<p>One can hardly blame much less selective schools for putting their eggs in the merit aid basket. </p>
<p>When the selective schools have cherry picked the high-achieving low income students, it is rational for the less selective schools to do what is best in their financial and reputational interest, especially when the schools are not richly endowed-- they must resort to admissions triage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(Do you mean “financial aid and scholarship triage” instead of “admissions triage”?)</p>
<p>For state universities, does it make more sense for each campus to have its own policy on financial aid and scholarships, or for there to be a statewide policy if the state intends for there to be affordable state universities for the non-superstar students?</p>
<p>Yes, I meant aid triage. On a battlefield, it makes more sense to focus limited resources on patients w the most likely chance of surviving (i.e. graduating).</p>
<p>The dynamics are different in a well stocked hospital that admits only mildly ailing patients.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The one that UIUC offered my son seems to be largely based on one’s ACT score and having applied to the College of Engineering. According to CC posts in the UIUC forum at the time, it was offered to those applicants with ACTs of 35 and 36; one Hispanic student with a 34 also received an offer. </p>
<p>That’s a pretty high threshold for a merit scholarship, and I think such scholarships were specifically designed to reduce the Illinois brain drain to more elite colleges. I don’t know how well that “bribe” is working for UIUC, because both Silverturtle and my son ended up at Brown instead.</p>
<p>One other program is the Sage Tuition Program. It can be tied to PA’s 529 program, plus some other programs. The more you have invested in PA’s 529 program, the more automatic scholarship you can receive from hundreds of private colleges. The colleges that participate are generally the less selective ones. The longer you have the money in the 529 program, the more benefit you receive. If you save in advance for college expenses, it is not difficult to earn a $4,000 a year guaranteed scholarship for 4 years.</p>
<p>I mention this option because of how it affects the motivations of colleges. In addition to seeking students who can pay tuition out of current income, they also want students who have large amounts of college savings. The colleges are willing to offer a discount to these students regardless of their test scores.</p>
<p>Update: someone identifying herself as Max’s mother posted a critical comment yesterday on the Times site, saying that the reporter had made misleading comments based on phone conversations with “two naive young men.” She also claims that the reporter ignored the fact that another one of her children received a full-tuition scholarship at Purdue.</p>
<p>This has always been an issue with merit awards. The fact of the matter is that many schools want those students with the higher SAT scores. Yes, those students do tend to be from the more upper income households, and, yes, they do tend to do better. Higher test scores, better performance, completion rates are all very much linked to income. It’ s a fact of life.</p>
<p>A low-income Indiana resident attending Purdue (or any other state school) can qualify for the state’s 21st Century Scholar program. While there are a few hoops, for those that register and meet the qualifications, they pay no tuition at any public, in state school.</p>
<p>For a 21st Century Scholar student attending Purdue who pays no tutition the Pell grant and federal loans just have to cover the remaining expenses. For room and board, books, and other misc expenses the Pell and federal loan money along with potential work-study or other part-time income can MORE than cover all the costs involved.</p>
<p>With the state aid available, it makes no sense for a school like Purdue to offer additional need-based aid and their available funds are better served offering merit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I couldn’t disagree more strongly. The figures you cite may work for the student with zero EFC who is eligible for the 21st Century Scholar state grant as well as the maximum Pell grant, and takes the maximum available federal loans, and perhaps work-study. But relatively few students are in that category. Pell grants are on a sliding scale; most recipients don’t get the largest award. Look at Purdue’s own Common Data Set. Even AFTER distributing $26 million in federal need-based grants/scholarships (primarily Pell grants), and AFTER distributing an additional $22 million in state grants/scholarships, and AFTER distributing a whopping $140 million in student loans, and AFTER parceling out an additional $7 million in work-study money–they’re still left with about 9,000 students with unmet need, out of a total of about 13,800 determined to have financial need before any of this aid was awarded. On average, they’re meeting only 84% of need AFTER FA from all sources is counted.</p>
<p>Granted, this is better than at many public universities, but it’s not good enough, IMO. The bottom line is that most students with financial need at Purdue get “gapped,” with financial aid from all sources falling short of calculated need. The fact that they’re meeting on average 84% of need suggests the gap isn’t insuperable; it could be overcome with a little more institutional effort and different institutional priorities. But that’s precisely why I would question their priorities in dumping $24 million a year in institutional funds into merit (non-need-based) aid. As a public university, their goal should be to meet 100% of need, at least for in-state students. If they’re not doing that (and clearly they aren’t), then I would question every dime they put into merit money for students without demonstrated need.</p>
<p>I have a lot more radical opinions about state schools, what they should cost and how funding should be directed more to them,starting with the community colleges, but the reality is that my models are not what is in existance. No state school guarantees to meet full need to all state residents, other than VA, Michigan and maybe a few more, if that. Some states such as GA, WV, FL, with programs like Hope, Bright Pomise have come up with money for merit awards on a wide spread basis with no income restrictions but with academic standards (gpa and test scores usually) to keep talent in state. So this is a valid concern. For states without such progams, and I don’t know whether IN falls into this category, having merit money in the picture is doing the same thing. Giving money to NMS finalists, having additional merit awards, all of these things do make the schools attractive to those students with stats high enough that they could go elsewhere. The result of making a school that is not attracting a high level of students with the income, test scores, grades, is going to make it even less attractive. </p>
<p>This is a conundrum faced by schools that give merit for a number of things to address something that keeps the school a strong consideration for students with families that could pay for them to go to any humber of choices. Giving preference and more consideration to those students than can make a school more attractive is beneficial to all concerned. Though schools like Harvard can do just fine without giving merit money, only financial aid, that is not the case with many schools competing for students. The reality is that most schools are not that selective in admissions and the student can do the selecting, so that the schools have to work to attract the students they want most and also take finances into account. There are schools out there where the sticker price is not real at all with close to 100% of the kids getting financial aid. I don’t think that 's a good direction for a school to take.</p>
<p>My son applied and was accepted to Purdue. He is one of those that would have been gapped.</p>
<p>I am a single parent with an income of approximately $60,000/year, not low income by most definitions. Our EFC was about $11,000. My son did not qualify for any federal aid because of our EFC. Assuming I would be able to pay the EFC + federal loans, would have left a gap of about $5000 based on their COA of about $21,000.</p>
<p>However my son would not have qualified for any need-based aid and I don’t believe he should have. He is at another school on a full-tuition merit scholarship.</p>
<p>Not all of those students that are gapped are ‘low-income’ students. While I agree that the cost of college is WAY too high and that costs need to be controlled, I would also argue that it’s not the job of the tax payers to pay ‘need-based aid’ for students that are in the position of my son because I as a parent didn’t plan adequately as I knew I should have.</p>
<p>I had absolutely no issue with Purdue failing to offer my son need-based aid even though we had a gap. My only issue with Purdue was that they opted not to offer my 4.0+ GPA, 31 ACT son ANY merit aid, so I guess I’d argue that they don’t budget enough for merit…</p>
<p>
I don’t know about other states, but here in WV, PROMISE is criticized by some for not doing enough to help low-income students, even though the requirements are relatively modest (a B average on the school’s scale plus an ACT score of 22) Our high schools simply are not that rigorous and this is doable for most kids who halfway apply themselves no matter what their income level.</p>
<p>These days the first priority of many publics is tuition revenue maximization. If you don’t like that write your governor.Fin aid is a luxury many cannot afford.Also many states have state scholarships/grants good at any state school. The schools don’t get credit for those.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UCs meet in-state need based on FAFSA EFC, but with an ESC of $8,500 to $10,000 (UVA ESC = $0 now, but will be $7,000; UMichigan ESC ~= $9,000). CSUs produce a net price of about $4,000 for commuters, $11,000 for on-campus living, for in-state students eligible for maximum financial aid.</p>
<p>UNC-CH and UWashington probably also meet in-state need.</p>
<p>Other than UVA now (but not for next fall’s frosh), most schools that meet need have an ESC of at least $4,000 (yes, even Harvard and Stanford), with many in the $8,500+ range where both direct loans and some work earnings are needed to cover it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Be careful with percentage of need met for public schools. The percentage may be substantially different for in-state versus out-of-state students.</p>
<p>Also, how is ESC considered in terms of percentage of need met? If a school has a list price of $25,000, calculates a student’s EFC = $0, and offers a $20,000 financial aid grant, leaving an ESC of $5,000 for the student to cover with direct loan and/or work earnings, is that counted as meeting 80% of need or 100% of need?</p>
<p>Of course, EFC may be calculated differently by each school. A school can claim to meet 100% of need, but calculate EFC very unfavorably for many students.</p>
<p>UVa and UNC-CH are the only two public colleges that meet 100% of financial need for all US students, including out of state. UNC-CH has a much lower percent of out of state and much higher state funding per student than UVa.</p>
<p>I understand William and Mary meets 100% of need for in-state, and provides some aid for lower income out of state.</p>
<p>Starting with next year’s incoming students, UVa will expect all in-state students to take on $3,500 of federally subsidized Stafford loans per year in order to be eligible for the University’s own aid. This was already true for most students, but now it will also be true for low income students. For out of state students, the amount is $7,000 a year, which is intended to be a mix of Staffords and Perkins loans. UVa has a loan cap, after which students can be eligible for additional aid from the U. Work study is also typically part of the package.</p>
<p>Though it is commendable that UN-C, UVA, W&M are meeting need, the schools are such that they preselect the cream of the crop anyways so that the bias is already for those students that could qualify for merit mone. If a schools like Eastern Virginia Tech that tends to get more needy students, lots of PELL eligible kids, decides they want some kids that UVA calibre, can’t give the full need met guarantee to all kids because they don’t have the money, they should not be alowed to use some of their funds for merit money? Even if who they are more likely to attract given the stats, are the kids who don’t need the aid, and they are taking funds that could be used for need?</p>
<p>THere is a small local school here that gives out a lot of merit money for those that would be, say, it their upper 10% stats. Most of the kids are on financial aid, and few have full need met, and there are a decent number of PELL eligible kids. The kids I know who have gone there on merit money tend to be those whose families would not qualify for financial aid, and those kids likely would not have gone there if it weren’t for the generous merit that sometimes makes the school tuition totally free, They even throw in grad school goodies for those who keep up the grades during UG. I know someone who turned down UNC-CH for the deal and got her BA and Masters there free vs what OOS costs would have been for UNC as well as for any other schools that were possibilities for her. It’s clear that the school is “buying” top students. IS that so wrong? Does it not raise the calibre of the school for those who do not get the merit money as well, and make it a more attractive option over all? I think it does. </p>
<p>My son got such an offer but wanted to go away to school, but after seeing a lot of peers going there, enjoying it and doing well, his feelings about the school are quite high, and he would tell anyone that it is a good option. So the school does get value for funds expended. </p>
<p>For schools without the reps of W&M and UVA, attracting kids of a certain academic standard is difficult. And that standard is linked as a matter of fact to income. I don’t see any other way to get more of such students than to offer merit mone. All things equal in cost, a student is almost always going to go to UVA over a Eastern VA Tech. A free ride might change the picture. UVA meets full need so for those who qualify for getting all of their costs paid, when offers come in from both schools, they can get the money from UVA as well. It’s those who have to pay out of pocket that the merit money will attract in such situations.</p>
<p>Whenever everyone talks about merit aid, they talk about the colleges chasing US News rankings. However, another way of looking at it is that they are rewarding students who are working hard in high school. After all, don’t we want merit to be rewarded? </p>
<p>Don’t we want strong incentives to be built into the system, so that high school students want to pull themselves away from video games and beer?</p>
<p>If someone is fumbling their way through high school with little effort, maybe it is best if they can’t afford a large 4 year university that is far from home. Maybe they would have a higher graduation rate and less debt if they attended a college that is closer to home with fewer distractions and less competition, or if they studied at a trade school?</p>
<p>Not sure W&M is meeting 100% need for instate without a huge redefinition . On a Fafsa EFC that was just a pittance, friend’s kid got a good grant but even after loans and WS was major gapped. The merit plus need aid for the second son- at a private- actually makes the latter lower cost. Equally strong students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Someone fumbling his/her way through high school with little effort may not even be admitted to a less-selective state university, so affordability and financial aid is not relevant to such a student.</p>