<p>No history of that as far as I know. I think they play it pretty much straight up. They calculate your need and that's what you get.</p>
<p>In 2004/05, 50% of the students received need-based aid. Of those 50%, the family incomes broke down as follows:</p>
<p>22% - under $40,000
12% - $40,000 to $60,000
15% - $60,000 to $80,000
51% - $80,000 and above</p>
<p>Obviously, many factors go into determining need. So your mileage may vary.</p>
<p>ID - are there any other "warm, fuzzy, comfortable" schools that you know of?</p>
<p>Pinkearmufs, were you wanting lengthy analyses on endowment size, or were you interested in student lifestyles, attitudes, academic climate, campus life, overall campus atmosphere, etc?</p>
<p>Schools with similar student bodies are Brown, Carleton, Wesleyan, Bard, Vassar, Reed, UChicago, Macalester, Haverford, Bryn Mawr, Smith. Probably some overlap with Williams and Amherst, but those are probably students that are rankings obsessed and probably carry the US News College Issue under their arms everywhere they go. Swarthmore feels so different from those two schools.</p>
<p>lol the latter. somehow the thread evolved into endowment specifics.</p>
<p>There is that tendency here on the Swarthmore boards.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ID - are there any other "warm, fuzzy, comfortable" schools that you know of?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sure. That would be the general rule, not the exception, at small liberal arts colleges. Most LACs have very comfortable campus communities.</p>
<p>What do you mean that tends to be the trend at the Swat boards? Johnwesley brought up the endowment, ID mentioned it once in his first post on this topic, but he mentioned a number of other things. Wesley decided to single it out.</p>
<p>I do wonder, however, whether the subject of Swarthmore's luck in the investment sphere isn't something of a smokescreen for something else. Ten year's ago, Swatties wore those T-shirts that swore, "It would have been an A anywhere else" with pride. Now, that there's been a certain degree of embarassment around the whole idea of academic balance at Swat, I sense a certain casting about for identity. And "Richest School In America" does have a certain ring to it. :)</p>
<p>johnwesley,
My son (junior at Swat) wears his "Swarthmore College-Contents Under Pressure" T-shirt with pride. The "Anywhere Else it Would Have Been an A" t-shirt is just so last decade.</p>
<p>Wait, does that mean that there are now other schools that are academically intense, where students take their studies seriously? Where getting an "A" is also difficult?</p>
<p>Search for "Swarthmore" and "endowment", examine search results, then you'll see what tendency I'm writing about.</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with that. ID likes per capita endowment at Swarthmore, I'm intrigued by the chalkings there! :)</p>
<p>kelly,
You've got less than a month to go until you hear about that Yale(?) EA application, right? We've all got our fingers crossed for you!</p>
<p>There is no "embarrassment" or backing away from the reputation for rigorous academics at Swarthmore. Just the opposite. It appears to be a real sense of pride for the entire community: students and faculty. </p>
<p>Nor is there any "search for identity". From what I can see, Swarthmore has one of the most clearly defined "identities" among the liberal arts colleges...and it has been a consistent identity dating back at least half a century.</p>
<p>As for endowment, the average Swattie has never stopped to think about it. It's just not on the radar screen, despite the fact that endowment size ultimately contributes to almost everything Swatties love about the school -- starting with the faculty and the campus and the diversity.</p>
<p>Thanks to Williams College President (and economist) Morty Schapiro, I started to understand that much of what we think about colleges and universities is determined by simple marketplace economics. Again, look at the top of the USNEWs charts (for either universities or LACs) and see the unmistakable correlation with per student endowments. The schools with the lowest acceptance rates have large numbers of applicants because they offer attractive products. The things that attract students, in most cases, result from large amounts of per student spending.</p>
<p>I see "Anywhere else it would have been an A' t-shirts all over the place. What are you talking about John? </p>
<p>One of the main reasons I applied to Swat was that they DO have a clear identity, and are proud of it.</p>
<p>Momof3, that is so sweet!!!!!!! Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you! Keep those fingers crossed! I'm keeping mine crossed too! I hope I can get as good an education at Yale as one could get at Swarthmore.</p>
<p>Well, apologies to Morty, but, we're bumping right up against that old correlation-doesn't-equal-proof thingie again. Most families (I say, most) wouldn't pick a college based solely on the size of its endowment, any more than they would pick a church based on its quarterly statement.</p>
<p>Occasionally, the bigger fin/aid package will tip the balance in a toe-to-toe a contest between two otherwise equal overlaps, but, over the long run, the differences between a Haverford and a Swarthmore are invisible to the naked eye. </p>
<p>The top research universitities and LACs, in most cases, began with a vision of what they wanted to achieve and found the money to achieve it. For some, it's in the form of a well-oiled alumni network, for others it, it could be lady luck at the roulette wheel. But, in most cases, it begins with the "the vision thing" -- not with found money. </p>
<p>ID wrote:
" Thanks to Williams College President (and economist) Morty Schapiro, I started to understand that much of what we think about colleges and universities is determined by simple marketplace economics. Again, look at the top of the USNEWs charts (for either universities or LACs) and see the unmistakable correlation with per student endowments. The schools with the lowest acceptance rates have large numbers of applicants because they offer attractive products. The things that attract students, in most cases, result from large amounts of per student spending."</p>
<p>I think you misunderstood him.
ID isn't trying to argue that people choose Swat because Swat has more money...instead, people choose Swat because it has many little things like better facilities, more financial aid, better student:teacher ratio, etc. than other schools. And those little things exist because Swat has more money to spend on them.</p>
<p>It isn't the only reason. But it is a big one, in the long run. Despite being at Swat right now, I don't know a ton about Haverford. But I suspect there are quite a few differences between Swat and Haverford that arise because of endowment differences.</p>
<p>Arador:</p>
<p>Exactly. It is the per student endowment that allows Swarthmore to do many of the things that make Swarthmore what it is.</p>
<p>I hate to use Haverford as an example because, in the broader context, Haverford is a very heavily endowed college, just like Swarthmore. That is why it is in USNEWS' top-10 LACs by any measure: overall ranking, selectivity, peer assessment, etc.</p>
<p>Having said that, the difference in per student endowment between Haverford an its peer institutions (including Swarthmore) is something that Haverford highlights in its self-study planning documents. See the graph on page 64 of Haverford's 2004 accreditation intermim report:</p>
<p>Specifically, they talk about the fact that Haverford relies on tuition revenues for a larger percentage of its operating budget.</p>
<p>One example. Haverford's board has set a threshold of a 28% tuition discount rate (financial aid as a percentage of full sticker price tuition). Exceeding this threshold requires the college to make adjustments, most notable being the consideration of ending need-blind admissions.</p>
<p>Swarthmore does not have this kind of threshold. In fact, Swathmore's tuition discount rate was at 36.3% in 2004/05.</p>
<p>So what? Well, this difference is directly responsible for Swarthmore having more diversity than Haverford. Double the number of internationals. 62% white and/or US versus 71% at Haverford. 48% qualifying for financial aid compared to 43% at Haverford. Simply put, having a bigger endowment allows Swarthmore to afford more diversity and still outspend Haverford by $14,000 per student per year.</p>
<p>I suspect that Swarthmore's diversity is one of the major reasons that many students choose the college and find their on-campus experience rewarding. It doesn't take walking around campus for very long to see that it is one of the defining characteristics of the school.</p>
<p>ID -
I dunno. My jaw continues to drop at the sorts of things you assume people are choosing Swarthmore for. Those "little things" you point to are just that -- little things that reinforce a family's decision ONCE THEY'VE DECIDED to attend Swat. The big things: 1) a beautiful, woodsy campus, 2) small classes, 3) a self-motivated, somewhat nerdy student body -- these are all things Swarthmore boasted way before it had a billion dollar endowment. And frankly, you'd have to go pretty far down the totem pole (like maybe #108 in the USNews rankings) before a small endowment -- by itself -- had anything like the pedagogical impact on an LAC you think it might. Sarah Lawrence has practically no endowment at all and has a smaller student/faculty ratio than Swarthmore.</p>
<p>I agree about the identity thing. Students choose Swarthmore, Reed, Carleton because they're cool nerd farms. Students choose Brown, Wesleyan, Vassar, and Oberlin because they have artsy, hip, political atmospheres. People choose Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Dartmouth because they're preppy and athletic (not me though). And people choose Harvard, Yale, and Princeton because they're, well, Harvard, Yale and Princeton. All good schools. I don't know why all the liberal arts colleges want to be like Williams and Amherst. I know they're good schools with lots of money under their mattresses and probably permanent homes at the top of those magazine rankings, but I found the campuses and student bodies a little boring. I guess it's that status thing that everyone wants.</p>
<p>Schools like Swarthmore with their wacky chalkings are more interesting! Good to know Swatties like it safe and consensual.</p>
<p>Let's ask Pinkearmufs. Pinkearmufs, what things are most important to you in choosing a college?</p>