<p>Indeed. Most often it is not the very top schools (and I’m going to use the USNWR definition of “top”, flawed as it may be) that do this, but ones just below, to lure students who got into a tippy top but are willing to go “down” a little step to save the money. The school gets the high academic (athletic, artistic) achiever and the kid’s parents get a financial break. I think it’s a win-win.</p>
<p>I also understand the argument that said school may offer less money to lower income kids as a result, so I am not firmly on a side in this, I do see both arguments.</p>
<p>Each family makes a choice about an offer with merit of some kind at perhaps a “lower” school, and an offer at a more desired school that costs more. My S chose his second-best financial offer because it was a good balance and the cost was workable. But there were two others that I think he’d really have liked to attend that were ruled out because the FA just wasn’t sufficient. I know both of those would have made a higher offer had his stats been higher though…in a supply/demand situation like this he was desired by some more than others, even though he was accepted to all.</p>
<p>Deep Springs College
United States Military Academy
United States Naval Academy
United States Air Force Academy</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, merit scholarships and need-based financial aid are two sides of the price discrimination coin. A college knows that a high performing student may have several admission offers, so it offers a discount in the form of a merit scholarship. A college also knows that a worthy student from a poor family may not attend college at all if it is too expensive, so it offers a discount in the form of need-based financial aid.</p>
<p>In any case, need-based financial aid was much less “necessary” in the 1950s-1980s at state universities that were almost free for state residents. Also, more men during the 1950s-1970s enlisted (not always voluntarily) into the military services, eventually being discharged with GI Bill money for college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Note that full pay at Harvard means coming from a family (of 3 with 1 in college) with income over $230,000 per year, according to its net price calculator. This apparently describes 40% of Harvard undergraduates, since 60% receive need-based aid.</p>
<p>Regarding Deep Springs College which a best buddy in HS considered, there’s a substantial weekly labor requirement to keep the campus running on top of heavy academics. </p>
<p>And Federal Service Academies are free in price because the student is exchanging at least 5 years of his/her life as an active-duty military officer with its associated hazards…including being severely physically/mentally wounded or losing his/her life in the service of country. </p>
<p>You’re also subjected to 4 years of a highly restrictive regulated 24/7 military environment with many military related training/drill duties/exercises on top of a heavy academic load and where upper-class cadets have power over you during most of your time.</p>
<p>Yes, but that (non-monetary) price fits into the “one price for all” strategy that a previous poster mentioned that some colleges were “considering”.</p>
<p>Note also that the risk of death in the US military is lower than what most people think. Navy and Air Force personnel in the Iraq combat zone in 2003-2006 had a lower death rate than US mostly civilian men age 20-34. However, Army and Marines personnel had a higher death rate. Obviously, this reflects the nature of the combat zone. Overall risk of death for US military in the Iraq combat zone in 2003-2006 was 2.78 times that of US mostly civilian men age 20-34.</p>
Judge those who disagree with you much? How about enumerating the schools that give a lot (not just a handful) of merit scholarships and meet 100%? Pretty short list isn’t it. IMO schools providing significant merit aid while not meeting the need of all accepted students are free to do so but not acting in the way I find particularly complementary about the school. The issue I have with merit aid is that a substantial portion of the money probably comes from money that would have been used for financial aid in the absence of merit aid. Any if it is old fashion to think colleges should maximize the odds of all the accepted student to be able to afford the school than call me old fashioned. Any school that meets need and also provides merit aid can go to town with their merit aid program in my book … however that is not the case for virtually all schools providing merit aid.</p>
<p>One benefit of merit aid - if you get better students, they may well earn more and provide more in alumni donations than other students. That wealthier family that receives the merit scholarship may also provide large contributions after their kids graduate.</p>
<p>I have donated to my own high school, which I attended on very generous financial aid. I attended 3 different colleges and don’t donate to any of them, though lord knows they all ask :)</p>
<p>I think it’s more likely that S will choose to support his college than I will.</p>
<p>What we’re calling Merit Aid can serve purposes beyond rewarding merit. It can attract kids who still pay a high amount after that $ is deducted, can lure geo diversity and be used to draw enough B+ kids to a school that tends to lose the A kids to a wide range of other schools. In the latter, it’s letting those kids feel courted and special. It’s promoting a better yield among a realistic subset of admittees. Depends on the school.</p>
<p>If I were an adcom at an up and coming school seeking to improve the quality of my students, where would I get a bigger bang for my buck - offering outstanding FA to low SES students or giving merit aid to lure really smart kids away from other options?</p>
<p>NYU has the reputation of being pretty darned stingy with both merit and need-based aid. Guess its an equal opportunity cheapskate.</p>
<p>At many schools funds earmarked for merit money are in a different pool from the funds marked for need-based FA. It isnt all coming from the same pot.</p>
<p>And some schools sweem to javk up the tuition to in turn be able to offer an incentive award to the students.</p>
And, additionally, to add to that thought, if I were an adcomm and I wanted to improve the freshman retention rate or percent who graduate in 4 years… where would I get the best bang for my buck?</p>
<p>Read carefully. I never said there weren’t or couldn’t be smart kids among lower SES. I asked where I’d get more bang for my buck if I could only choose one option and my goal was to improve student body caliber. I might choose to improve student body caliber first and then go after lower SES with FA as my second step.</p>
Yes to DS’s school and no to DD1’s. There were doors that we think his school opened that allowed wonderful opportunities for internships and employment that I appreciate and still contribute to the specific departments he majored in. Was disappointed in DD’s equally well rated school, so want to have nothing more to do with it. Time will tell how we feel about the last one’s choice.</p>