Actually, the students who “don’t pay” (really those who pay the minimum net price, typically between $4,000 and $10,000 of expected student work and student loan contribution – try net price calculators) usually make up only a minority of those receiving financial aid from the most selective private schools. The typical distribution at those schools is around 50% no-financial-aid students, around 10-20% Pell grant students (the minimum-net-price students are a subset of this group), and the remaining around 30-40% receiving financial aid but less than the maximum financial aid.
Regarding the statement, “One mistake we may have made was in checking the box on needing financial aid, when we didn’t need it. In the current environment, I’d be careful NOT to do that…”
If you’re absolutely sure that you’re not going to receive any FA even if you check off that box, then I’d be extremely careful to leave it unchecked. I checked off on that box even though my atypical 2015 financial situation would give me very little to no aid. The admissions results would indicate that there were indeed need blind policy practiced to the letter. I don’t believe that, regardless of whether I checked off on that box or not, it’d have impacted on my son’s admissions results. Sure enough, of the seven acceptances, about three offered no FA, two offered between $4,000 to $10,000, one offered about $25,000, and one offered $30,000 (not counting work study $$ and no loan amount).
Your statement is inconsistent. A 100% increase in chances is yuuuuuuge. Yes, I get your point that the odds are still 5:1 against, but that is a whole lot better than 10:1, ain’t it?
Waitlists are being used less while some top colleges are overenrolled
There appears to be a strong correlation between this year’s presidential election, and the resultant increase in blue state and decrease in red state applications - while anecdotal, Grinnell down 22%, Kenyon down 12.5%, Hamilton up 9% and Colby up 14% can’t just be random.
^ I actually know students who refused to apply to any colleges that were in red states, more so those that had suddenly swung red…poor Pennsylvania.
I don’t buy that. Michigan, Wisconsin, OSU and UT-Austin seem to be doing fine. Emory, Rice, Vandy?
@twoinanddone: LACs draw a different and typically more liberal crowd.
Being in the middle of nowhere is also different from being in a college town or big city.
@mackinaw - can you explain why you think the FA box would have made a big difference? Were they need blind or need aware schools?
I’d need some hard info on the red/blue application divide before acting on application processes with that thought in mind. The snowflake generation gets much media attention so maybe universities (and major chunks of their applicant pools) really have moved to a place where political differences cannot be accepted or debated. If true, too bad for higher education in America.
“Middle of nowhere” areas are more commonly right-leaning, while big cities are more commonly left-leaning. That has not changed.
However, one might want to consider what laws are enacted at the state level if some issues are important or may directly affect the student (e.g. voter ID issues). Note that partisan control at the state level may be different from how the state voted in presidential elections.
Staying away from Penn because Pennsylvania is a “red” state is a little silly. Trump won Pennsylvania by about 40,000 votes. He only got 15% of the vote in the city of Philadelphia, and he lost the five-county southeastern Pennsylvania area by about the same percentage margin he lost California (losing not just Philadelphia but every one of its suburban counties, too). Now, if you were talking about Franklin & Marshall, Bucknell, or Dickinson, that would be a different story.
@homerdog “Not to beat a dead horse but the student I’m talking about is not an average-excellent student. Very special ECs in STEM (including individual state championship Science Olympiad project junior and senior year). I believe she has won individual awards for her cello playing and was even paid for an app she wrote for a large well-known company.”
I am not sure I have a clear understanding of the phrase “average-excellent.” The 15-20 students are 3.9 gpa and 1,500 + SATS (new version). I guess that is average-excellent on cc:? I think those student make up the serious candidate pool at ivies, but there are still too many students left so they focus on ECs and essays. Students with relatively weak ECs tend to end up at Illinois or Wisconsin.
The STEM achievements you mention sound significant to me, wash she not targeting a STEM major? Then they would probably see them as less significant. idk?
I will be the first to admit that the competition is crazy and the adcoms often just make decisions that are inexplicable to people who really know the students in question. On top of that, it gets a bit more extreme and silly every year as more and more students learn how to play the game, and families expect a brand name school if they are going to pay $250,000.
In non-urban areas, most college kids are probably barely aware of the communities surrounding their campuses, save for the Walmart run or an occasional dinner out. Few interact. Their focus is campus.
And while awards are nice, the entire app matters. It’s not just the bones, the resume highlights. Any kid can blow some aspect, come across as bland or not quite it. It seriously helps to get away from the "best at " thinking. So many applicants will have that, in some way.
@JHS “Staying away from Penn because Pennsylvania is a “red” state is a little silly. Trump won Pennsylvania by about 40,000 votes. He only got 15% of the vote in the city of Philadelphia, and he lost the five-county southeastern Pennsylvania area by about the same percentage margin he lost California (losing not just Philadelphia but every one of its suburban counties, too)”
Penn is a blue school in a blue area, regardless of how rural Pennsylvanian’s voted. It is true that the typical Penn students are moderate dems, not far left crazies, but Penn is clearly blue.
I’m faced with my D18 who doesn’t want to attend school in the south. Period. NC (Duke, UNC, etc.) are out, because of the whole HB2 issue. Vandy? Nope. We’ve all grown up in CA. So I can tell you that there is some red versus blue with our family though PA, MI and WI (states Trump flipped) may be eliminated because of the weather, not politics. I’m trying to keep her mind open, but not having much luck. The app process in the next few months will be interesting.
There are always swings in admission rates, particularly in liberal arts colleges, and it is probably not accurate to read much into that. In 2015 the schools suffering the largest drop in applications included Boston College and Columbia. They seem to have recovered. So Grinnell this year may be down but may be back up next year as the flavor of the year. The long term trends that last seem to be the skyrocketing prices moving applicants to other options and the push to early decision.
I am one of those unfortunately unhooked kids. I had a 2310 on the old SAT, but mediocre grades. My school does not calculate or report gpa, but I’d guess I have something like a 3.5 UW. Despite taking hard classes at a challenging prep school, I know that my grades killed my chances at top LACs. I also had pretty sparse ECs (one sport of which I am not captain, one club of which I am not the head, and one instrument which I do not play in an ensemble). On top of all that I am a non-URM girl from New England without legacy or connections (exception: Smith).
Originally I had naively planned on applying to a total of seven schools. After being rejected from Wesleyan ED1, I added six and ended up applying to thirteen total. Because of the timing, I didn’t get to interview at Colby, Connecticut College, Hamilton, or Smith either on campus or with an alum, and the hill became even steeper, particularly because many LACs evaluate the interview as a part of your application.
But in the end I fared well in RD. I was accepted to Bates, Colby, Colgate, Hamilton, Connecticut College, Smith, Trinity, and Union. I was rejected from Amherst, Bowdoin, Haverford, Vassar, and Wesleyan. Miraculously, I wasn’t waitlisted anywhere.
I think what differentiated me was my common app essay. I took a risk and wrote about how I didn’t want to write an essay I didn’t care about or believe in to try to “play the game” and market myself. It was an essay about trying to find the courage to be wholly myself while stuck in the pressure cooker of the college admissions process. It was very vulnerable, and very me.
I think the risk paid off. And because it paid off my takeaway/advice for future seniors from the last six months is to do your best not to lose yourself even when you feel overwhelmed. Especially at small schools where fit is a major factor, write something personal, and believe in it. It seems that if you are academically, extracurricularly, and demographically uninspiring like I am, the best thing you can do for yourself is to make yourself inspiring. I think the common app essay is one of the biggest opportunities for that.
Of course, I can only speak to the process at small, NE LACs. It seems it could be very different at larger schools.
While your essays may have been exceptional, your stellar SAT score well above the 75th percentile at those schools may have been determinative. It is possible that admissions officers are paying more attention to essays this year. Not really sure how to tell.
@roycroftmom That’s definitely possible. I always thought that my test scores didn’t matter that much considering the test optional movement.