Interesting article from Tulane’s newspaper, The Hullabaloo https://tulanehullabaloo.com/44695/news/money-matters-tulane-reduces-merit-aid-budget-increases-need-based-financial-aid-spending/
I read this article a few days ago and I had conflicting feelings about this My daughter received a large merit scholarship from Tulane and would not have attended without it, however she frequently complains about the lack of diversity on campus. Ultimately I think Tulane has the right idea in reducing (not eliminating) merit scholarships. If all merit scholarships were reduced by a few thousand dollars (I saw they were even reduced a little last year) and a third of students attending receive them, think how much money that could translate into financial aid. I believe Tulane would benefit from all kinds of diversity, including socio-economic diversity. Good move, Tulane!
Probably means no Tulane for my son if they are reducing merit. We are too rich for aid, but can’t pay without merit aid. Oh, well.
@elodyCOH
We are in the same situation. The school was a bit of a reach for my daughter anyways, is extraordinarily expensive and she ultimately decided not to apply. Seeing this kind of solidifies the decision. I understand the rationale though even if I don’t agree with it.
How to throw your classmates (and entire school) under the bus: “We have this really strange balance of very smart kids and, quite frankly, a lot of kids who are very stupid that come from very wealthy families and can afford to go here”.
Why does he think that a move towards more need-based aid instead of merit aid for those “very smart kids” will mean fewer “very stupid” kids attending?
This is exactly the type of social change that USNWR was striving for when it made “provides opportunities to socioeconomically disadvantaged” — or something of that nature — as an important part of its ranking system. They realized that they had heretofore incentivized schools to provide merit aid to the brightest students they could find, which often happened to be the richest ones, and that the poor A-/B+ (And below) students were seeing their opportunities for need based aid reduced because money is not infinite. In the most recent UNSWR ranking, U of Florida catapulted many places ahead for already providing generous need based aid and otherwise lifting people up.
You can debate whether this is all bad or good, but I do think that is what is going on.
sorry to be thick, but do we think this will increase or decrease stupid rich kids at Tulane?
It certainly might decrease the number of very bright students, @Coffeymommy
@Happy4u - Totally agree. Tulane is a very expensive school and kids with high ACT/SAT scores have many options with very generous merit scholarships. Doesn’t sound like this will be my DS’s future college.
How does changing the type of aid given affect the intelligence level of the matriculating class if the admission standards remain the same? If their mid-50% SAT is 1420-1510, and they give need based aid to to those students instead of merit aid, the only way the average SAT score of matriculating students will be lower is if the upper SAT ranges are held by students from upper income families. If that’s true, then the scores are more likely a reflection of family wealth and privilege than a reflection of individual intelligence. Even if you believe that standardized tests measure intelligence, the difference between a 1420 and 1510 isn’t much. Do people who think students who score a 1510 are very bright really believe that those who score a 1420 aren’t?
It’s too bad the college junior quoted in the article has such a low opinion of her classmates. It’s unlikely that she knows all of them, and even if she did publicly calling your classmates “very stupid” doesn’t show a lot of sense.
Isn’t this what top LACs like Vassar have been doing for years?
“How does changing the type of aid given affect the intelligence level of the matriculating class if the admission standards remain the same?”
The question is not whether the minimum admission standards remain the same but whether you will find as many “very smart” kids if you focus on need-based aid. That seems unlikely: the very smart poor kids will get even better aid at tippy top private colleges (and therefore won’t be incentivized to attend), while the very smart but better off kids who are chasing merit and chose Tulane because they couldn’t afford HYPSM etc. now will have to look elsewhere.
Instead you’ll get more less well off kids who can’t get into HYPSM. Even so that might not change the SAT midrange too much, if all you lose is the top 10-20% of merit chasing kids, though I suppose that losing the perception of a university with “very smart” kids might adversely affect the future application pool.
I do agree that the aim is to follow USNWR’s move to encourage admission of more lower income students. Of course the more that happens (see also Rice, although they’ve not formally indicated a reduction in merit), the more that merit chasing students who can’t afford their EFC are going to be shut out of the mid tier private schools. That will mean an even bigger crush of applications at schools like HYPSM because they are both the most generous and the most worth paying for. And more competition for the remaining large merit spots - public honors colleges are starting to look like the best bet to hold out there since public universities already admit more lower income students and benefit from that in USNWR.
Is it a given that students from families who aren’t full pay – which could be anything from middle income to actual low income – have lower test scores than students from full pay families? I’m reading the change as the intention to give need based aid greater than the limited amount given for narrow bands of test scores and GPAs. Instead of giving $20k to a middle income family whose kid has a 1510 (which still may not be enough to make the school affordable), they can give as much as they want based solely on the family’s need. It doesn’t mean the kid’s stats are below the current cut off for merit. It means the school isn’t limited in how much they offer.
“Is it a given that students from families who aren’t full pay – which could be anything from middle income to actual low income – have lower test scores than students from full pay families?”
No but it is a given that high scoring students from families with need have a wider choice of better colleges than Tulane compared to high scoring students from families who are seeking merit. Under the new system it’s hard to imagine Tulane will offer better need based aid than HYPSM so why would you choose it in those circumstances? Whereas in the current system a merit seeking student might well get a better financial deal from Tulane and choose it over HYPSM.
There are many more families who require substantial need based aid than there are seats at meets need colleges. Students whose families don’t qualify for need based aid generally have a residential college option somewhere. If a high scoring student from a lower income family doesn’t get into a meets need college their choice may be between commuting to the closest state school or starting at a cc.
Why would students’ choose Tulane over elite colleges that offer better need based aid? Tulane’s admission rate is 21%. Harvard’s is 5%. Students from families who qualify for need based aid can only attend a college that offers better need based aid if they’re accepted.
“Students from families who qualify for need based aid can only attend a college that offers better need based aid if they’re accepted.”
So we’re in agreement that few if any students who would get into HYPSM and get sufficient need-based aid would choose Tulane instead. And you appear to agree that top scoring students who don’t get need based aid (and would formerly have been awarded merit) “generally have a residential college option somewhere” [else].
So how do you plan to magically replace those merit seekers with more high scoring students (above the 1510 SAT 75th percentile) who have need? There are clearly plenty of qualified potential students with need in the US. It’s far less clear that there is a surfeit of top 1% students with significant need. After all that’s only 40K HS graduates per year (which skews towards the wealthier end of the population) so we are talking about perhaps 10K-15K kids per year to fight over with more prestigious full need schools.
Note that I’m not arguing about whether this change is socially desirable, I’m simply pointing out that some of those top scoring merit seeking students (including commenters on this thread) will now go elsewhere and be replaced by other qualified but less high scoring students.
Here’s why less “super strong” students may apply going forward. Suppose someone is in the 120k-180k income range, with variable income year to year (or perhaps some years a sib is in college, and some they are not.) Suppose they apply to a variety of needs based schools, such as competitive LACs that do not offer merit, as well as Tulane. If that student gets a Tulane merit scholarship, it becomes much more appealing to the comparable needs-based LACs or other privates. Why? Well because needs based is scary for someone has variable income (I know – that describes us). It means year to year we don’t know if we can afford the college or not. It means that if a sibling finishes with college, than the other students tuition may become unaffordable. (In our case, we have a special needs person we still must support, college or not.) Merit money at the same amount as needs-based is always worth more, because it is assured for the 4 years.
My DS (currently a Sophomore) had exactly this choice (between a private with merit, and a LAC with decent needs based.) For Freshman year, his cost at both schools would have been equivalent. At my urging, he chose the private with merit – it was a much more financially sound decision.
Tulane, under the new system, will lose applications from people who fear the “needs based” uncertainty. I am not sure they will gain so many more applications, because there is lots of competition in that space for students with high stats.
Tulane was a possibility for us previously, because their non-need based merit aid pushed it into a somewhat affordable category. Once you take that merit off the table, the school is now no longer anywhere close to being within reach. Variable income is a big factor. We have had a few years of good bonuses in a row. There have been years where the bonus is very small or non-existent. If they are going to drastically reduce merit this year, I’m sure their yield numbers are going to be very different than what they normally see. Many people may have applied because they thought it was a financial option for them, when now it may not be. I wish I knew how much they changed it, if it’s really drastic, it might be better for my son to just withdraw his application. I don’t want him to get accepted only for me to tell him no. I wish they announced all of this before the application cycle started.
I read this article last week and was offended at how the students spoke about their classmates. I don’t think it’s possible to be so stupid and stay at Tulane. If I was full pay there, I would definitely be feeling like I was being used for the funding I bring. If Tulane really wanted to be helpful to everyone who applies they could look inwards at why it’s so expensive to attend. Their dorms, food plans and mandatory fees rise annually and are too much to begin with. How about a tuition guarantee? Dropping the $6000/year and rising mandatory food plans? Not hiring rappers to perform during homecoming weekend and using some of your phenomenal music groups for entertainment.
If Tulane charged an application fee of around $50 (they could still waive it for qualifying students) they could have around $2 million in additional $$ to put towards merit and need based aid.
(and as an aside, @austinmshauri , I think Tulane’s admission rate was 17% this past year).