<p>merryecho....ditto, ditto, ditto...those of us who have saved and sacrificed since our kids were born need to have some validation; if this is it, so be it...</p>
<p>I thought that NEED BLIND meant the admissions are need blind, doesn't mean the aid is going to allow it to happen.</p>
<p>I heard from some one who ought to know (this was about 5 years ago) that many schools would let every one in (still selective, but need blind admissions) then the finaid pile had A, B, C packages with A being the largest, grant heavy and C being the stingiest, loan heavy.</p>
<p>SO, the admissions was truly need blind, but the financial aid dept still had a budgetary limit. I even got the impression that ABC rank came from the admissions dept :eek:</p>
<p>I feel bad for those that are hurt by the changes but it has been frustrating for me that, since we have saved from the day the kids were born, over the years we lost the "admissions edge" of no sad story. Recently, D was specifically told (by someone in the know) how if she had a "sad story" that it would help her in admissions.</p>
<p>Believe me, I am not putting down those that have overcome adversity but not having adversity to overcome should not be punished either.</p>
<p>It's always like this in life: the rich always have an advantage, are ahead, and are lucky (the last part may be subjective, but come on, who'd prefer to be poor honestly).</p>
<p>somemom:</p>
<p>NYU and GWU practice "enrollment management" today.</p>
<p>As expected the practice of financial aid leveraging will be in use big time this year. </p>
<p>No one is hiding the fact that colleges are money sensitive. Best illustrated by Williams College president who said, never been a better time to be a smart rich kid; at some schools you dont have to be as smart as before. That is what happens during a recession. </p>
<p>What is your definition of smart? </p>
<p>I would say if those same elite colleges (worldwide) were actually teaching our kids critical thinking, basic money management, common sense business principles and ethics, global cultural understanding, philosophy and universal spiritual awareness based on Humanism, we may not have found ourselves in this situation in the first place. </p>
<p>We have allowed them to fail us! Worse yet, cognitive dissonance is preventing them (and us) to recognize that failure.</p>
<p>Most schools are need blind in admissions. They then give their most desired kids the best financial/merit aid packages and gap as they run out of money. </p>
<p>There are schools that admit that they are need aware in admissions. How they take need into account is based on their own procedures. A highly desired student can do well in aid packages at such schools since they generally give the top kids the best packages. These schools tend to fund those that they do accept, as they are protecting their yield figures by not accepting kids that cannot afford the school unless financial/merit aid meets their need. However, kids that are high need and below the median acceptance stats may be turned down because they are not considered a good admissions deal. </p>
<p>For those schools that are need blind and fund 100% of need, how the need is funded becomes important. Huge loans can be a problem. There are not too many schools that can fund 100% of need and give out all or mostly grants, and are need blind. Even among these schools, you may find that their definition of need may vary, widely.</p>
<p>Our GCs told us that they suspect some schools that say they are need blind are not. It's a point of contention with counselors as they feel that schools that are need aware should be upfront about it. There are also some schools that they know tend to be heavy on loans, gap, define need more narrowly than most. </p>
<p>The problem is that the lists are always changing. This season and the next will have changes in admissions for many colleges given the economy.</p>
<p>Thanks Oldfort--fabulous science, fabulous suit. Who says American science is not #1?!</p>
<p>But neither article mentioned why its lifespan was only 10-15 minutes in the water. Any thoughts?</p>
<p>Lets be clear on this. There is no free education. For those of us who were born poor and worked hard to get ahead and are now in the position of being just barely able to pay for our own childrens education if we are willing to scrimp even more, what, we should pay for your kids too? And be happy about it? There are those with limitations they just cant overcome, but for many more they just dont feel like working hard enough to succeed.</p>
<p>Some schools seem kind of weird in this area. USC clearly states that they meet full "USC determined need". However, they never actually call themselves need blind, and most places that are advertise that fact.</p>
<p>From the collegeboard:</p>
<h1>Number who were judged to have need: 1,194</h1>
<h1>Number who were offered aid: 1,193</h1>
<p>Sucks to be that guy.</p>
<p>I don't know the specifics about USC, but a school could, theoretically, guarantee to meet need, but not be need blind. In that case, they may consider a student's ability to pay in their initial decisions about whom to admit, but for those they do choose to admit, they will make sure their need is fully met.</p>
<p>I'm super worried now. At the conference I attended, the admissions people highly stressed to emphasize the fact that we're low-income as they stated colleges want "high achieving low income kids". My family's EFC is literally 0, and I did mention our family's unique circumstance in the additional info (living w other family members as we just immigrated, dad retired, mom workign part time while studying etc). As I applied to quite a number of selective schools, this whole thread is freaking me out and making me angry and upset.</p>
<p>Eeeek--what about us strictly middle class ppl?? </p>
<p>The lower income kids and rich enough to go anywhere kids seem to have their advantages here...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Totally agree. I never understood the mentality of people who believe they deserve a free, $50K education, just because they are smart. And that giving a spot to a lower scoring applicant who is actually willing to pay for it is some sort of travesty.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's because some people believe that all kids should have, as much as possible, equal opportunities at the beginning of their lives. What they choose to do with them is their choice. But it's not because of the merits of the child that his parents are rich, or the child's deficiencies that his parents are poor. Poorer kids already have a ton of disadvantages in life; they might as well have an equal shot at college, especially considering they probably had less help in school/ECs to achieve an admission.</p>
<p>darling, don't worry. I can really see how this thread would be disturbing to you. While I think it's probably true colleges will be pleased to bring in full-pay kids, even maybe in somewhat higher numbers than last year, nonetheless they will also be looking for kids like you. They will still want a freshman class that is ecomonically, socially, racially, geographically diverse. No one is going to want an entire incoming class of upper middle class kids. You will be judged on your merits. You can't take all this to heart. Honestly, this is just a bunch of people on a message board speculating, exploring a topic... but no one is actually in the room making admissions decisions. I appreciate how you feel, though. Last year my kid was applying and he had a lot of financial need. If I was reading this a year ago it would have disturbed me too! Hang in there. If your EFC is zero, it's not like you can do anything other than make your need known. It may hurt, it may help, it may be irrelevant. There's no way to know. Good luck to you!</p>
<p>ellenomope -- 15 min in water life -- they wear those suits mostly in the meets, not for practice -- each event is a few seconds/minutes. 15 minutes can be a lot of events. Im just speculating. Im sure there is someone here with a kid that swims competitively who can resolve this</p>
<p>I'm with MerryEcho and Rodney. My wife and I both paid our own way with work and loans. We have saved enough for our kids to go to school just about anywhere they are admitted (hope this doesn't destroy their work ethic). Some people would be happier and may even achieve more if they stopped fretting over what other people have and would stop defining "rich" as someone who has more than they do. W and I worked very, very hard for what we have. The money for our kids education is , I feel, safe from being confiscated and traded for votes by the new government.</p>
<p>'rentof2, Those were precisely the schools were my kids did poorly in admissions. If they were good enough to be competitive to a "need-blind" meets-full-need school, they were accepted (or rejected)-- no waitlist. If they weren't competitive for those, they were granted admission only at schools that gapped. Our need was too high for match schools that meet full-need or close to it but are not need-blind. (I think a lot of private schools fall into this category because even if they don't meet full need, they are watching their yield and won't gap a low EFC kid 5 figures because it will impact yield.) </p>
<p>darling, I don't think much has changed. I think the schools always look at how much need you have. If you apply and are competitive to schools that have the $ to give you and those schools meet full need, you are fine. If the school takes finances into consideration or doesn't meet full need, it will work against you. That's the difference between an ivy and a school like NYU.</p>
<p>mhmm is right. The high-performance suits have such limited lifespans that most elite swimmers won't even wear them for warmups at big meets (the warmup can be well over a mile). They are designed like super-tight pantyhose, and it can take many minutes for the swimmer to squeeze him or herself into the suit. Apart from distance events, most swim events are 50-200 meters, with times from 20 seconds to about 4 minutes. So the suit might last for 2-3 big meets, and then it's toast. But most swimmers at the elite levels don't have to pay full price for their suits -- they are provided at a giant discount by the club or team, and are often free. Well, not really free, because club team swimmers pay a hefty fee to join the team.
My son is a college swimmer, and I can tell you that there are very few swimmers from low-income households. Michael Phelps was one big exception, but it's extremely difficult for working or single parents to get their kids to 8 practices a week and to meets in inconvenient locations.</p>
<p>darling: don't worry....this will not affect you.....with an EFC of $0 you should be fine........</p>