<p>Does this mean if you offer to pay full tuition, you have a better chance of gettin in?</p>
<p>short answer: yes</p>
<p>but what it really means is that the admissions office may decide between similar applications by taking into account that one person needs less aid than the other</p>
<p>yeah, but it means you have a better chance of getting in if you are borderline or very similar to other people who applied because they will take you over the other people who are just like you, but even so many people who offer to pay full tuition are rejected...er...rather, wait-listed, there are a couple at my school....i am not sure but i hear columbia has the same admissions policy</p>
<p>Columbia is need blind as all of the ivies are. Though Wash U is not need blind, it does not mean that you are automatically put in a separate stack. Admissions gives all candidates a need blind reading and decision, and then those kids who need financial aid are given further assessment. Usually some sort of "grade" is given to candidates when they are assessed whether they are financial aid kids are not, with the top grade kids getting first crack at the merit awards, again financial aid or not, and other goodies. Those files that do go to financial aid are assessed by this grade along with amount of need. There is a difference between needing $5K and needing a full ride, and all other things equal, it is more prudent for a school to accept 8 kids needing $5K and using their $40K that way rather than using it all on one kid, unless the kid is a standout (a top grade candidate). So it is difficult to say whether your need affected your application decision. I know a couple of kids who have received some outstanding merit/aid packages from Wash U, in fact, that is what made the decision for them, as it was by far the best deal for them. But if you are a borderline candidate to them, financial need could well enter the picture.</p>
<p>Jamimom,</p>
<p>In your recollection, did the students who you referred to who recieved outstanding merit/aid packages recieve merit aid only through the scholarship application process, or does Wash U hold back any merit money apart from the named merit awards? My son did get accepted, was nominated for and applied for the Danforth (didn't get one) and I am in real doubt that the need-based aid will be workable for us. Haven't yet seen it, but that is my fear, not because of this year's available money but because we will have to foot the whole bill for stepson in 2006-2007 due to his mother's refusal to help. Son also got a full ride to another college, but he has expressed a very psoitive reaction to Wash U.</p>
<p>Wash U provides 100% of need for their kids, I am pretty sure. They will turn down someone before gapping them significantly. However, I do not know how the merit money works specifically to them. If it looks like you are going to have a situation of this sort, you may want to have your son write to them expressing his enthusiasm and the fact that Wash U is his first choice school, but that finances may interfere with his going there as he does have a full ride offer. Since Wash U so hates to be turned down, they may well be able to come up with something for him. No guarantee, but no risk either, as they certainly are not going to rescind the acceptance for asking about merit money. You might want to reiterate the situation in a separate letter or ask for a conference via phone after S's letter arrives, so that you can put the parental spin on the situation.</p>
<p>Congratulations for your son's acceptance. It was a tough year to get into Wash U. Several of my son's friends with some impressive resumes were waitlisted or denied.</p>
<p>Thanks, Jamimom, for your response. My son's full ride is a Bellingrath at Rhodes, which I only mention here because I know that there is often direct competition for students between the two schools. Think that might make a difference to Wash U? For me, (if I were the student) it would be very hard to turn down the Bellingrath, and it might prove to be so for my son, as well. Things are still forming in his mind, as he heard about the scholarship only a couple of days ago. But your advice is helpful. And we are thrilled with all the news that has come so far! Just concerned about what's next.</p>
<p>My son was also accepted to Rhodes with a nice merit award 5 years ago. He visited for the weekend and loved the school. Probably should have gone there. He had visited Wash U also before applying and their athletic dept was hot to have him, but the college did not interest him after his visit and he did not even apply there. My good friend from years back (has a D the same age as S) wanted her D to get into Wash U so much as it was the girl's first choice, and she did not get in despite sterling stats, great resume. But she ended up loving where she ended up going. </p>
<p>It seems like all else that comes is gravy in your case. With two very nice acceptances in hand, your S seems pretty set. The southern schools are starting to come on so very strong. More, and more kids are applying to them, and I suspect the selectivity is going to get tighter each subsequent year.</p>
<p>You are so right about the gravy. I should not worry a bit, I know. And there also are five other schools he applied to, all way high reaches, but he liked them all a lot. It will be good to have all the facts in hand, positive and negative, to make a good choice. Glad to hear that your son liked Rhodes. It is a really great place, as is Wash U. I am so sorry when I do hear stories about kids like your friend's daughter, who do not get in to their first choices, especially when every facet of their application is stellar. And yet so often they end up happy where they land! What an unfathomable ride this can be.</p>
<p>My counselor said that Wash U does like to take money into account, but that she's not so sure anymore, seeing that I got in requesting financial aid (and I really DO need it). I got a half-tuition scholarship there.</p>
<p>So don't try to rag on them too much. They aren't just trying to be cheapskates as some people think.</p>
<p>I did not know about their non-need blind admissions. I am definately underqualified for WashU but got waitlisted. I was hoping it was my great extra curriculars and being a stand out saxophone player but now that you talked about the money I probably only got waitlisted cause I didn't ask for any financial aid.</p>
<p>Jordan, I sincerely doubt that. A school with the number of apps that Wash U gets, with a 20% accept rate does not have to go into the underqualified list for its waitlist. It is not easy to tell who was in the fuzzy financial aid category. It does not work in the way that the one who is borderline and accepted is a full pay vs a FA student. The way it usually works is that there is a bunch of borderline FA students and so much money to allocate and it has to be allocated the best way possible. Admissions decisions are generally made first, then the money is allocated and some cuts may have to be made. But I doubt very much that they use the money criterion in the accept phase. It is too complicated to do so, and adcoms would rebel. The decision has to be made after the kids are triaged after the accept list is drawn. Financial aid does not evaluate every single candidate--only the accepted ones. So being able to pay does not give you an advantage in the accept stage. That is done on a need blind basis.</p>
<p>Sorry to break it to you parents and students, but there is no true "need-blind' school. If you apply to ivies which claim to be "need-blind" and check off the box for financial aid, you have a considerable disadvantage compared to those students to did not ask for aid. This is what my guidance councelor (ex-Harvard admissions officer) told me. So Wash U is really similar to other "need-blind" schools- it only admits that financial aid plays a role in the admissions process.</p>
<p>College5812, I do not know who this ex Harvard adcom is, but I strongly disagree with him. Although there is a point to the argument that there is no true "need blind" school given that the critieria for acceptance to most colleges are heavily dependent upon things that are just easier to get when you come from a well to do household (tutoring, test prep, strong ECs, great experiences, good school, less monetary stress at home, educated parents, ), I know that even schools that have to be need aware, make the process as need blind as possible by not taking into account that box for financial aid until the very end of the process. Kids sometimes do not qualify for aid who apply, and there is a world of difference between needing $5K and a full ride. Adcoms have their hands full trying to put together the best community given many constraints. They do not juggle the financials at the same time. Once all of the kids are triaged, the one who are borderline are often looked at with an eye to the bottom line. I know a number of people in admissions and financial aid, and though there are schools where the need issue does play a role, they are adament that checking that little box has no effect on the decision at the top schools. In fact many of them are a bit put off by "silver spoon" kids whose lives are pretty much "bought" given many of the adcoms don't even make what it costs to attend these schools. A mediocre resume from a rich kid turns everyone off in an admissions office.</p>
<p>Sorry Jamimom, but I strongly disagree with you. While I admit that there are definitely different degrees at which colleges factor in financial aid in the admissions process, ALL colleges do consider whether or not students will need aid. While people are led to believe that the colleges are genuinely concerned about educating the poor and minorities, in reality, they only care about two things: MONEY and PRESTIGE. Of course recruiting minorities and members of the lower financial class is needed to raise prestige, but the fact remains that money outweighs all other factors. Often the early round of admissions is based on financial situation: students who do not need financial assistance, or children of large donors are immediately accepted, while strong students who may need some assistance are usually deferred. There are certainly exceptions, however this appears to be the general trend. And if a "mediocre resume from a rich kid turns everyone off in an admissions office", why did a caucasian girl from my school just get into Georgetown with a 3.5 and 1300 SAT (and no notable ECs)? Certainly her families wealth (Which has been demonstrated through large but not historic contributions) played a large role in her admissions decision.</p>
<p>College5812, I know plenty of kids who were turned down by GT with much higher stats than your colleague whose families not only could afford. the tuition but who were legacies and whose parents were downright rich. Though I will not deny that those who are development/celebrity types will have an admission category of their own, and I would not be surprised if the superrich kids with big names are not given a second look, I do believe that the adcoms are needblind in the bulk of their admissions. Several years ago I personally knew of the situation of two very wealthy girls from families with known names coming from a top flight boarding school. Neither got into their fathers' alma mater. One never did get in though her father is a big time donor there. The other did get in off the waitlist (I think) but did not end up there. I knew of the situation personally, and I can tell you that one of the girls was a very qualified admit to any ivy, and yet was waitlisted at her top two choices and had to make the rounds and plead her case to get in. As anecdotal as your story, but I have seen this repeatedly though I have also seen border line development kids get in. The clincher might be Papa letting the development office know ahead of time. I worked in an admissions office for a top school, and not once was there a hint of the financial making a difference in an overt way, and this school is need aware. The top admits and mid admits got in without any discussion of need. The lower 5% were the ones that had to be maneuvered among the money that was left.</p>
<p>The merit based scholarships, I think, have a lot to do with your family's disposable income. My friend and I have almost the EXACT same statistics except her family's income is 1/2 of mine. Her merit based scholarship money was almost 2x as much as mine</p>
<p>that is not necessarilu true. i do not qualify for any need-based aid (at any school), however, as an Ervin Scholar, I received full tuition and a stipend from Wash U. I am still undecided about going, but the whole "need-based" idea seems a little weird to me considering that the school is pretty nice about money. And my family's income is pretty substantial.</p>
<p>To College5812 - i really dont think that with all of the money that harvard has....(the highest endowment by far in the nation) at $22.6 billion and about 70% of Harvard's undergrads receive financial aid....Harvard College's nearly $80 million in scholarships for undergraduates in the coming year represents a 49% increase over the past six years when inflation rose by only 13.5%. This increase in scholarship aid has reduced the average student loan debt upon graduation to $8,800</p>
<p>WOW that sux! that must mean the school is poor! i guess that sooort of explains y im waitlisted. ha! i thought good schools are suppose to be need-blind! oh well im gonna go to wellesley with a superbly sweeet financial package. so good luck to u all</p>