<p>First I apologize for the typo in the title i meant "has" instead of "had"</p>
<p>I am trying to choose one school to try and do early decision for from the Ivys and am basically trying to pick between Columbia and UPenn</p>
<p>My family is quite in the middle in terms of our income so I am not low enough where I am guarenteed a lot of financial assistance but am still low enough where my family needs the help to pay for this kind of school. What I want to know is which school in general offers more financial aid in grants and has more scholarship/work opportunities to try and make college as affordable as possible?</p>
<p>geekorathletic why should i not exactly? i really love both of those schools and i believe that the edge ed gives is substantial since I am passionate about both of these schools</p>
<p>Have you done any research with FA and colleges, especially ED? You clearly haven’t.
There is a reason why it’s generally recommended not to apply ED if you need FA. Assuming you get in, RD would allow you to compare FA, whereas ED wouldn’t. ED gives the college more ammo in that they give you less than what you need and force you into a tough spot (binding agreement).</p>
<p>okay. I am also aware that even though you enter a binding agreement if you cannot work out a financial plan that works for your family you can opt out. obviously they cannot make you go to their school if you cant pay for it that’s why in cases were you cant afford the school you can get out of the binding contract. at least thats what my research has indicated</p>
<p>If you can prove it sufficiently beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, that’s rather hard to do, and college FA officers have no reason to help you out in that case. The university will have the leverage, not you.
That’s the risk of ED.</p>
<p>“If you can prove it sufficiently beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, that’s rather hard to do, and college FA officers have no reason to help you out in that case.”</p>
<p>With schools that accept the Common Application, no proof is necessary; it is solely the student’s decision. Here’s the rule:
<p>Consider the alternative, that attendance is somehow compelled, and then the student is expelled when the bill can’t be paid; it doesn’t happen.</p>
<p>But I agree that this is not an ED situation; rahuja should compare FA offers at RD time.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, just declining means that follows one’s record of violating the binding agreement. You need to be released from the agreement with a mutual agreement from the university itself to be on the safe side. </p>
<p>Why risk going through all that? RD is far safer.</p>
<p>How can you be positive this never happens? If it were really that easy to “decline the offer of admission and be released from the Early Decision commitment,” then couldn’t ED admittees simply force the hand of the ED school in question to give them better FA offers? Since in this scenario (in which “proof” is not required), the school no longer defines “need” but the admitted student, then couldn’t the student keep asking for more and more FA to his or her heart’s content (or “need”)? And if so, what would make the ED commitment “binding” in any sense?</p>
<p>It seems inconceivable to me that a student could apply ED and not have to bear any opportunity costs or risks. Maybe I am misinterpreting something, but I don’t see how ED applicants can have their cake and eat it too. The ED schools must have more leverage than the Common App statement re: ED agreement implies, no?</p>
<p>Personally, I don’t think ED should exist in the first place, but that’s neither here nor there.</p>
<p>“Unfortunately, just declining means that follows one’s record of violating the binding agreement. You need to be released from the agreement with a mutual agreement from the university itself to be on the safe side.”</p>
<p>Only if declining for other than financial reasons. You have already submitted your financial data; the school has the data it used to determine the FA.</p>
<p>We should hear about schools that use the Common App but then don’t follow its rules, designed to not discourage needy students from applying ED to their dream schools. Needy students should be warned about such schools.</p>
<p>“How can you be positive this never happens?”</p>
<p>It would be well publicized, both here and in the press. Just imagine the awful PR the school would incur.</p>
<p>“then couldn’t ED admittees simply force the hand of the ED school in question”</p>
<p>Students have limited leverage. Schools are trying to maximize the quality of the student body within a limited budget. Giving more to Billy means less is available to Jane. Demands don’t work (but sometimes appeals do).</p>
<p>The ED “risk” to FA students is being locked in after accepting the offer; the benefit to schools is locked-in students they want.</p>
<p>This is mostly an esoteric argument; ED yields are generally high. The main point is to prevent needy students from thinking there is a financial risk of being locked in to something they cannot afford when applying ED.</p>
<p>Clearly, anyone is free to not believe the published Common App ED FA rules.</p>
<p>So you’re saying that if no one hears the sound of a tree falling in a forest, a tree couldn’t have fallen?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How is this leverage “limited” if the students can be released from their ED commitment without providing any proof?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The high ED yields could just as easily be attributed to the fact that admitted students cannot break (or at least have a lot of trouble breaking) their ED contract.</p>
<p>Key words: school determines the FA need, not the family. Thus, school has the leverage. For example, the school may think an FA award of $10000 may suffice, whereas the family may think more in $20000 range. But unless the family can actually prove it to the school that they actually do need $10000 in addition to the original award, why should the school be required to release the student from the binding agreement? That is the risk of applying ED. The school has the leverage, and it’s entirely up to the school to release the student from the agreement, not the student.</p>
<p>“But unless the family can actually prove it to the school that they actually do need $10000 in addition to the original award, why should the school be required to release the student from the binding agreement?”</p>
<p>The question is actually: Why don’t schools require proof? Because schools already have the family’s financial data, so no proof is possible. The difference of opinion as to how much aid is needed is often due to a family’s lifestyle. E.g., a school may expect families to give up vacations in Hawaii, but some families won’t.</p>
<p>Proof is possible. Something may have abruptly changed, a parent getting laid off, etc. Granted, those are rather extreme cases. </p>
<p>The universities have no reason whatsoever to let the student go from the agreement. In your example, if a family is unwilling to give up vacations, then they shouldn’t have let their child apply ED. Everything comes at a price. </p>
<p>The point is this. The university may or may not release the student from the agreement. Clear proof of some extreme case may perhaps be the only surefire way out of such cases. But is ED worth the risk of having “I backed out from the honor system of binding agreement” following that student for the rest of his life? You may not agree with me, but I don’t think so.</p>
<p>i do appreciate all this discussion it is somewhat helpful. This paragraph from the article you posted does shed some light: </p>
<p>"The most acceptable excuse officials cite for backing out of an early decision commitment is a financial aid package that a family considers too low. The financial aid letter is often the first time a family sees all the costs lined up, says Eric Maguire, director of admission at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa. “Some families are finding their aid packages are not aligned with their expectations. If so, we certainly enable them to break their commitment.”</p>
<p>At some schools applying ED can be a substantial advantage, but I suspect that at Columbia and UPenn, two of the most popular (selective) schools, it does not.</p>
<p>If you like each school equally well, I would apply RD and choose the best FA package, if you have a choice.</p>
<p>Rahuja, apply ED if you want. I applied early to Dartmouth and still got a great FA package from them. Their expected family contribution was actually less than the one calculated by FAFSA. other people that I know from Penn and Columbia also got awesome FA packages when applying early. From my experience, colleges with a lot of money like Penn and Columbia will try all they can to help you go there and in my experience, my FA was actually raised after I talked with the FA department. These schools are need-blind and will pay all demonstrated need.</p>