<p>Personally, I dont agree that a large number of ED admits are disappointed with their financial aid offers and subsequently regret their decision. I believe that there are always anecdotal cases. Forums as widely read and posted to as CC tend to skew perceptions. If you look at the stats at each school, Im pretty sure youll find that the percentage of ED accepts who attend is almost always > 99%. </p>
<p>Count me with the group who think youre OK to apply ED if its your first choice, the school has a commitment to meeting 100% need, and youre OK with that understanding that most of the time that commitment includes loans and work study.</p>
<p>I’d question what’s the cause and what’s the effect here. I can think of three groups of students who “get into only one” college. One group is those who are accepted ED to their first choice and withdraw, or never complete, applications to other schools. This group is going to skew higher-income precisely because families with need are more gun-shy about applying ED; as a consequence, the ED admits as a group will qualify for less need-based financial aid, not because the colleges treat them any differently in their FA calculations, but simply because they have less need.</p>
<p>Another group of applicants get into only one college because they apply to only one (whether ED or RD). Typically these will be students applying to schools with high enough admit rates that they’re confident of admission—their local public university, perhaps, or a not-highly-selective private college. Typically these schools have less institutional FA to give out, and for the most part their COA is also less than highly selective private colleges. Applicants to highly selective (and typically high COA and high FA) colleges frequently end up with multiple acceptances (unless they’re accepted ED) simply because they submit multiple applications in a sensible admissions hedging strategy. So it could well be that the multiple-acceptance group gets more in FA than the single-acceptance group, not because any school treats the two groups differently for FA purposes, but because these groups of applicants are applying to different kinds of schools with different FA profiles.</p>
<p>A third group of applicants get into only one school because they’re only marginally qualified to attend college; or perhaps because they overestimated their chances of admission to more selective schools and ended up being accepted only at their safety. As a group, these kids are probably less likely to get merit aid than the multiple-acceptance group, again skewing the FA profiles of the two groups not because of differential FA treatment for single-acceptance and multiple-acceptance applicants, but because of different applicant profiles. </p>
<p>Not that this should change the way anyone thinks about applying ED if they have financial need. I agree that it’s risky for a high-need family. Even if the school would make the same FA offer whether you’re admitted ED or RD and whether you have one or multiple acceptances, you’re simply not in a position to compare offers if you apply ED. But that gives a huge leg up to full-pays who have a clear first choice; they have nothing to lose by applying ED. I suspect colleges know this skews their ED applicant pool toward the more affluent, and even “need-blind” schools can use this to their advantage; by dialing up their total number of ED acceptances and dialing down the number of RD acceptances, they can probably reduce their expected FA cost (or, if you like, increase their tuition revenue net of FA) without ever having to examine any individual applicant’s finances. I’d keep an eye on the percentage of the incoming class admitted ED, which seems to be creeping up at some schools in the wake of the shellacking they took when the markets collapsed.</p>
<p>*there is no benefit whatsoever to a *[need aware] *college to tie up a space in its class with a borderline student who needs financial aid. The last thing a need-aware college is going to do is accept a student in that position.
I mean, the colleges aren’t crazy. They are not ever going to make admissions decisions that go against their own interests. *</p>
<p>Maybe the problem is the use of the term “borderline.” It implies a candidate is sitting out at the edge, not truly qualified- or barely legit. </p>
<p>This perception ignores the fact that many factors can make an applicant a good admit. He/she may not have the top quartile stats, but may have many of the other strengths, experiences and qualities- and interests- that the college wants in its student body. </p>
<p>Borderline also implies there is some way to quantify one’s chances. It’s true that the better one’s academic perfomance AND his “others,” the better the chance of an admit. But, that’s where it ends. Admisisons decisions are not black and white. Plenty of valedictorians get rejected. You can look at the Stanford and Yale EA threads and see the number of shoo-ins who got shooed away. Why? Who knows? Maybe the college, looking out for it’s “own interests,” needs something else in the pot, besides kids with tippy-top GPAs and scores.</p>
<p>ED can work when, as others wrote, you go in with your eyes open. It can help a kid who doesn’t have top quartile stats, by giving his app the little extra look-see that’s available when you’re competing against a smaller group.</p>
<p>As for the issue of getting only one FA offer, yes, it is risky. The family must be as informed as possible. Too many parents start threads about ED finaid disappointments and admit a host of rookie errors. Just look at all the threads where they say, “But, my Fafsa said I’d only have to pay X.” Or, they speak of income and don’t understand how assets come into play.</p>
<p>Don’t know that Tufts is “settling,” although I see that you put “settled” in quotes, certainly; we know plenty of kids who got into GT (in fact, we know an acquaintance’s kid who is currently applying for transfer from GT to Tufts, for sophomore year–he would have transferred, mid-year, if Tufts had had such an option) and UPenn and didn’t get into Tufts, even ED.</p>
<p>I think that ED is a fine option for the kid with a fine-tuned and specific list (which indicates really knowing oneself and being fairly immutable) of what he/she is looking for in a campus/college life. For example, if you have a child who has a certain political sensibility, hates rural, knows he/she wants to study something in the physical sciences or theatre arts, for example, wants a certain religious denomination to have a significant presence on campus, and is ready to leave the next of small, private incestuous secondary schools, then it is a safe bet to apply ED to Carnegie-Mellon or Northwestern, respectively, which has all of those ingredients. Specific priorities tend not to change. And the gift of knowing where one is going by Dec. 15th, thus eliminating ongoing stress, cannot be underestimated.</p>
<p>But, again, I am talking about a deeply aware kind of student who has had the same passions/priorities throughout high school (even before h.s.) and has a certain “rigidity” about their college wish list. It is true, too, that the kid who thought he/she wanted a school of 1600 in Fall of senior year, in Western MA, may have fallen in love with a Univ. of Michigan or UNC @ Chapel Hill, by Spring. Kids do change in their sensibilities just as there is a certain kind of kid who hasn’t altered their politics and social and intellectual and geographical preference since age 13. I am always surprised when the same applicants pick schools in removal and schools in the middle of a large city, citing that either would be fine, which seems sort of contradictory and unrealistic to me.</p>
<p>The high school student who will be making a decision in April can be very different from the student who applied in October. Unless your student has been on an unwavering track for several years I wouldn’t risk it.</p>
<p>However, I could understand a VERY well thought out decision to go ED. Mostly, I think ED programs just put extra pressure on families. Resist the pressure.</p>
<p>Really? I think it was fabulous and I wouldn’t change a thing. Two acceptances to a top 20 uni and a top 20 LAC within the span of 10 minutes on December 10. Lots of screaming; oh, yeah, the kids too :-). That weekend, all outstanding applications got withdrawn, a bonfire was held over assorted college papers and paraphernalia, and now they’re enjoying the rest of senior year.</p>
<p>I’m with Pizzagirl on this one. Each of my daughters was accepted ED to her top choice in December of senior year. My current senior is enjoying a stress-free senior year, and my older daughter is still thrilled with her choice after 2 1/2 years.</p>
<p>Finances aside, the real key to choosing to apply ED is for the kid to have his or her “ducks in a row” early in the senior year. That means that making campus visits, finishing standardized testing and having a solid GPA by the fall of senior year. If at that point, the kid can look at her or her list and choose a clear top choice, then ED makes a lot of sense. It’s really nice to have an acceptance to your first choice in December.</p>
<p>^ I agree with Pizzagirl. My D1 was accepted ED by her top choice, a top 10 LAC. We were all tremendously relieved: no more waiting, worrying, hoping, it was all over as soon as that envelope was opened on December 15. It was the kids who still had applications to finish by January 1 and admissions decisions to sweat out until spring who were under pressure. My D spent a happy holiday season and spring semester getting ready to go to her dream school , which allowed her more time and mental and emotional energy to focus on a strong finish to her last year of HS.</p>
<p>You do understand that “need” is whatever the school says it is, right? Just about every so-called “100% need” school relies on the CSS Profile, and they take into an account an array of factors related to income and assets that are not part of the FAFSA calculation.</p>
<p>I’ve been through the RD round twice and I have seen the tremendous variation in financial aid packages, often defying my previous expectations of which school was likely to be “generous” and why. Sometimes the colleges that do not promise to meet full need for everyone end up giving the strongest awards at an individual level – so anyone who assumes that a school’s promise to meet “100% need” means that its need-based aid will meet their expectations as to what they think they need is naive about the financial aid process.</p>
It doesn’t matter – I think the main point of the example is that the student in question assumed that she would need an extra boost to get into a top college – so she chose an ED school strategically, rather than because it was the favorite on her list or her very top choice. Then in the spring she saw friends with weaker stats being admitted to colleges that would have been on her RD list and which she might have preferred. </p>
<p>Students who use ED that way are not only giving up the ability to compare financial aid, they may be giving up the ability to compare schools. They aren’t applying to their dream school -the one college they want above all others – but rather to the school where they think ED gives them the biggest edge.</p>
<p>^ But my kids did compare many schools. We started both the serious touring and finaid research at the begining of D1’s jr year. (We actually visited some schools the summer before, just because they were close, to give the kids an idea of what’s out there.) D2, who applied ED, did choose the one college that stood out among all her options (likely or stretch.) She did not choose to apply ED for the edge, but because she was ready to commit to that choice. </p>
<p>So, she gave up the chance to compare packages.<br>
Long story short, we did a lot of research. We also knew what we thought we could pay and what Plus loans we might be willing to take. We never made assumptions, but we certainly did run through a number of “what ifs.” And, this included letting both kids know we had to have the right aid or that school would not be affordable. In both cases, we got decent aid- all D1’s RD offers were close (maybe 1400 difference, from best down) and D2’s ED pkg followed suit.</p>
<p>We can’t generalize that ED kids are settling or trying for an edge or robbing themselves of adequate aid, etc. In cases, it is true. Sure.</p>
<p>ED worked for D1, who is now a senior. She applied to a need-sensitive, meets-100%-of-need top LAC. I was confident that the package would come in close enough to the mark. D was also well-aware that if the school was too much of a financial reach, it was back to the drawing-board with RD applications; I had also explained to D that if her ED school was unaffordable, that likely would have been the same IF (big IF) she were admitted RD. </p>
<p>For D, the admissions boost, completing only one app and being done with all the entire process by Dec. 15 was worth risking the disappoinment of being admitted, but turning down the seat for financial reasons (in which case D could roll-over her app to RD and if admitted, compare aid packages). In the end, each year’s aid package - - approx. $4k fed loans, $2k work-study, $2K from summer earnings, the rest in grant money - -covered close to 2/3 the COA and was just a bit above our FAFSA EFC. </p>
<p>Sure. I guess in general, I’m more of a trust the statistics kind of guy. So in the case of ED, when I look at the fact that ED acceptances virtually always attend, I think that indicates financial aid surprises are rarely an issue. And, in this cases where this does occur, the ED terms allow for an exit if they are unacceptable. But again, this rarely seems to be the case when you look at the statistics. </p>
<p>Bottom line, if you want to compare offers to get the best deal, you obviously shouldn’t apply ED. But if you have a first choice, and you have a general idea based on school’s policies and your own finances, then i think the risk is really low that you will be disappointed with the school’s financial aid offer. </p>
<p>One last point, the last thing any school wants is a group of students accepted via ED who are bitter and angry because they feel they were shortchanged in financial aid.</p>
<p>I believe there is another component to consider in the debate: If ED has no or little benefit in admissions, and obvious disadvantage when considering financial aid, then it may only be beneficial to a select few (only those wishing for the reduced “stress” time that ED can provide).</p>
<p>There is speculation currently that suggests that if you are not a recruited athlete, that the stats for accepted ED applicants may not vary from the statistical results of RD students. </p>
<p>Research by Christopher Avery, a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, found that applying early only gave a slight edge to students whose test scores, grades, and other qualifications were slightly below the college’s average. Underqualified students were rejected no matter when they applied.</p>
<p>^ That sounds about right. But recognize that stats don’t tell the whole story at the most selective colleges. Williams may reject 75% of its applicants with 2300+ SATs, even though 2300 SATs would put a student in its top quartile. But I doubt it rejects 75% of ED applicants with 2300+ SATs. Some, yes, but not 3/4ths.</p>
<p>In other words, in some cases it’s not necessarily that somewhat weaker students get a boost with ED (or get enough of a boost ED to make a difference). It may be that perfectly strong applicants, who nonetheless would face a significant chance of rejection RD because the college is going to have to reject a lot of perfectly strong applicants, face a somewhat more favorable lottery in the ED pool.</p>
<p>Exactly! At the most sought-after colleges, the majority of rejected applicants are qualified to attend. Their courses, grades, and tests are fine. Their extracurriculars are usually impressive. But the overall profile simply doesn’t offer exactly what is “special” enough to allow an affirmative verdict. (A Harvard dean once said that an entire freshman class, as strong as the one already admitted, could be selected from among the applications in the reject pile.)</p>
<p>But applying ED–and thus promising the commitment that goes with it–can be enough to turn one of those aforementioned strong-but-not-special applicants into an accepted applicant. Most admission officials are big believers in the Bird-in-Hand theory … especially when they’re not really missing out on two in the bush but perhaps just one-and-a-quarter. ;)</p>
I think that the vast majority of ED applicants do NOT need financial aid, or have a good deal of flexibility in that area. That is, they may be hoping for aid but they are prepared to cope with gaps in aid and borrow funds if necessary.</p>
<p>There are some schools that are very transparent about their aid practices and very generous to students on the lower end of the income spectrum —a student who comes from a very poor family is likely to be offered a near full ride at just about any college that meets 100% need. But my comments about financial aid are focused more on those who would consider themselves to be middle class / middle income.</p>
<p>
There are at least 3 threads started on CC in the past month from parents disappointed with their financial aid offers. One had to turn down Rice, which I believe is a 100% need school.</p>
<p>I’d point out that, especially among parents who are new to the process, many may not know that they ought to be disappointed. Financial aid awards can be hard to decipher for the uninitiated, and without a basis for comparison, it’s hard to know what award is appropriate and fair. </p>
<p>Outside of a few elite schools that are particularly generous with financial aid (most of which do not have binding ED programs) – I think that there are many ED admitted students who have gotten shafted with their aid, but just don’t know it. They may never figure it out, but they will be in a school for 4 years and what looked do-able the first year may become very burdensome by the 4th year as tuition and other expenses rise and the loan burden mounts up. That’s the value of having the ability to compare awards - a difference of only a few thousand dollars in aid can be far more significant when multiplied over 4 years.</p>
<p>I can’t know, but I believe that the meets-full-need schools are fairly transparent in their definition of need, in the sense that if you use one of the online calculators that follows institutional method, you can get a good sense of what they will offer. Though we did not apply for FA when S was applying to school, we did apply when our monetary circumstances took a plunge. I used an online calculator to get a sense of what we might get in aid. Now, remember, he was already a student there, had been full pay, so they were under no obligation or exigency to offer him a dime. Yet the financial aid came in pretty much to the dollar of what the calculators suggested. That’s the kind of school you can apply ED and have an idea of what you will get. The big IF is if you do the research and use the calculators, rather than assume that of course you wll get aid, which seems to have been the gist of what happened in the recent cases on this board.</p>
<p>“I think that there are many ED admitted students who have gotten shafted with their aid, but just don’t know it. They may never figure it out, but they will be in a school for 4 years and what looked do-able the first year may become very burdensome by the 4th year as tuition and other expenses rise and the loan burden mounts up.”</p>
<p>At D’s meets-full-need school, COA increased from year to year, but so did our income and D’s grant; there was a modest increase in w/s after the first year and the loans increased consist with the federal limits - - no surprises. I’m sure there is a degree of bait-and-switch with some schools (maybe those that have smaller endowments?) - - it’s not just limited to need-based aid, I’ve read a number of threads where parents complain about reduction in the merit award.</p>
<p>There is no such thing as institutional “method” (in the singular) – CSS Profile collects information for private colleges and provides software to them to calculate financial aid, with dozens of customizable options, and perhaps hundreds or thousands of possible permutations of the result depending on how the institution decides to treat various information. Just the issue of home equity is a major wild card, from variations in how colleges assess market value of the home to whether they limit or cap consideration in respect to family income or other factors. If the college happens to provide its own calculator, then it may be reliable – but a generic “institutional methodology” calculator may have little or no bearing on what an individual college is likely to do.</p>