Do colleges try to accept as many kids as possible who can pay full tuition each year who still having good stats? Is it of any advantage to be able to pay full tuition without financial aid?
It is a hook, more so at some schools than others. My kid’s school, a meet full need and need blind school, consistently has 55% of students who are full pay.
Not a hook IMO but certainly something considered.
I’ve been told it doesn’t make any difference until the financial aid budget is depleted (the highest priority is top students), but after that only full pays are accepted.
It depends on the school. Colleges that are NOT need blind might give you an edge. While I know of at least one college that says they would only do that for students right on the cusp of admission (take full pay over someone with significant need), it seems clear from results we see it here that some colleges are admitting students on the lower end of their stats scale because they are full pay. Purdue, for example. I think there was a recent thread showing that the UCs are doing it, too.
There are schools that don’t even see whether you’re applying for FA. I don’t think sweeping generalizations can be made about how full pay impacts at a need blind. The long hurdle to get past is how you rate, holistically. Lots of kids miss that.
If you are an international, it is a benefit and for many colleges a necessity. Majority of colleges do not offer need based financial aid to internationals and you cannot get a visa to attend absent being able to extablish that you can afford the total costs including tuition, room & board, etc., for the first year. And many of those colleges require such proof as a condition to even being considered for admission (others will admit but then failure to provide such proof results in withdrawal of any admission given).
For domestic students, it is a mixed bag. Some colleges consider need for financial aid in determining admission, many do not, but even those may admit many, such as public univerisites admitting many out of state students, and then not offer aid of significance and hope many of the applicants attend and pay the full load.
At need blind, it makes no direct difference. At need aware, it’s definitely an advantage - how much depends on the school.
Regardless of how schools think. Being able to apply without worrying about financial aid is a huge benefit for you.
In any case, it shouldn’t matter to applicants if a school is need blind or aware; it affects only the chances of admission, not how much you like the school, or how good a match it is for you.
Colleges are able to see if you filled out the FAFSA- if you didn’t, it means you aren’t applying for financial aid. In speaking with a few admissions officers that I know (not through a college but who my dad knows personally) and family friends who have been through this process, being a full pay kid, unfortunately, does give you a boost, ESPECIALLY in the ED round. A college admitting a full-pay kid in ED knows for certain they are going to be paid the full value of tuition- so in deciding between two similar kids, the full-pay kid might get the offer.
Won’t matter if the school is actually need blind. But fewer school actually are than say they are.
“But fewer school actually are than say they are.”
Where is this info?
Officially its no where. But if you believe every school that claims to be need blind is actually need blind, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
Unofficially? Your info comes from somewhere!
GW hit a snag when the admissions officer actually said they were need aware instead of need blind.
http://www.gwhatchet.com/2013/10/21/gw-misrepresented-admissions-and-financial-aid-policy-for-years/
It happens…
Thanks, specifics are useful. But note that the more important issue is meeting full need. For example, NYU has been need blind (for domestics) for years, but doesn’t meet full need, preventing attendance for many who are accepted. The opposite is a need-aware school that meets full need, supporting attendance for all accepted. To which would you rather apply, other things being equal (which they seldom are)?
You mean, does a profit-aware business try to maximize its income? And will a customer move to the front of the line if they can pay the full price for an item without a discount?
The answer to that is going to vary by school (depending on admissions policies and size of endowment, among other things). Being able to pay should not hurt you.
Not all colleges let adcoms see if you’re applying for aid or submitted paperwork. And they can’t just assume by parents’ occupation or zip code.
Whether a school looks at need or not probably depends on the financial status of the school. Schools that have been struggling to fill recently, for example, would need the revenue and would have stronger incentive to accept a student who’s full pay. It’s worth checking the list to see if your desired school filled this year. It’s also worth checking the Forbes ratings of schools for credit worthiness.
Likewise institutions whose budgets have been limited by legislation (some state schools) or whose budgets have been cut and/or tuition capped for in-state students, they’ve been looking elsewhere for needed cash. This accounts somewhat for the rise in international students. Full-pay students going OOS would be enticing.
As for hiding paperwork from adcoms and the notion that they can’t assume from zip codes or parents’ occupations, good point, but a lot can be inferred. Just like other things that are hidden (race, ethnicity, religion, age, gender) these things are discernible throughout the rest of the app. And I should think that someone attempting to leverage their full-pay status could somehow get their financial status across.
And then there’s the GW example. Some schools are really there to raise bucks IMO and there are marginal programs that seem to be marketing “education products” in the form of masters degrees that seem to terminate in debt and not much training or career opportunities, certificate programs that seem to do the same, etc. GW and Northeastern really worked the rankings system and I feel cynical about their motives.