Pre med study

Pre-Med & Medical School Pre-Med Topics
21

<p>Just wanted to say that Stanford does still give non-need based athletic scholarships; my brother, an athlete, was just offered almost a full ride and he doesn’t qualify for any sort of need based FA.</p>

22

<p>

</p>

<p>H is generous, but not that generous:</p>

<p><a href=“https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/how-aid-works[/url]”>https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/how-aid-works&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If only it were that simple. The OP is from MN, their family is not wealthy and likely cannot afford an OOS public without substantial debt. The OP needs to be much more realistic and strategic than to just pick schools where they’d like to go and assume admissions and finances are going to work out.</p>

23

<p>Ento, Three years ago, Harvard noted the $100,000 as a precise point, Their endowment took a hit I believe since then so it may have changed.</p>

<p>I wanna and dina: your facts are different than what Richard Shaw and John Hennessy state. Also their publications state “ALL” are based on need.</p>

<p>Entomom
I agree that several choices need to be made and the final decision has to be bases on both “want” and “can” - but I feel you are also being a bit pessimistic.</p>

<p>I stand by statement to pick based on what you want to major in and where you want to live (would not go to a place you would hate to live or that is terrible in your major) - but will agree to also add $ to the equation</p>

24

<p>In 2011:</p>

<p>[Harvard</a> increases financial aid to low-income students | Harvard Gazette](<a href=“http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/09/harvard’s-record-166-million-financial-aid-program-will-increase-aid-to-low-income-students-and-provide-a-new-financial-aid-calculator-for-students-and-families/]Harvard”>Harvard increases financial aid to low-income students — Harvard Gazette)</p>

<p>

</p>

25

<p>Sorry P’Dad. Stanford most certainly gives non- need based athletic scholarships. If the fellas are saying they don’t, well , they mis-spoke. </p>

<p>I think it is likely though that they were referencing merit scholarships, not athletic scholarships and simply not being precise.</p>

26

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Interesting jump from top/like to terrible/hate in response to such a ‘pessimistic’ statement. </p>

<p>Other members have provided links to the statements they are making, it would be helpful if you did the same.</p>

27

<p>Princess’Dad, and I’m telling you my brother was offered a huge athletic scholarship, so they must not be talking about athletic scholarships.</p>

28

<p>^^To reinforced dina’s point. One of our neighbor’s kids/HS classmate of D2 recieved a substantial athletic scholarship to Stanford based upon national qualifying times in his sport. (The family does not qualify for need-based aid and was full pay everywhere for both of his older brothers.)</p>

<p>The young man in question graduated from Stanford this past May.</p>

29

<p>P Dad,</p>

<p>so you’re saying the stanford athletics page I posted above dated 2013 and the NCSA are lying?</p>

<p>[Stanford</a> University Football Scholarships Guide](<a href=“Stanford University Football Scholarships Guide”>Stanford University Football Scholarships Guide)</p>

<p>

</p>

30

<p>After some quick google research, I think what Shaw or others might have been talking about is the “unique” way Stanford funds athletic scholarships . Maybe something got muddled in the retelling. There was a WSJ online article about it. There is also a FAQ about the athletic scholarships. Google Stanford+Football+ scholarships. Should come up in the top results. </p>

<p>P’Dad certainly heard or read what he says he heard or read . I trust that. It’s just that it’s not correct.</p>

31

<p>I wanna, from your ref: “Number of Students Who Received Non-Need Based Athletic Grants and Scholarships: 0”</p>

<p>Dina, don’t know your income, but Stanford gives full tuition if income < $100,000 which is full pay at most universities </p>

<p>Just saying, Richard was specifically asked about non-need based for athletics and he said no. The < $100,000 for tuition and < $61,000 for everything is based for ALL. </p>

<p>Jobs and loans are open to all and athletics may have different sources. </p>

<p>Again, ref replied by Iwanna says zero</p>

32

<p>From the Stanford FAQ I mentioned earlier. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.gostanford.com/fls/30600/old_site/pdf/StanfordAthleticScholarshipFAQ.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=30600[/url]”>http://www.gostanford.com/fls/30600/old_site/pdf/StanfordAthleticScholarshipFAQ.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=30600&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

33

<p>Cur
Keep reading: amount of money student-athlete may get is dependent on financial need</p>

<p>I stand by my post. Athletes get no different aid then scholars do. The Senate was adamant on this! They like Lucks, they also like Rices</p>

34

<p>Pdad,</p>

<p>is it a super duper recent policy change? Because while my reference does say 0 first time freshman, it says 629 full time undergrads have non need based athletic scholarships.</p>

35

<p>Princess’Dad, my parents are very well off and so my brother wouldn’t qualify for any of these. He was offered the scholarship this application cycle.</p>

<p>I’m not trying to make this a bigger deal than it is, just want it to be known.</p>

36

<p>Then there must of been a change</p>

<p>Lots of parents are well off, but with good financial advice, not too hard to make the $100,000</p>

<p>Iwanna. I have no idea, it has been a year since Shaw adamantly said no to athletic non need based $ and your ref is confusing</p>

37

<p>what about stanford’s own ref that says there are 300 athletic scholarships? Why word it that way? Why not say “all athletes will receive full need based aid?”</p>

<p>My guess is there’s some weird loophole/fund that was created that wasn’t explained well such that the status quo of athletic scholarships has been maintained while somehow being able to now claim the university doesn’t grant them. Kind of like how fraternities “don’t spend any money on alcohol.”</p>

38

<p>lol. Plausible deniability. </p>

<p>Not hard to imagine . Faculty senate anti big football/ sports. Not academic enough for a prestigious uni. So Prestigious uni sets up totally separate fundraising for an athletic scholarship endowment totally separate from school endowment/FA funds. They make sports scholarship students fill out FA apps even though no FA money is ever awarded. Senate is mollified. Coach is still able to recruit. And let’s be real. How many big sport kids wouldn’t qualify even if the athletic department didn’t have a finger on the scale? Not many.</p>

<p>Of course. I am not talking about Stanford . Just saying it is not hard to imagine it happening somewhere.</p>

39

<p>Stanford Senate is “for” sports. The IM sport program at Stanford is one of the largest in the country. </p>

<p>In recruitment, Stanford is different from SEC or most schools. Andrew Luck wanted to go to Stanford and was was great student. Giving him a financial aid package would not have changed that. The athletic program does have some “pull” in admitting someone (ie gives the kid the WOW factor)</p>

40

<p>Are you saying Luck did not have a football scholarship?</p>