<p>If it is obvious that a student will NOT be eligible for FA, yet the student indicates on the application that he or she will need/want FA, does that set him up to a <em>higher standard</em>, since the adcoms know that he won't be coming unless he gets FA (and of course, he won't...)?</p>
<p>IOW, why waste an acceptance on someone you know isn't going to pan out?</p>
<p>doubleplay--wondered about that also when son was applying to schools, also. While we knew that we would most likely have to pay full cost out of pocket, we wondered if asking for financial aid would hurt his chances. We also wondered, however, if adcoms did notice that likely we could afford the tuition and based on his academic qualifications did admit him knowing he was a full-pay. Oh to be a fly on the wall in admissions offices!</p>
<p>The admissions committee is completely seperate from the Financial Aid Office.</p>
<p>I don't understand your point, doubleplay.</p>
<p>I'm not making a point; I'm asking a question...
We also wondered about the "will you be asking for financial aid?" question on the application. For what purpose was it on there? If you say "yes, I will need FA", and it's obvious you aren't going to get it (say, because of your parent's occupations and where you live), does it affect the decision?</p>
<p>If it is not regarded in the application process, why is it asked on the application? Why not just accept or not accept and then find out later (by the FAFSA and Profiles) how much the college is going to give out?</p>
<p>The admissions committee may be separate from the Financial Aid office, but don't they all see the same app? Or is the app chopped up and sent to the various offices? As I said in an earlier post, all an adcom has to do is look at the parent info. Likely it is pretty telling as to whether financial aid will be needed--I think that if the app is asking a lot of questions about the parents (education, employment), then a fishing expedition is occurring! The app should be about the student, not about parents!!</p>
<p>I understand your frustration, mammall. But, I must say I wish I was in a position to share it. I will --if things go the way we hope-- have one kid in a local public U and one in a private. Hopefully there will be some aid from the private, and I know there will virtually none from the public. Our income is kinda middle, I guess: <60K for a family of 4. We have quite a bit of equity in our 60 year old, 1000 sq. ft house because of the rise in real estate prices since we bought it. We work hard too. We have one 16 year old sub-compact car, and no investments. We don't eat out. We don't go on vacations. We don't buy clothes except when they are on clearance racks outside the discount store. We don't have cell phones. My kids don't have laptops or Ipods or video game systems. We don't have cable TV. Both kids have jobs. But we will have to pay thousands of dollars (probably around 10K if the finaid calculators are correct) combined for our kids every year, and they will graduate with loan debt. We will borrow against the house to pay our share. It's okay. A college education is worth it. But it's not like we're lucky to be poorer. </p>
<p>In fact, I don't think of us as poor at all. Only by crazy consumerist American standards would anyone ever think of us a "poor." I am grateful for what we have. I just hope universal health care comes through at some point... and that social security will survive in to our old age! Take heart! You are a fortunate man and you have fortunate kids! Good on you for doing such a great job by your family.</p>
<p>doubleplay-</p>
<p>I would imagine that the box is there to make sure that the college has all of your paperwork.</p>
<p>I would also imagine that the average admissions officer is not intimately acquainted with how to calculate financial aid/review tax returns.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obviously we all would like to be able to provide our children with the ideal college environment, but I think there is a risk when we lose sight of the ability to sort preferences & desires from basic requirements, especially in the context of an overly hyped college admissions system.
[/quote]
Calmom, you're right, in the narrowest sense, that as a parent I want the best for my own kids. I also want the best for yours, and for our society, and for the globe. I think that means doing all we can to make education accessible -- especially to the bright motivated kids who can make the best use of it. The top LACs ("Ivy" is irrelevant to me; I'm talking about small colleges with first-rate faculty and facilities) encourage top students by doing their best with need-based financial aid.
If a small, rigorous college is a best fit, for whatever reasons, wouldn't you agree that it is in everyone's best interest to make that possible? Don't we need all the excellent teachers and poets and peacemakers we can enable?</p>
<p>
[quote]
If a small, rigorous college is a best fit, for whatever reasons, wouldn't you agree that it is in everyone's best interest to make that possible? Don't we need all the excellent teachers and poets and peacemakers we can enable?
[/quote]
In what way do you suggest that it be made possible?</p>
<p>I don't think excellent teachers, poets, and peacemakers are the exclusive domain of small expensive colleges. I also think a 'no expenses spared' approach to education is impractical.</p>
<p>Celloguy, I think that what we need to do as a society is focus on public education options. To the extent that a small, LAC environment is a positive for many students then - yes -- I think that we should encourage states to fund smaller public colleges as well as large research universities. </p>
<p>While I appreciate the opportunity that both my kids have had to attend private colleges, I don't see this as a societal concern. I certainly don't want to see taxpayer money becoming the stepping stone on which private colleges can use to boost their tuitions even higher.</p>
<p>I would point out that a lot of states already have such colleges, and part of the struggle these small public colleges face is competing for good students with the private colleges. So those colleges might fare a lot better if they weren't treated with such disdain by prestige-conscious families. </p>
<p>For example, the layoffs that took place at my son's college are a direct result of insufficient enrollment -- too many kids use that college as a safety and go elsewhere; leaving the school to repeatedly fall below its projected enrollment figures.</p>
<p>We also wondered about the "will you be asking for financial aid?" question on the application. For what purpose was it on there?</p>
<p>My daughters acceptances and finaid package came in same envelope</p>
<p>There are only 26 totally "need blind" colleges or universities in the US.</p>
<p>My husband is reading that book now. He says it's a revelation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We make enough that we'll have to pay full freight but we are most certainly not rich.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Have you tried any of the online financial aid estimators? Some of the middle-class parents to whom I have recommended a reality check on their eligibility are pleasantly surprised to see that they are eligible for discounts from list price at some great colleges. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.princeton.edu/main/admission-aid/aid/prospective/estimator/%5B/url%5D">http://www.princeton.edu/main/admission-aid/aid/prospective/estimator/</a> </p>
<p>mammall, we were in a similar position 5 years ago when our son was a hs junior. Though he was a good student and could be admittied to many fine colleges(not HYP but the likes of Cornell and Wesleyan) we made a decision that paying $180,000 for an undergraduation was foolish given other fine options.</p>
<p>We have never regretted the choices we made and our son has received a top notch education, achieve several academic successes and is enjoying himself greatly.</p>
<p>Our retirement savings are intact(well not quiet with the three week market downturn) and about $50,000 of his college savings(which was $76,000 when he enrolled frosh year) remains for use when he graduates next may.</p>
<p>Regrets? None. </p>
<p>Be happy that your child is a good student who will take full advantage of the academic opportunities regardless of where she/he attends.</p>
<p>"There are only 26 totally "need blind" colleges or universities in the US."</p>
<p>There are actually NO "need blind" colleges in the country (except the military academies perhaps, and maybe Cooper Union and Olin). The only question is the extent to which they use need in making admissions decisions. For example, no college could make a commitment to increasing the percentage of students who are low-income if they were blind to their need. The flip side is that it is extremely, extremely unlikely that a college could maintain virtually exactly the same percentage of full-freighters year after year after year without knowing their (lack of) need status in advance. </p>
<p>Now do they need to know the need status of individual candidates? In the first case, probably yes. In the second case, probably no (they can figure that out from zip codes, etc.)</p>
<p>It's pretty clear that even need-blind colleges can't let their FA budgets fluctuate wildly, but I wonder if they can't keep the "need for need" stable in more subtle ways: </p>
<p>by having admissions targets for other categories: URMs, legacies, internationals, geography, public/private school attendance; </p>
<p>by relying on the correlation between test scores and income; and </p>
<p>by just monitoring all of the above year-to-year and making adjustments as needed. For example, I don't think that any school is probaby truly need-blind in the sense that they'd admit all the superbly qualified international students that apply (many of whom would have high need).</p>
<p>To the OP, sadly more schools are becoming more akin to "Robin Hood" than ever before. University of Richmond, for example, just raised their tuition last year by $9,000 per year! This was done to provide more scholarships.</p>
<p>My daughter attended Syracuse University Summer art program,which was $5,000. I found out that while we paid full tuition, twenty-five percent of the summer class paid nothing! It absolutely galled me to such an extent that my daughter went elsewhere for college ( although there were other reasons that she didn't choose Syracuse).</p>
<p>Carnegie Mellon gives out some full paid merit scholarships and a number of partial need based scholarships while wanting us to pay the full tuition. It is very appauling.</p>
<p>My suggestion, however, is not to focus on the inequity of this situation. Just focus on what is best for your kid taking affordability into account. I wouldn't recommend compromising your retirement for your kid to attend a top 10 school when there are plenty of great options that might provide great merit scholarships. Just my opinion though. I am sure many would would not agree.</p>
<p>To person who noted that their kid got a great scholarship and noted " I hope the school will decide that its investment in his education was worthwhile"</p>
<p>My response is that it isn't just the school who is making this investment. In fact, it can be argued that the school isn't making this investment at all: it is the other suckers.....er...parents who are paying full tuition who are paying for scholarships. Maybe my thinking is a bit insular,but I really don't want to subsidize other people. I do it enough with my taxes, I don't personally want to do this with other types of expenes. I know that this isn't politically correct, but it is the way that I feel.</p>
<p>I wouldn't recommend compromising your retirement for your kid to attend a top 10 school when there are plenty of great options that might provide great merit scholarships. Just my opinion though. I am sure many would would not agree.</p>
<p>Well I would agree-</p>
<p>There are so many choices- almost as many as there are students it seems sometimes- but like at the supermarket, that can make it more confusing.
US news and others are good resources- but even if you are a top scholar- a Westinghouse winner- there are other opportunities that can be appropriate besides an Ivy.</p>
<p>Also if it means that your parents have to shortchange other priorities- then going into hock for an Ivy * wouldn't* be appropriate IMO.</p>
<p>it is the other suckers.....er...parents who are paying full tuition who are paying for scholarships.</p>
<p>Source?</p>
<p>Actually endowments pay for scholarships- tuition from other parents never pay to subsidize another student.
However at Ds school room and board costs included maintainance while students who lived off campus, didn't include those fees.</p>
<p>"For example, no college could make a commitment to increasing the percentage of students who are low-income if they were blind to their need. The flip side is that it is extremely, extremely unlikely that a college could maintain virtually exactly the same percentage of full-freighters year after year after year without knowing their (lack of) need status in advance."</p>
<p>I don't quite understand how you can make that assumption. I would think it is the other way around in that admission at highly selective colleges is favorably skewed toward those students who need major financial aids. Low income is a major hook, at least for the highly selective colleges.</p>