BTW, @CupCakeMuffins, if you want all colleges to bring COA down for worthy students and not make a decision based off of money, you can go to uni in Germany (tuition free for all everywhere! Thank the German taxpayers) or mainland China (pretty low tuition costs everywhere).
Why not choose those options? Nobody is stopping you.
How is this deceptive? They are enrolling academically talented kids. Period.
St. Olaf decreased the automatic NMF scholarship from $7500 to $2000 a few years ago, hence the likely drop in enrollment
@TytoAlba My D has gotten $5000+ a year from St Olaf for NMF. It’ll come to some $23k for all 4 years. But I don’t recall that they advertised anywhere that the NMF award would be that much. I thought it was just a one-year $5000 offer. The other nice thing is that St Olaf’s NMF $ has gone up each year. It started at like $5000 and now is up to $5600.
With NMF, my guess is where students go is greatly affected by recruiting and advertising. I don’t recall getting that many scholarship offers in the mail with D16 from her NMF. With S19, he was getting big NMF scholarship offers weekly for awhile. So I think maybe the ‘NMF landscape’ has changed a bit just in the last few years. Sadly, he choose a school that give zip for NMF.
@liska21, the FL publics have really expanded merit for NMS (thanks to the FL legislature) but if anything, NMS awards have tended to be cut back. OU has cut back substantially and WashU did recently too. I think there is just more advertising now.
University of Kentucky changed its Patterson Scholarship (for NMF) for incoming class of 2018 (graduating class 2022). Still offering full tuition (in or out of state as applicable). But rather than room and board for 4 years (really 8 semesters), they now give $10,000/year for 2 years for room and board. University cuts check to student if they live off campus. If spend on room and board is less than what student actually pays, student keeps difference. Room and board portions of scholarship are taxable. Tuition portion is refundable if you take an internship and are not taking full time classes (that portion is also taxable). Student can defer scholarship in the internship situation if they want.
I’m not saying it’s deceptive to give money to buy good students. They work hard and deserve good opportunities, financial aid system doesn’t reward merit or need of students, just demonstrated need of parents.
I’m calling these lists deceptive marketing as an average student or parent doesn’t know why some colleges are getting more scholars and others less.
@CupCakeMuffins “It’s a deceptive count. Unless all colleges give similar scholarship money, it’s no badge of honor to flaunt falsely inflated statistics. If a college is worth it, they won’t need to offer bribes to manipulate middle class students.”----- What???
Why would it matter to the average student or parent (or the above average or below average for that matter) why some colleges are getting more scholars? If the academics, the connections, and the challenges were not there, do you think that all of those NMF and other top 1% would actually attend these schools that are bribing and manipulating? How in the world is it “falsely inflated statistics” or a “deceptive count”?
What makes different colleges “worth it” to attend without bribing students? I don’t know ANY school worth $280,000 and that is why mine did not (and will not) apply to any. Your money, your choices. You can figure out what is “worth it” to your family but I do have questions. What are you actually paying all of that extra money for? What does that $250,000+ get you that you won’t get at a merit school for free that makes one “worth it” and another bribing and manipulating? Opportunities to research? Face time with top professors? Small classes? Internships? Alumni network? Chances to design your own major? Take an honest look at the honors college at these state schools that are offering merit and you will find all of this and much more. It just doesn’t fit the narrative of prestige and exclusive schools. Most people will say they want their children surrounded by other serious, top students so they are only looking for the top schools. They don’t want their top student bored and want them to be in the company of other intellectuals. This just goes to show that you will find those serious, top, intellectual students at MANY levels of schools (and it is not just NMF - look at Goldwater Scholars and other college level top honors and you will see many levels of schools represented). Just think, some of those brilliant, intellectual peers are showing their financial skills and will be $200,000 ahead. Kind of invalidates that reasoning of paying for a top school to be with the intellectual elite. Perhaps people want their children ONLY around the cream of the crop and those that “value education” enough to spend $250,000+++ for each child. Perhaps schools that are worth it are insulating students from having to associate with the riff raff average student.
Colleges are big businesses. Top talent is good for an organization. No different then companies with signing bonuses for jobs, enhanced benefits packages with jobs, flexible schedules for jobs, or recruiting athletes. The coupons in my paper introduce me to products that I would not typically recognize and give me an incentive to check them out and car dealerships constantly offer incentives. Do you feel that financial reports for companies that are offering incentives and discounts are “deceptive” and “falsely inflated”? Do you walk in a purchase a car at sticker price? Merit scholarships work the same way. If dangling $120,000-$200,000 gets people to actually look past old stereotypes and look into what those schools have to offer then it is worth it to the schools. These schools are attracting top students from all over the country/world and providing a top tier education. In turn, top students and their families are spreading the word about the great education they are getting. After a few years there are dozens applying to these schools and many are paying full OOS tuition. The scholars graduate and many stay in state, propping up the economy of their adopted state. Conversely, they head all over the country, spreading the network.
@bamamom2021 - Amen!
I don’t know of anyone so simple-minded that they think that, say, 'Bama attracted a ton of NMS without offering them large scholarships.
And if a school does tout their large number of NMS, well, they do have them, and that may be attractive to some. I don’t see stating a fact as “deceptive marketing”.
Although I wouldn’t put it past UChicago that their reason for giving a small NMF scholarship is to make them look good relative to other elite colleges.
I wouldn’t go as far as calling it outright manipulation but it is a marketing and recruiting tool. These scholarships influence decisions of finalists (or their parents) based on money and it impresses and attracts others to see high number of scholars at a college. National Merit Scholars are prized horses bringing prestige to these colleges, improving yield and inflating graduation rates, average SAT, ranking etc.
In 90% of the cases those National Merit Finalists tolerate these colleges to become scholars and for money, not because of love for the college. Most of these students want to attend prestigious colleges and would if they could.
As noted, colleges are big businesses at this point. They all engage in marketing and recruiting efforts (even the “elite” ones however you define it). Why single out NMF recruitment?
Your 90% number strikes me as totally made up. Any support for it?
It is totally made up … as usual from this poster.
“They all engage in marketing and recruiting efforts (even the “elite” ones however you define it).”
Elite rich ones, especially. I think many would be shocked by the expenditure per enrolled freshmen some colleges spend on marketing (which obviously isn’t free; that money is coming from somewhere, like tuition).
@saillakeerie If we put it this way, this is indeed just another industry and every college does what they can to get ahead. You are right and I can’t argue with that. I did use 90% as figuratively not literally. This is the impression I get from students in real life and on this forum. I could be wrong.
@itsgettingreal17 There are no official statistics available for these topics. That’s my guess or estimation, you can post your side of the argument or whatever percentage seems more accurate to you.
Oh my goodness, @riversider I have no idea where you come up with this stuff. My son attends UTD and sure maybe some there tolerate it for money and even more went there for money. But a whole bunch end up loving the school. I don’t know why that is so unfathomable to you. Within his particular scholarship program (not NMF but similar) most were accepted to Ivies and other big name schools (mine didn’t apply cause my of family financial problems at the time) but made the conscious decision to attend UTD whether to save money for medical school or for more extensive research and study abroad opportunities or because they were financially gapped. In any case, this idea that there is just a bunch of sad scholarship kids sitting around all day wishing they were somewhere else is just really not the case. (without discounting that sure, for some it might be. But nowhere near 90%)
I was thinking about @bamamom2021 as I read this. My son got into a very competitive summer abroad program for his interests. They recently formed a Facebook group and I’ll be honest my kid was slightly intimated by the very big name colleges most of his cohorts are from. Then he found a kid from UA Tuscaloosa. So yeah, maybe my kid and that kid took the money, but I don’t think it’s holding either of them back at all. Money gives you a lot of freedom to spend time you might have to spend working instead doing research or other resume building activities.
Could I have sent him somewhere fancier if I’d won the lottery? Sure! Would he have been happier? I’ll never know., though it seems unlikely given how much he loves his school. I do know he would like to attend a pretty big name grad school (or at least one highly ranked in his particular field) but with all the stuff he’s been able to do thanks to making the most of his time at UTD I’m not worried. At all.
Schools give money to attract the students or the type of students they want. My D’s school gives money to Eagle Scouts and FIRST robotics team members. Why? Maybe they’ve found those students to be the type they want to attract.
Some schools want to attract NMF. Some want those students more than other schools do so offer more money.
Yup. Schools don’t give money to benefit students, they use their money to benefit college’s interests. Lower tier colleges can’t attract high achievers on their own so they offer money to get what they need.
Top colleges have no shortage of top applicants so they don’t need to use merit scholarships as an incentive. They don’t get enough low income and minorities so they offer financial aid and holistic admission to get what they need.
: National Merit Scholars are prized horses bringing prestige to
: these colleges, improving yield and inflating graduation rates,
: average SAT, ranking etc.
I don’t think this has the huge “inflating graduation rate” impact that you believe it does.
Let’s take UT-Dallas, who has one of the largest intakes of National Merit Scholars of any school. Last year they had 3751 first-time, degree-seeking freshman, out of which 172 were NMS. Their six-year graduation rate is 69%. Let’s assume, unrealistically, that these NMS graduate at a rate of 100% – higher than even the best colleges.
So given all that information, we can tell for sure how low (at the lowest) UT-Dallas’ graduation rate could possibly be without the NMS.
Solving for x:
69% = 100%*(172/3751) + x(3579/3751)
Rounding to the nearest number, that means the lowest possible UT-Dallas’ graduation rate without the NMS is…68%. A one percent difference.