aid. Clearly, Mac gives merit aid…discussion of this is all over College Confidential. I don’t think Carleton should have to give merit aid at the same level as Macalester if Carleton can attract better students without giving the merit aid. Carleton would be better off on spending the money on new or improved buildings, or even faculty salaries. What worries me about the comparison with Macalester is why Macalester has more students on Pell grants. In my mind, there is no reason this should be the case.</p>
<p>I prefer the way a college I know does this. The admissions office is completely need blind in selecting the class for the general pool. But as they go through their list of accepted students, they are given a 1, 2, or 3 rating, depending on how desireable they are. The ones are wanted for pure academic excellence and having other attributes to make them the most desired students. The Twos don’t quite make the cut, and the 3s are the ones that may have taken some discussion and hard decisions in terms of accepting or WLing. All ones get full need met with the goodies. All twos get what’s left and the 3s are either gapped, or turned down, Since this is just the general pool, athletic admits, development, URM, first gen, special pool applicants are done separately.</p>
<p>Quickly checking the 13-14 Common Data Sets for Carleton and Middlebury produces the following information from section H:</p>
<p>Carleton:
Total full-time undergraduate students: 2023</p>
<h1>of students who had no financial need and were granted non-need based aid: 132 (6.5% of students)</h1>
<h1>of students determined to have financial need: 1119 (55% of students)</h1>
<p>Average aid package (with loans): $37,888
Average aid packeage (without loans): $33,316</p>
<p>Middlebury:
Total full-time undergraduate students: 2456</p>
<h1>of students who had no financial need and were granted non-need based aid: 1</h1>
<h1>of students determined to have financial need: 979 (39.9% of students)</h1>
<p>Average aid package (with loans): $40,419
Average aid packeage (without loans): $38,384</p>
<p>Meant to include:</p>
<p>Carleton</p>
<h1>of students awarded need-based aid who were also awarded non-need based aid: 184</h1>
<p>I looked up some similar numbers from the13-14 common data set for Macalester and included one more from Carleton.</p>
<p>Carleton:
average non-need based scholarship: $ 2,757</p>
<p>Macalester:
Total full-time undergraduate students: 2010</p>
<h1>of students who had no financial need and were granted non-need based aid: 124 (6.2% of students)</h1>
<p>average non-need based scholarship: $ 10,909</p>
<h1>of students determined to have financial need: 1394 (69.4% of students)</h1>
<p>Average aid package (with loans): $39,234
Average aid package (without loans): $33,663</p>
<p>My thoughts (for anybody who cares 
): Carleton should not feel pressure to match Macalester on merit aid (non need-based aid). What concerns me is why Macalester outperforms Carleton by a significant margin on needs-based aid. Macalester has less of an endowment.</p>
<p>Carleton is refocusing and redefining the way they handle and describe their financial aid. Great! I’m all for it.</p>
<p>No matter how Carleton spins this, I think the bottom line is that Carleton should GIVE MORE AID! My concern is that the reason for the difference in financial aid between Macalester and Carleton is primarily salaries for faculty and staff. Should Carleton faculty and staff have slightly higher salaries…Sure. This goes with Carleton not being obligated to give merit aid. I think it would be very difficult to justify a significant salary difference between Carleton and Macalester’s faculty and staff.</p>
<p>With all this being said, I hope the reason Carleton gives less aid, is its building spree. This is a more interesting discussion, and some of the buildings really did/do need built, fixed, or torn down. </p>
<p>The linked article requires an account to view it.</p>
<p>Am I to understand that Carleton is not 100% need blind? e.g. for some small % (15%) decisions the applicant’s ability to pay will be a disadvantage?</p>
<p>Further, that if you know you are a full pay applicant it is better to not request financial aid? Our college adviser told us to apply for aid everywhere, because it rarely puts a student at a disadvantage at highly selective schools. But if it helps at Carleton at all, we may want to amend our application.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>Carleton is not 100% need blind but that only comes down to the last few seats in the class (i.e. a much smaller percentage than 15%). I would recommend that you apply for financial aid anyway if you need it. It still doesn’t hurt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, this is correct. </p>
<p>It used to be that 15% of the admissions decisions were need-aware. They said the 15% idea is obsolete.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If I were you, I’d apply for aid. Look at the common data set from 2014-2015 (Page 21). 521 are in the new class. Of those attending 393 applied for aid while 278 got aid.
<a href=“https://apps.carleton.edu/campus/ira/assets/CDS_2014_2015_completed.pdf”>https://apps.carleton.edu/campus/ira/assets/CDS_2014_2015_completed.pdf</a></p>
<p>I can’t say for sure, but I can’t imagine Carleton would have a policy that would discourage somebody who ends up paying in full from applying. This would seem to be the exact opposite of what they want. Families need to feel comfortable with Carleton to apply. By saying “If you apply for aid, you have less of chance to be admitted even if you didn’t need aid”…that would discourage people from applying.</p>
<p>Applying for aid has other benefits. A family needs to get a sense of the financial aid office. This is important because things happen that could affect a parent’s ability to pay….layoffs, sudden illness, etc. You may not need the aid the first year, but may need the aid the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th year. I would want to know if the financial aid office provides a good explanation of why my family didn’t need aid and what changes in my income might warrant a financial aid package.</p>