question on gap years, applying again, and Early decision commitments

Parents Forum
21

<p>many questions</p>

<p>First off, we are all now agreed DD will not apply ED to WUSTL. We need to examine further if applying to WUSTL at all would endanger her position at RPI, if we need their permission, how to approach them, etc.</p>

<p>DW says it occured to her just because she realized it was the time of year for ED deadlines, and WUSTL was the only one of the schools that WLed her that DD was interested in after she got her acceptances.</p>

<p>FA guarantee - We asked RPI if their aid offer is still good with a deferment. That might have caused us to pass on the gap year. They assured us it is, and for all five years of the B Arch. We also had to notify NMSC, as RPI offers $$ to NMF’s, which DD is. However part of the RPI package is need based, so we DO need to refile FAFSA. </p>

<p>Difficulty - I do not know how to say this without sounding like a real jerk. But TJ kids other than those who go to tippy top colleges, often DO report that “college is easier than TJ” TJ is a seriously very, very hard place. Now thats not really an issue against RPI - A. after her academic struggles at TJ, a program that is a little easier wouldn’t be bad for here necessarily - its hard finding the sweetspot with a kid like this B. Anyway, thats not really relevant to architecture. OTOH we are HOPING that studio work will be a good fit for a an ADHD/visual spatial kid who likes hands on things. The worst moments at TJ were when she had to write a big paper - not so much the writing (she’s a pretty good stylist) but the organizing, focusing, etc. Sitting at home, getting distracted. The great thing about architecture, we hope - you have to do it (mostly) in the studio, not take it home. Anyway, for DW, I think the appeal of WUSTL (aside from general positives about it as a fantastic, serious, nerdy, but balanced place) this is more about a gut reaction against ‘don’t reach too high’ than it is about RPI. </p>

<p>technical kid - she not as techy as some TJ kids - whiles shes pretty good in math, and has done well in purely tech courses, she is not a fan of science so much (though she admits she had some talent in physics) Her APs senior year were English, Gov, and Japanese. She loves musical theater, Judaics, photography, is interested in Anthro. So she is used to both techy and non techy people. OTOH she has had a better comparative advantage socially with the techy people. (Another reason I think her aim at Architecture is a wise choice, is that it can draw on both sides of her - her math and physics skills, and also her artistic/creative side) (Also lots of TJ kids who ARE good in sciences are not as geeky as you might think - there are some really geeky kids, like the ones who hang at SysLab, but there are also really smart suburban kids who want to be premed, etc) She was iniitially a little concerned that RPI kids would be TOO techy/nerdy, but after accepted students weekend, when they had the activities fair, she found she really liked the RPI kids, especially the females, who seemed to have the right balance of normal and techy/nerdy. In fact DD said that at RPI she might consider joining a sorority - I nearly fainted, as DD is about the most “ungreek” kid you could find, but I could see how at RPI, that could make sense. To be one of the most socially skilled people on a geeky campus, versus being one of the weird kids on a “normal” campus, could be very good for her. </p>

<p>She has been concerned about the course availability in the liberal arts at RPI. As it happens they do have range of offerings, including Anthro. They dont have Japanese (anymore, due to cuts) but after some issues with AP Japanese, she is not as enthused to keep taking Japanese as she was. RPI has no Jewish studies offerings, but well she is getting that in Israel right now. The total number of LA courses she can take is limited, due to the B Arch program. That would be true at ANY B Arch program though. She could get more slots for LA taking 4+2 (BS or BA in Arch, plus an M Arch) but not that many (the fifth year in B Arch gives you more courses) and then we would still have to face financing the Masters degree. That all assumes she stays in Arch. Of course a certain percentage drop out of Arch. If she does and IF she wants to do Civil E (which she has had an interest in) RPI would still be a great place (and they apparently make a real effort to find ways for former Archies to stay at RPI). If she decides to switch to LA, she would probably want to transfer. IIUC FA is harder to get for transfers - OTOH, William & Mary (instate) which she passed over last year because it had neither Arch nor engineering, would be a logical choice in that case (and no I dont know how hard it is to get into as a transfer). </p>

<p>Oh yeah, jewish studies aside, WUSTL has a stronger Jewish community than RPI. and St Louis will probably be a more fun place than Troy, though without the distractions of a NY or Boston.</p>

<p>How many got off WL - ISTR that it was posted here that no one was admitted off the WL at WUSTL last year. I could be misremembering.</p>

<p>well, that was way too long. Sorry</p>

22

<p>It might be a pain in the neck, but I would imagine she could take Japanese through the consortium of other colleges: [Registration</a> at consortium colleges : Office of the Registrar, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute](<a href=“Academic Planning | RPI INFO”>Academic Planning | RPI INFO)</p>

23

<p>Glad to hear DD is not going to apply ED . WUSTL is CLEAR on their ED application that:

While sure, it is possible to get out of an ED admittance, it flies in the face of the spirit of the admission. And YES, if your D is accepted ED to WUSTL, she would be REQUIRED to decline/rescind the offer from RPI. Anything else would be unethical, and yes, if RPI got wind of it, they could, and probably should, rescind their offer. Applying ED elsewhere would be smarmy, IMO. Many schools do NOT guarantee an equal FA package to a student who takes a gap year. If RPI did, this is wonderful, and should not be taken lightly. Just because other gap year kids are going to what she may feel are “better” schools, this is no reason to second guess her choice. She made a commitment to RPI and they to her. IMO she should honor it. If she dislikes it after a year, she can transfer.</p>

24

<p>the only offerings in Japanese in the region are at U of Albany and at Hudson Valley Community College. AFAICT the HVCC offering is going to be very elementary for someone compared to AP Japanese, and U of Albany is about 40 minutes away without a car (which she wont have as a freshman), making it challenging to fit into an Archie’s schedule. </p>

<p>She is tempted to take the offering at HVCC to balance a difficult schedule at RPI, though I am not sure that is worthwhile. Anyway, thats not a priority at the moment.</p>

25

<p>Some schools offer on-line or virtual classes with other schools when they do not offer a class/subject. Taking it at a local school during the summer is also an option</p>

26

<p>My recollection is that WashU is one of the schools that doesn’t make CDS info publicly available. </p>

<p>BBD, our experience with similar programs is that the kids are supremely well-prepared to work hard and the self-discipline to get through. That doesn’t mean there aren’t bumps, but there is a sense of competence that comes out of a place like TJ, even if the grades weren’t always what one hoped. Add that to confidence and independence of the gap year…it can be a really great combination.</p>

27

<p>“While sure, it is possible to get out of an ED admittance, it flies in the face of the spirit of the admission.”</p>

<p>Unless the reason is that the ED FA offered still leaves the dream school unaffordable. That is a huge disappointment for the student, but one that must be recognized ahead of time as a possibility.</p>

28

<p>While perhaps technically that is true, vossron, it is, IMO, a potential way one could try to manipulate the system. Apply early, try to negotiate the FA offer indicating that the aid is not sufficient, and then accept or reject the ED, which clearly said, in the application contract (signed by the student, parents and guidance counselor) that one will accept the ED if offered. Who is to say if the family can/cannot “afford” the school? IMO, if the family really thinks they might not be able to afford the school, then they should apply EA or RD (or any other NON-BINDING EA option). To me, ED indicates a higher level of commitment. When it says binding, IMO that means you are committing to the school. If thats not a possibility, then ED shouldnt be pursued. Again, JMO</p>

29

<p>Yes, but the “out” must be there so that honest students don’t have needless fear of applying ED needing FA. It’s an honor-system agreement (with possible consequences for reneging for other than financial reasons); it’s more needless fear that it’s a legal contract.</p>

<p>Schools that encourage top students to apply ED even if they need FA oppose this “well-to-do-only-need-apply-ED” viewpoint (i.e., only the well-to-do can be certain they can afford it). It’s one reason some schools have dropped ED; not enough needy students were applying.</p>

<p>Only the family can know if a financial aid offer is affordable; the formulas schools use are general and standard.</p>

<p>It’s okay, we just disagree! :)</p>

30

<p>I guess that’s what I don’t really get, vossron. If it says “binding”, and people sign the "contract with knowledge that it is BINDING, they shouldn’t apply if they can’t affirm that they can commit no matter what. It doesn’t say “binding” with a little asterisk next to it, it says “binding”. Period. Thats what it is intended for, IMO, not to see if a student will get in early AND get a boatload of $$ to boot. In this increasingly intensely competitive application process, to me its just another way for some (not all) to manipulate the system. Its too bad the ED schools can’t offer an early write with FA, and if the numbers dont seem doable, the student doesn’t submit ED. Makes sense to me, but what do I know…</p>

31

<p>jym, the specific language about FA on the ED agreement is “Should a student who applies for financial aid not be offered an award that makes attendance possible, the student may decline the offer of admission and be released from the Early Decision commitment.”</p>

32

<p>Is that on all applications, slithey? I don’t see that anywhere on WUSTL’s ED form <a href=“http://admissions.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/EDForm2010.pdf[/url]”>http://admissions.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/EDForm2010.pdf&lt;/a&gt;

</p>

33

<p>jym, the language I quoted is what’s on the Common App ED agreement. Interesting that the WUStL specific language doesn’t just follow the Common App language, since the school specifies using the CA agreement.</p>

34

<p>“It doesn’t say “binding” with a little asterisk next to it, it says “binding”. Period.”</p>

<p>True, there’s no asterisk, but there is a statement in the Common App (for schools that accept it):

<a href=“https://www.commonapp.org/CommonApp/docs/downloadforms/ED_Agreement.pdf[/url]”>https://www.commonapp.org/CommonApp/docs/downloadforms/ED_Agreement.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I don’t conclude that it’s unethical to use it when it applies.</p>

35

<p>Can’t the issue be resolved with two simple questions to WUSTL’s FA office:</p>

<p>“Do you encourage top applicants needing financial aid to apply Early Decision to WUSTL?”</p>

<p>“What happens if the financial aid offered is not enough to make attendance possible?”</p>

36

<p>I have to wonder how many colleges/universities that accept the common app might not be in total alignment/agreement/happy with that statement on the common app form, if it encourages some (any) applicants who aren’t as honest, forthright or upstanding to use the ED approach in a way it was not intended.</p>

37

<p>I think it’s the price they must pay in order to also get honest ED FA applicants!</p>

38

<p>True… but I wonder if there isn’t a way to separate the wheat from the chaff</p>

<p>. In truth, this option was ALWAYS there. If an ED applicant couldn’t pay, they would be released from the commitment. It was just less “out there” and more done privately.</p>

39

<p>There have been lots of threads about declining ED. I have to admit: I started out thinking like jym, but after a lot of thinking am pretty much in agreement with vossron. </p>

<p>No college would admit that it wants its ED program to exclude those who need financial aid. </p>

<p>If that’s the case, they HAVE to give people an out for inadequate aid offers, and with pretty much full discretion to the applicant to decide what’s adequate. </p>

<p>Few accepted students are going to take advantage of that, because there is a super-high cost to declining an ED admission. If they decline the ED admission they are burning the dream school for good – they can’t keep the offer open and see if something better comes down the pike. Generally, colleges give students until January 15 or so to make that decision, so they can’t really test the waters elsewhere. Studying the information a few schools provide, it seems like ED colleges expect 0-2 kids to decline ED offers each year – so that’s not exactly a gaping hole in the integrity of the programs. Also, most colleges WANT their accepted ED kids to attend, so they do their best to meet legitimate FA concerns, and it won’t be clear that someone else will definitely give a better need package.</p>

<p>And none of that matters here, because: (a) As a matter of ethics, the OP’s daughter should not be applying to other colleges without withdrawing from RPI first. (b) The OP’s daughter isn’t going to apply ED. (c) General folklore says that kids are never accepted when they reapply to someplace that did not accept them the year before. That certainly accords with my anecdotal observations.</p>

40

<p>What will TJ do? I can tell you that the public magnet my offspring attended would refuse to send out the transcripts for the app. </p>

<p>Someone in my office had a D who deferred a year. GC at top private NYC school warned the student and parents that if the kid accepted the offer and deferred, it was binding. The school would NOT send out apps to other colleges during the gap year. I know the mom was upset that the D was WLed at Harvard and I think the GC suspected that the kid would reapply. So, right up front, the GC said you can choose to wait a year and reapply after your gap experiences or you can accept the offer from X college and defer. You cannot do both. </p>

<p>Now, I can imagine a scenario where you could get around that if you resubmitted FAFSA and/or PROFILE and the need package the second time around was worse or your fin circumstances had changed dramatically for the worse, due to job loss etc. and the college didn’t respond. </p>

<p>But barring those scenarios, I wouldn’t just assume that TJ will mail off your D’s transcripts to WUSTL without at least asking you if you’ve notified RPI.</p>