<p>"I know plenty of straight C-students who now hold Wall St. jobs that some of my 3.5-3.8 GPA friends could only dream of... and why was it they were hired--connections."</p>
<p>I was on the short-end of that stick over 20 years ago - it is sad that this still goes on...funny thing is, I have played many volunteer roles in giving back to my alma mater, and where are these slackers? Not even on the donator rolls...sheesh. But if my D applies as a legacy and one of theirs does, who gets in first?</p>
<p>"Bates does say it's need blind. I specifically asked the question when I was there. I couldn't find it on their website (it may indeed be there), or in the guidebooks (it may indeed be there), but that's what they said when I specifically asked them."</p>
<p>Well, they lie. So do all the others (with the possible exceptions of Cooper Union, Olin, and the service academies.) Some of them are more blatant about it, like Amherst, where, while claiming to be need-blind, they actively seek to accept low-income students (and they can't accept them unless they can identify them), or Williams, where the admissions director actually counts the percentage of "socio-ec" admits as they go through the process. </p>
<p>What is true about Bates, however, is that they (seem to) have the highest percentage of full-freight students of any of the top 50 LACs. (And I think that's totally fine - they've decided this is a good way to make sure they can pay the bills.)</p>
<p>Percentage of students receiving need based grants from their LACs, according to 2008 USN&WR-</p>
<p>Washington and Lee 30%
Colby 35%
Colgate 36%
Bates 37%
Trinity 38%
Colorado College 38%
Haverford 40%</p>
<p>I'm still astounded at the number of people who can pay total costs approaching $50,000 per year per kid. I know these schools have small student bodies, but still. Perhaps these schools are more than ever the places to send the offspring of social climbers.
In the case of Haverford, at least, I am ready to believe the will and the money are there to reach out to the less well-to-do if the name were better known.</p>
<p>It's a good thing that Bates accepts kids who are service-oriented because Lewiston needs people who will contribute to community projects. Given the large percentage of Somali immigrants (10% of the local population), many of these endeavors are very interesting - and nationally recognized: Effective</a> Practices Exchange</p>
<p>"Well, they lie. So do all the others (with the possible exceptions of Cooper Union, Olin, and the service academies.) Some of them are more blatant about it, like Amherst, where, while claiming to be need-blind, they actively seek to accept low-income students (and they can't accept them unless they can identify them), or Williams, where the admissions director actually counts the percentage of "socio-ec" admits as they go through the process."</p>
<p>Need blind and having the character to embrace diversity are not mutually exclusive. All need blind means is that students are accepted regardless of ability to pay. It does not preclude the schools from admitting who they please and how they please. In no way at any 568 school does the policy of being need blind conflict with programs like QuestBridge where the schools seek out and compete for high achieving minority students. There is no lie in any way shape or form.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just to point out - a B average doesn't mean this kid was a complete slacker... it's perfectly respectable to get Bs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Each school grades differently. In my son's school, B is respectable. When I went to his school's college admission workshop, the dean said that the school usually doesn't give out A. Less than 25% of students get A-. Thereby I probable can assume that B+ to B is average for most students who are accepted to competitive colleges.</p>
<p>Hope this will help to explain some private schools' grading polices. :)</p>
<p>"Need blind and having the character to embrace diversity are not mutually exclusive. All need blind means is that students are accepted regardless of ability to pay."</p>
<p>But there is no evidence that this is true, and significant evidence that it is not. Statistically, there is no way that any school could get virtually exactly the same percentage of full-freight students each year if the applications were need-blind. It's a statistical impossibility. And now we know for sure that the colleges who claim to be need-blind are actually looking at need status, and making decisions on the basis of information that includes whether a student can afford to pay (including, in some cases, favoring students who do not, or whether a student qualifies as a "socio-ec" - whether Williams wanted more of them or fewer of them is unclear - the article seems to suggest that there is some kind of targeted quota.) Isn't it "interesting" that when Princeton or Harvard says it wants more low-income students, they magically appear in admissions, or (prior to that), they don't grace the gates? </p>
<p>And I don't have any problem with any of this except that they lie. As far as I am concerned, they can accept who they want. Admissions officers are professionals, and they know very, very well how to accept a class that fulfills the school's institutional mission (including its budgetary mandates.)</p>
<p>All of you who are so concerned about the admissions policies at Bates and the poor kid who gets screwed in the process in favor of the preppy legacy.... go take your ire to your local public state U, which is paid for by taxpayer money for the education of your own citizens. As admission policies in public U's increasingly favor the upper middle class; as short sighted financial planning results in favoring full pay out of staters over your next door neighbors; as the arms race to construct snazzy basketball facilities and football stadiums obliterates the commitment to education... not to mention the fact that K-12 education is such a sham in many cities that those kids couldn't get admitted to your flagship U even if they wanted to... this is what aggravates me. Why lose sleep over Bates? Is it even a drop in the educational bucket????</p>
<p>You guys are so cute, really, worrying about whether your kids SAT scores are below the median at Barnard and does that mean that Barnard isn't rigorous. There are probably 12 High schools within a 50 block radius of Barnard where the seniors are reading at a 6th grade level. Go worry about that for a change.</p>
<p>I agree with mini in principle, but "lie" is a bit strong: I think that the conventional meaning of "need-blind" was never literal; it just connoted that no individual student whom the college otherwise desired to admit should be denied admission based on their inability to pay (or to pay in full). In that, admittedly narrow sense, I think there were many institutions who were not misrepresenting what they were doing.</p>
[quote]
Pity the high achieving, middle-class kid applying to Bates.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Post #63:
[quote]
Perhaps these schools are more than ever the places to send the offspring of social climbers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are these the same people? If they have money to pay full fare at expensive schools, do they still have to climb?</p>
<p>There I was, as the parent of a high-achieving student accepted at Bates (but who did not matriculate there), thinking that by paying full fare rather than hanging out for merit scholarship fo my Ss, I was doing other, less well-off students a favor. I am too indolent to engage in climbing, social or otherwise.</p>
<p>Marite, you crack me up. Yes, I think we can agree that if you're a mutiple generation legacy AND development case AND attending elite New England Prep school etc. you can leave the climbing to someone else and just rest on your laurels (or sitting on grandma's divan in the cottage in Nantucket).</p>
<p>"Oberlin’s involvement with POSSE and QuestBridge is supported by a financial commitment to educate minority, first-generation, and low-income students.</p>
<p>QuestBridge is a referral service that recruits students and matches them with college admissions officers. Seven of the nine students Oberlin enrolled through QuestBridge this year are African American."</p>
<p>Oberlin’s Strategic Plan mandates that the College “significantly improve [its] admissions yield and retention of African-American and other students of color.” Retention, which is measured by graduation rates, evidently improved in the years before the plan was passed in 2005."</p>
<p>"96 percent of the 200 finalists had family incomes below $50,000; 33 percent were African-American, 39 percent were Asian, and 23 percent were Latino." ashoka.org</p>
<p>I just took the data from the Oberlin Review and ashoka.org as an example. You are correct it is open to all but sadly, in that they are poor and underserved, the numbers seem to work out that that stills means 95% are minorities at least in that admission year that I could find numbers on. I cede to you the 5% who are not.</p>
<p>^^Note as well that Oberlin was the first private college in America to admit AfricanAmericans. The first 4 who matriculated were runaway slaves. So there is a long and proud history instiutional history going on there, too.</p>
<p>Come on mini! Most people know what the term need blind means, ie providing a full needbased finaid package to all acceptees. We all know that they receive FAFSA info to determine the amout. And we all know that adcoms choose to admit a broad range of students based on many factors, one being socio-economic status. Yes, the term need blind may be ambiguous and/or imprecise. But that hardly is cause to claim that colleges are lying to applicants and their families by encouraging them to apply regardless of their ability to pay sticker price or some other amount higher than their EFC.</p>
<p>Oops, you are right, marite.
I should have said maintaining upper crust status in the next generation, via such mechanisms as inter-marriage, rather than "social climbing". These people would be insulted to be called climbers. They are already there.
I think mini is perfectly right to call what schools say on the need blind issue "lies".</p>
<p>Well, but need blind institution certainly appear to make sure they don't accept too many needy students. I think it's more a case of making sure they accept enough development and full pay admits first. Maybe the terminology is bad.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but need blind institution certainly appear to make sure they don't accept too many needy students.
[/quote]
They do it with SAT scores -- everyone knows the scores statistically correlate to income. When they set the bar to admission high enough, they pretty much insure that the very few low or moderate income kids will have the stats to get in. </p>
<p>I'm wondering how many test-optional schools purport to be need-blind and also promise to meet full need? (You need the promise of aid coupled with the need-blind policy -- otherwise its meaningless, as the school can simply admit students without funding them).</p>
<p>I think that there's exactly 1 college that is both need blind and SAT-optional, Bowdoin. </p>
<p>This report (pp. 12-12) has one of the more reliable lists of need-blind institutions, and Bowdoin is the only one that I see, at least among the usual suspects.</p>