<p>Details: Mythmom is correct. My son picked Vassar over Wesleyan and has never looked back. As an aside, Vassar's financial aid package was infinitely better than Wesleyan's. We found the people in the financial aid office at Wes to be quite uncaring. Quite the contrary at Vassar; they have been lovely to deal with. Our son was able to choose between the two, as well as many other good schools, and his decision was not based upon the financial aid package. However, his decision was indeed a bonus for us in the financial sense.</p>
<p>I do believe that your son will be very happy at Vassar. The advising and professors are both phenomenal. Not to mention that the campus is breathtaking. We still gasp every time we vist and drive through the main gate.</p>
<p>At first I thought my own kids had not been victimized by "need-aware" admissions - but thinking back they could have been.
My second only applied to two schools - very different from each other - we were stupefied she was rejected at one pretty selective school that seemed like a perfect match and thought perhaps she blew her interview but it very well could have been the financial aide thing. It didn't matter because she ended up hating it after the overnight visit.</p>
<p>My oldest applied to St Joes (Philly) and was accepted and awarded a very nice merit scholarship - 1/2 tuition. This is a pretty expensive school and 1/2 tuition is/was still a lot of money not to mention room and board. Her merit scholarship came with her acceptance and I told her to wait and see what financial aide they offered her. I admit I was naive - when the aide award came I was furious. Sure she got a Stafford loan and a Perkins but we were still $20,000 short. No need grant whatsoever. Yep. All their grant money goes into "merit scholarships" - long story short she did an overnight at another school and liked it better and got a much more affordable deal. A combination of Merit scholarship and need based grant.
But I was resentful of all the kids with money who got $$$$$$ they didn't "need". So while they accepted her they made the school so unaffordable they should have just rejected her. Now - it wasn't so much the policy of no need grant that got me but was just that they didn't tell you! Seriously, if you don't know the question to ask then you can't ask it - I learned a big one.</p>
<p>Honestly - for regular kids applying to regular schools - Perhaps I am wrong again - but I haven't seen it.
The reason I asked for specific schools was to see how well it was advertised/explained - I haven't seen the issue raised in the schools we are currently working with. Perhaps this is a dirty little secret - if it is a factor in admissions they should tell you. up front.</p>
<p>So what do you guys think of state schools? Do you think they practice "need aware" admissions as well? Maybe the top 50 - esp if you are out of state? much to ponder - though much is also uncontrollable, unless megabucks is won.</p>
<p>justamomof4, St. Joseph's in Phili seems to only meet 74% of financial need for freshman (souce is USNews). My older son applied to a school that only meets 65% of need, so needless to say did not go. My older son was accepted to 10 schools, but 5 right off the table because we could not afford to send him to those schools.</p>
<p>"At first I thought my own kids had not been victimized by "need-aware" admissions - but thinking back they could have been..."</p>
<p>Financing a college education is the responsibility of parents and students. It's incorrect to characterize need aware admissions as "victimization." If one wants something that one cannot afford to purchase, one can ask others for financial assistance. Those with the financial means to assist you can choose whether they wish to do so. Choosing not to assist you doesn't make your daughter a victim. </p>
<p>The issue of need awareness is less relevant in public institutions. State schools primarily deal with aid formulaically, based on your FAFSA, and there is a lot of gapping going on.</p>
<p>you are correct - I should have said "affected". </p>
<p>But if the OP is correct and- if the school encourages kids to apply regardless if they are going to need financial aide and then reject an applicant on the basis of whether or not they will even apply for financial aide (which is not a guaranteed you will get it and necessary for low interest governement sponsored loans that essentially cost the school nothing) - then yes they have been victimized. For the school to reject without knowing full financial facts does not even allow the applicant to come up with the $$$ to attend. </p>
<p>I wonder about publics though - the rumor here in PA is that it is easier to get accepted to Penn State Main if you are out of state than if you are in-state - presumable because oos will produce more $$$.</p>
<p>
[quote]
St. Joseph's in Phili seems to only meet 74% of financial need for freshman
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I contend that it is that high because St Joes attracts a lot of applicants on the high end of income that don't need much aide and can afford it and because they pad their aide with private loans and PLUS loans - which really isn't financial aide at all.</p>
<p>When they meet 74% of need that does include loans. Need is met with grants, work study, and loans. It would be easy to meet a much higher percentage of need if they only accepted the rich. They are accepting students that are not wealthy too, but they are gapping them on average by 26%!</p>
<p>"For the school to reject without knowing full financial facts does not even allow the applicant to come up with the $$$ to attend."</p>
<p>Schools try to build classes. They select students based on a variety of criteria. Most schools are not need blind and when making admissions decisions, many of them need to consider a family's ability to pay. An applicant can account for her family's full financial facts on the financial aid application. If an applicant's financial aid application indicates a student can't afford to attend with the amount of aid the school is willing to offer, then the school may opt not to make the admissions offer. That doesn't seem underhanded or victimizing to me. Of course, if an applicant withholds information, like a relative willing to pay part of her costs, then the applicant can't expect the school to consider that information when making their admission decision. That's why financial aid students should always include all of their family's financial facts when applying to schools that do not claim to be need blind.</p>
[quote]
So while they accepted her they made the school so unaffordable they should have just rejected her.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Then you say,
[quote]
For the school to reject without knowing full financial facts does not even allow the applicant to come up with the $$$ to attend.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You can't have it both ways. Pick one.</p>
<p>Oh, and on the "74% of need": There are two numbers reported in the Common Data Set and in US News. The first is the percentage of students who receive need-based aid. That's the number that reflects the "full pay" students. The second number is, for the students who receive need-based aid, how much of that need is met. That has nothing to do with the number of "rich kids" who apply or attend. That may be the 74%, showing a gap of 26%.</p>
<p>In response to that PennState comment... I seriously doubt that it is easier to get in out of state if only for the fact that they have to fill a certain number of spots with in state students.</p>
<p>dntw8up - I totally agree with what you are saying and was going to post similar comments. Private colleges are not in the business of being "need blind". There may be a handful who have the endowments and cash flow to be able to make those claims, but I would think those particular schools are in the minority not the majority. I have no doubt if they have dollars to give away they will pick and choose who those dollars go to and how they are going to build each class. If you cannot afford the cost then you are basically putting your hat in the ring. Agree with the statement that the applicant is "not" a victim. Although I doubt this occurs, there is enough demographic information right down to street address that if any school wanted to take the time and a wild ass guess at your potential monetary value as a household they probably could.</p>
I have no doubt if they have dollars to give away they will pick and choose who those dollars go to and how they are going to build each class. If you cannot afford the cost then you are basically putting your hat in the ring.
[/quote]
Actually, imo, if 'build each class' is the whole purpose. Since not all kids from 'poor' family are characteristically same, neither all kids from 'rich' family are characteristically same. So theoritically they can chose the whole class from 'poor' family kids. or they can chose the whole class from 'rich' family kids......however in reality, most are in the middle, either economically or 'meritly'. Another words, most applicants are boardlines.</p>
<p>Maybe, but I doubt many private colleges can pick a class largely made up of financially needy kids. Private colleges could, if they chose, pick kids whose families do not need financial assistance. Fortunately this isn't the situation either. Very few students are inherently "entitled" by viture of financial situation alone. We will never know why this particular college said "no" in the OPs particular situation, but the fact that the school quite possibly is out of financial reach for this family is a strong possibility. Fortunately it sounds like there are very good options already in play for them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In response to that PennState comment... I seriously doubt that it is easier to get in out of state if only for the fact that they have to fill a certain number of spots with in state students.
[/quote]
no they don't - some states require that but not PA. I have heard it happening anectdotally alot. living in PA - where a lot of kids try to get into the main campus and are pushed to one of the many satelite campuses.</p>
<p>dntw - go back to the OP - she said the application asked if her d was applying for financial aide and if other children were in college - this was EA or ED - and the financial aide form was not done yet.<br>
She and others felt like the rejection could have been made based on that limited amount of financial data. - I questioned that but was assurred that it does happen.</p>
<p>Chedva - you are right - I am not making judgement here, more or less thinking out loud. I guess I am just pointing out that different schools do things differently. </p>
<p>Look I don't have a problem with Smith - they say up front and you better apply for financial aide when you apply - they have the whole picture in front of them. For a school to reject an applicant on a POSSIBILITY of needing financial aide - or because they plan on applying for it without out disclosing this criterion up front and taking a hefty application fee for the privelege of doing this is (and this is harsh) victimizing applicants.
If a school is going to use "need aware" admissions- which to me is different than offering 100% of need - then they should be
Honestly - I never really thought about this until today. This has been an enlightening discussion.</p>
<p>I have sent two kids through private college and a third will most likely pick a private - she is getting a good deal. None of the private colleges we ever looked at made the claim that acceptance/rejection could be based on financial need.</p>
<p>While it would have been a bit more accurate to say "they made the school so unaffordable that they might as well have just rejected her." I know what JustAMom meant here. The extent to which many schools practice "admit-deny" policies, as they are known, DO come as a big surprise to many and are far from transparent, even as the schools go all out to get as many apps submitted as possible, while discouraging no one. </p>
<p>From that Atlantic Monthly article I linked on the previous page:</p>
<p>
[quote]
With their ever-expanding reach, enrollment managers are inevitably dogged by controversy. But it's the way they have changed financial aid—from a tool to help low-income students into a strategic weapon to entice wealthy and high-scoring students—that has placed them in the crosshairs of those who champion equal access to higher education
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Some schools have no choice but to gap students once they've exhausted their aid budgets. Others will intentionally gap poor students so severely that they decide not to attend in the first place—or, if they enroll, the long hours of work-study and mounting debts eventually force them to drop out. Called "admit-deny," this practice allows a college to keep poor students out while publicly claiming that it doesn't consider a student's finances when making admissions decisions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Admit-deny is when you give someone a financial-aid package that is so rotten that you hope they get the message: 'Don't come,'" says Mark Heffron, a senior vice-president at Noel-Levitz, one of the largest enrollment-management consulting companies. (His financial-aid division currently has 140 clients.) Unfortunately, "they don't always get the message."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
However nasty, admit-deny allows schools to avoid the controversy associated with publicly abandoning need-blind admissions. That students are rejected on the basis of income is one of the most closely held secrets in admissions; enrollment managers say the practice is far more prevalent than most schools let on.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Good luck getting any institution to tell you exactly how they handle ability to pay as a driver in their admit decision," said one enrollment manager who requested anonymity. "What they will say is 'We're need-blind.' That's bulls***. They would never tell you exactly how they do it, but they do it all the time."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to the same article, we shouldn't doubt it:</p>
<p>
[quote]
At the AACRAO conference two members of the University of Alabama's enrollment-management team demonstrated how, in their campaign for out-of-state prospects, they overlaid income data from the U.S. Census on maps of high schools in Texas to target wealthy students. (Alabama's data-mining strategies are inspired by the success of the credit-card company Capital One.) After the presentation I sat down with Roger Thompson and asked him how he approached recruiting at rich private secondary schools.
None of the private colleges we ever looked at made the claim that acceptance/rejection could be based on financial need.
[/quote]
Is it safe to say that as long as a private institution dose not claim 'need-blind' admission then it is presumble a 'need-aware' admission. Any school claim 'need-aware' admission would not be 'politicly correct', you'd think.</p>
<p>And I questioned adofs at several "need blind" schools who actually fudged a bit and admitted that financial decisions can govern their wait lists. And then we can guess why certain people were put on the wait list. At other schools this isn't true.</p>
<p>And we don't have to worry about admissions being able to figure out financial status: ec's should say it all. Trips to Europe vs. working in a grocery store. And this information is on the app that goes to admissions.</p>
<p>That said, I am very grateful that there were institutions willing to offer my children substantial FA offers, and now Williams has abandoned loans.</p>
<p>Barnard is not heavily endowed, so I am not sure how they offered D what they did. The offer was surpassed only by Mt. Holyoke which is not a "need-blind" school.</p>