<p>Reed’s aid is pretty good, outside the no-loan schools probably about
as good as it gets. Also from their website</p>
<p>Reed aspires to make every admission decision without regard to an applicant’s ability to pay; however, our financial aid resources are sometimes insufficient to meet the need of all qualified applicants. When that happens, those applicants deemed most qualified are given preference in the admission process.</p>
<p>That didn’t happen. They accepted less qualified students based on wealth. I think Reed owes those students it denied for financial reasons an apology. It’s bait and switch college style!</p>
<p>^ Again, this happens every year at every need-aware school. </p>
<p>But I do think one sentence could be improved: “When that happens, those applying for financial aid deemed most qualified are given preference in the admission process.”</p>
<p>As far as I can see that’s the only sentence on the website that even
vaguely suggests Reed is need-aware. Not only that, but how about those
students who have visited and interviewed and been encouraged to
continue the process. Were they told directly that Reed is need-aware.
They could have applied ED if they knew that or if they knew Reed was
considering changing it’s policy midstream. I think the right thing to do
was to change the policy after this admission season and be clear about
the need-aware policy. It’s deceptive.</p>
<p>First, this is a really good thread. The people posting are respectful and well-informed.</p>
<p>As far as Reed informing the 100 unfortunate students who needed aid as to what happened, the deliberations of any admissions committee are confidential. Noone ever gets to know why they were admitted, rejected or placed on the wait list from any school.</p>
<p>Bay made an excellent point. All that I would offer is that noone wants to see an education at the elite schools available only to those who can pay the full price. But Bay did make a really good observation, there is nothing wrong with a family working its way up.</p>
<p>I too am really tired of the attitude that I’ve seen on CC that “you’re doomed to mediocrity if you don’t attend a top school”. The truth is a good education is available at many places. The idea that being low income is a hook, you’d have to prove that to me.</p>
<p>Also, like one of the earlier posters, I am tired of the notion that meeting a family’s demonstrated financial need means that you are giving them enough money to attend your school. That just isn’t the case, the only schools I know that can really claim they give enough aid so anyone admitted can afford to attend are HYP. From what I can gather some families get enough and some families don’t and I can’t quite pin down why the difference.</p>
<p>^^ There was no change in policy. The impact of the existing need-aware policy (put in place in 2003) was heightened by the recession. The previous policy was need-blind with gapping; it was changed (by the new administration at that time) because it was viewed as cruel and unfair, doing more harm than good.</p>
<p>here’s an upfront statement from another need aware college, Skidmore.
Truth in advertising.</p>
<p>Is Skidmore College need-blind?
Skidmore encourages any student interested in applying for admission to do so regardless of his/her intention to seek financial aid. All candidates are evaluated on the strength of their academic and personal qualifications, without regard to their financial circumstances. The admissions committee makes every effort to meet the demonstrated need of as many admissible candidates as it can. Unfortunately, each year there are more qualified candidates in need of financial aid than the College’s resources can support. When all institutional grant resources have been committed, the admissions committee will offer admission to some candidates but place them on a financial aid waiting list. In the final round of the selection process, the committee may also find it necessary to waitlist or deny a small number of candidates on the basis of unmet financial need.</p>
<p>They were qualified, not admitted. All the students who were admitted were qualified, even the rich ones.</p>
<p>As has been pointed out endlessly, admission isn’t about taking the ‘best’, it is about ‘building a class’. So now they want to build a class with more money.</p>
<p>Thanks, Vossron. That information from President Diver was sent in a letter to every Reed alumnus (and, I suspect, parent and donor).</p>
<p>While I think the NYT article was good, and the discussion here as well has kept the Reed policy in context, the headline/title of the NYT article was misleading (“College in Need Closes a Door to Needy Students”). Diver had to write his corrective both because the article largely overlooked the information that he is supplying here and because that headline was misleading.</p>
<p>oh! the spin! I think the title of the article was right on and follows up
very nicely on the Times previous article on 2009 college admissions.</p>
<p>There’s going to be a cascading of talented lower-income kids down the social hierarchy of American higher education, and some cascading up of affluent kids,” said Morton Owen Schapiro, the president of Williams College and an economist who studies higher education</p>
<p>Pretty much exactly what happened at Reed and numerous other Lacs this year.</p>
<p>Very interesting posts. I had been following the letters from President Diver but didn’t see that NYT article.</p>
<p>I actually am a student who is directly affected by this. I applied as a transfer student to Reed for this fall and (by a glitch) my application was processed late. By that time, they had already divvied up the financial aid for next year and even though they wanted to accept me, they couldn’t afford me as their fin aid budget was already overextended. Because of the economic situation, a lot more people are applying for and accepting aid packages than anticipated, and current students are requesting additional help. However, the admissions office kindly called me, explained the situation and offered me deferred admission for Fall 2010 with guaranteed fin aid. After a lot of consideration, I accepted. I appreciated their forthrightness and giving me other options, instead of just waitlisting/ rejecting me because of my need. Most likely the 100 students in the article were probably waitlisted because they were still desirable, not outright rejected. And they have established a financial aid waitlist in case a miracle happens and more money opens up.</p>
<p>I think when you guarantee to meet 100% of students’ demontrated need, you must have a need-aware system in place so you don’t promise more than you can pay off. It is a trade-off for offering excellent financial aid. My current college is need-blind but practices “gapping” and expected me to pay double my EFC because they can only cover 50% or so of my need. I think this is more detrimental to economic diversity, because it actually makes it impossible for some disadvantaged students to attend who can’t buck up the extra money, where Reed is at still admitting and paying 100% of the need of some qualified yet disadvantaged students, just not as many as usual.</p>
<p>I have a student at Reed who has completed three semesters and has over $25,000 of debt so far. “Demonstrated need” is not the same as what you can afford to come up with, especially if you are middle class. The financial aid “need” calculation is a formula which as far as I can tell does not necessarily correspond to reality. If the student and family are low income, or if the family is truly rich, then welcome to Reed. If you are middle class, you may be in for a very rough ride.</p>
<p>It is true that schools that use PROFILE and their own aid forms, may ( probably) have a different idea of EFC, than the FAFSA which does not take into account mortgage- second homes, etc, does.
However- as a middle class family, living in an expensive area, we did find that filing Jan 1st seemed to make a difference and Reed used same EFC as FAFSA.
100% need met, meant just that.
Small subsidized Perkins loan
Maximum subsidized Stafford loan
work study
the rest besides EFC was a grant.
I’ll admit that the EFC was a PITA to come up with.
But that would have been the case had it been UW ( in state) or Reed college.</p>