Top 50 schools where full pay makes a difference

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

[Anonymous]

combined with an undersubscribed major (humanities!) and private high school or other "full pay" markers, yes, it can make a difference in admissions outcomes.

but not on its own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my kid’s private school, anyone full pay gets into NYU. Anyone.

Same here

Even for Comp Sci?

[Anonymous]

VA TECH
Rollins
Longwood
UMD
Miami

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

Wash U
Northwestern
Northeastern (!!!)
Duke
Cornell

Ultimately was accepted at ED Ivy. But still.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A T20 AO (retired/now in private college counseling practice) told me that AOs do look "favorably" on certain markers of wealth and that it's inevitable that a large number of successful applicants will always be wealthy and full pay. After all, half the class is full pay. How do they do that each year? Think about it.

Much has been written about this non-novel idea. Wealthy students have advantages that make them - by far - stronger applicants. It's a self-selecting sample. You claim an AO told you but it is important to note that not one former AO - including the many who have written tell-all books - supports this claim.

"Need blind" is not the same as "need ignorant". There are plenty of “tells” or markers throughout an application that can point pretty firmly in one direction or the other as to whether the person likely applied or would need for FA (including parents' education, professions, and type of school) that don't even get past the biographical info.

Yes, the privileged class are easy to spot, especially on paper. That does not mean that there is a sneaky conspiracy to admit full pay over equally qualified students with need. You should not spread this misinformation as it may discourage students from applying or asking for financial aid when it will have no affect on their admissions decision.

No sneaky conspiracy at all. Not intended for FA families at all. I don't pretend to know anything about it.

For wealthy families, there's more than meets the eye in admissions. And, I don't pretend to understand EM. But it is rather interesting that the % of full pay stays around the same each year. Maybe WL do the heavy lifting there? Who knows. I'm sure they have a sophisticated way to do this so we never figure it out.

My takeaway: Just don't hide the wealth - we certainly aren't. And it worked out well for Kid1 into T20.

The bold part explicitly suggests a sneaky conspiracy. Need blind colleges are need blind in admissions as stated. Please stop with the misinformation.

Need-Blind Admissions Has Always Been a Lie: https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/college-admissions/the-need-blind-admissions-lie-exposed/
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1287452
https://www.thedp.com/article/2022/01/upenn-not-need-blind-admissions

But this price-fixing cartel has been discussed here before.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/19ekf70/top_schools_are_not_really_need_blind/

Any other college counselors call out “need blind” as a farce?

Mark on YCBK’s last episode (new Penn policy on financial aid) went off and named schools which use home equity in asset calculation - as a way to “pretend” be need blind but actually offer uncompetitive financial aid packages? Was he hinting at this phenomenon?

Why would they not include home equity in the calculation? If you can afford a home you are doing well and can always take out a second mortgage/heloc to help pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

Wash U
Northwestern
Northeastern (!!!)
Duke
Cornell

Ultimately was accepted at ED Ivy. But still.

I’ve seen admissions professionals who would say that the Northeastern result was yield protection and WashU (lack of enough DI?), but all of the others are fairly normal and expected RD outcomes.

It’s only the “cracked “applicants who far exceeded the stats to have something so unique, exceptional, and memorable about them that get into multiple T10s. Cracked has nothing to do with stats or rigor at all. It’s all the extra, internationally/national level stuff.

Grades and scores do not get you in to a selective private T15 school. You need to meet a certain baseline. But after that, it does not matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A T20 AO (retired/now in private college counseling practice) told me that AOs do look "favorably" on certain markers of wealth and that it's inevitable that a large number of successful applicants will always be wealthy and full pay. After all, half the class is full pay. How do they do that each year? Think about it.

Much has been written about this non-novel idea. Wealthy students have advantages that make them - by far - stronger applicants. It's a self-selecting sample. You claim an AO told you but it is important to note that not one former AO - including the many who have written tell-all books - supports this claim.

"Need blind" is not the same as "need ignorant". There are plenty of “tells” or markers throughout an application that can point pretty firmly in one direction or the other as to whether the person likely applied or would need for FA (including parents' education, professions, and type of school) that don't even get past the biographical info.

Yes, the privileged class are easy to spot, especially on paper. That does not mean that there is a sneaky conspiracy to admit full pay over equally qualified students with need. You should not spread this misinformation as it may discourage students from applying or asking for financial aid when it will have no affect on their admissions decision.

No sneaky conspiracy at all. Not intended for FA families at all. I don't pretend to know anything about it.

For wealthy families, there's more than meets the eye in admissions. And, I don't pretend to understand EM. But it is rather interesting that the % of full pay stays around the same each year. Maybe WL do the heavy lifting there? Who knows. I'm sure they have a sophisticated way to do this so we never figure it out.

My takeaway: Just don't hide the wealth - we certainly aren't. And it worked out well for Kid1 into T20.

The bold part explicitly suggests a sneaky conspiracy. Need blind colleges are need blind in admissions as stated. Please stop with the misinformation.

Need-Blind Admissions Has Always Been a Lie: https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/college-admissions/the-need-blind-admissions-lie-exposed/
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1287452
https://www.thedp.com/article/2022/01/upenn-not-need-blind-admissions

But this price-fixing cartel has been discussed here before.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/19ekf70/top_schools_are_not_really_need_blind/

Any other college counselors call out “need blind” as a farce?

Mark on YCBK’s last episode (new Penn policy on financial aid) went off and named schools which use home equity in asset calculation - as a way to “pretend” be need blind but actually offer uncompetitive financial aid packages? Was he hinting at this phenomenon?

Why would they not include home equity in the calculation? If you can afford a home you are doing well and can always take out a second mortgage/heloc to help pay.

I don’t think Princeton or Stanford include home equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

Wash U
Northwestern
Northeastern (!!!)
Duke
Cornell

Ultimately was accepted at ED Ivy. But still.

I am not following the string of posts. Can you clarify? A student accepted ED to an Ivy would have withdrawn everywhere else before being waitlisted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

Wash U
Northwestern
Northeastern (!!!)
Duke
Cornell

Ultimately was accepted at ED Ivy. But still.

I am not following the string of posts. Can you clarify? A student accepted ED to an Ivy would have withdrawn everywhere else before being waitlisted.

So, the student was deferred from ED and then ended up waitlisted at the other schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

My full pay kid was waitlisted at a school where she was at the 75% for grades and test scores. Didn’t seem to help her at all.

This times 5.

Wow.

Hard to believe.

Wash U
Northwestern
Northeastern (!!!)
Duke
Cornell

Ultimately was accepted at ED Ivy. But still.

I am not following the string of posts. Can you clarify? A student accepted ED to an Ivy would have withdrawn everywhere else before being waitlisted.

So, the student was deferred from ED and then ended up waitlisted at the other schools?

Exactly. Obviously dc didn’t stay on any waitlists once accepted RD at Ivy after being deferred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are some top 50ish schools where being full pay makes a difference?

Interested but thread too long. So what is the conclusion? Is this for run of the mill full pay or HUGE donations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of them.

+1. with the exception of the few need blind schools

I think that need-blind/meet-full-needs schools just know how to shape the student body without looking at aid needs.

Schools pretend that holistic admissions is about DEI, but it’s really about favoring full-pay students.

Students with certain kinds of activities will mostly be full-pay students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brown
Dartmouth
Vanderbilt
Georgetown
WashU

This!

I think, though, that some of these schools can be very generous if they love the student.

A weak aid package is a sign that they’re not that excited about the student body