Where "full pay" really helps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any need aware school ED it should help

^ or not ED

My full pay kid was rejected at several schools where she was 75% (or very slightly below) stats wise. Applied EA, deferred then wait-listed. Didn't seem to help her even a bit.

Why would you apply ED to what sounds like a safety based on stats?

EA, not ED

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Early Decision at Northwestern U

Would be interested in any info or anecdotes on this school. (Obviously Northwestern claims to be need blind, though I also understand that the school can easily identify some applicants who would be full pay based on parent employer and education info in the app) We have a high stats legacy kid who is full pay, tho not all legacies are admitted in ED so it's hard to imagine that full pay would provide significant benefi there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, not at the top 20, or maybe even top 30 anymore. So many are able and willing to pay full price, and with test optional, it still won't matter

What do you mean nope? There are many many schools where it does help even if they are not up to your standards.

So many people don't read the posts they are responding to...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s a huge advantage that you can put yourself in the ED pool. We need in state or merit aid so can only apply ED in state. Full pay is an advantage at every school that has ED. It won’t help you over the other ED applicants. But it will over the other kids who can’t put themselves in the ED pool for financial reasons.

I don’t fully understand this. My DC applied TO to T15 ED, as we felt that was the best shot for acceptance. She was admitted with no financial aid. She left her app open for UC Berkeley, where she is likely a strong candidate. Not sure which she will choose. My point is concern about finances or affordability shouldn’t prevent you from applying ED to top choice - you can and should also apply to a full slate and evaluate those acceptances against the financial aid from the ED school. This notion that an ED acceptance means pulling all other apps is incorrect - you can decline an ED offer based on better relative affordability of another school. And don’t start bringing up “financial calculators” etc etc - only you and your family know what’s affordable. And the more options for students the better - colleges hate this logic as it shifts the power dynamic. And the wealthy contingent hates it because the “pulling all other apps” completely favors the wealthy where cost is no issue.

How much more time does your DC have left to enroll at the ED school? Im not a fan of ED but once you can see that financial aid is not affordable, the apps should be pulled. Time to fish or cut bait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s a huge advantage that you can put yourself in the ED pool. We need in state or merit aid so can only apply ED in state. Full pay is an advantage at every school that has ED. It won’t help you over the other ED applicants. But it will over the other kids who can’t put themselves in the ED pool for financial reasons.

I don’t fully understand this. My DC applied TO to T15 ED, as we felt that was the best shot for acceptance. She was admitted with no financial aid. She left her app open for UC Berkeley, where she is likely a strong candidate. Not sure which she will choose. My point is concern about finances or affordability shouldn’t prevent you from applying ED to top choice - you can and should also apply to a full slate and evaluate those acceptances against the financial aid from the ED school. This notion that an ED acceptance means pulling all other apps is incorrect - you can decline an ED offer based on better relative affordability of another school. And don’t start bringing up “financial calculators” etc etc - only you and your family know what’s affordable. And the more options for students the better - colleges hate this logic as it shifts the power dynamic. And the wealthy contingent hates it because the “pulling all other apps” completely favors the wealthy where cost is no issue.

I'm sure you won't disclose but I'd love to know where you received all this misinformation.
But sure enough, I came here to ask if all people truly applied ED were prepared to pay full or up to the college's estimate of your need. And as case above, clearly not.

[Anonymous]

it’s common sense - what do institutions and the privileged elite want you to believe? because who benefits? I agree that not being able to apply ED and not being able to fully evaluate all options available to a student is discriminatory in nature. Apply everywhere and evaluate options based on relative affordability

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:it’s common sense - what do institutions and the privileged elite want you to believe? because who benefits? I agree that not being able to apply ED and not being able to fully evaluate all options available to a student is discriminatory in nature. Apply everywhere and evaluate options based on relative affordability

Why? We're full pay but DC still gets just the one ED shot. Why is it fair that you get unlimited ED opportunities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Early Decision at Northwestern U

Would be interested in any info or anecdotes on this school. (Obviously Northwestern claims to be need blind, though I also understand that the school can easily identify some applicants who would be full pay based on parent employer and education info in the app) We have a high stats legacy kid who is full pay, tho not all legacies are admitted in ED so it's hard to imagine that full pay would provide significant benefi there.

It’s no different than any other top school. Being full pay doesn’t give you a significant benefit other than being able to apply ED. There is someone on here who has an axe to grind with Northwestern. I’m guessing it’s the same person who posted they regret applying ED and not going for an Ivy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s common sense - what do institutions and the privileged elite want you to believe? because who benefits? I agree that not being able to apply ED and not being able to fully evaluate all options available to a student is discriminatory in nature. Apply everywhere and evaluate options based on relative affordability

Why? We're full pay but DC still gets just the one ED shot. Why is it fair that you get unlimited ED opportunities?

nothing said anywhere about multiple ED applications

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s a huge advantage that you can put yourself in the ED pool. We need in state or merit aid so can only apply ED in state. Full pay is an advantage at every school that has ED. It won’t help you over the other ED applicants. But it will over the other kids who can’t put themselves in the ED pool for financial reasons.

I don’t fully understand this. My DC applied TO to T15 ED, as we felt that was the best shot for acceptance. She was admitted with no financial aid. She left her app open for UC Berkeley, where she is likely a strong candidate. Not sure which she will choose. My point is concern about finances or affordability shouldn’t prevent you from applying ED to top choice - you can and should also apply to a full slate and evaluate those acceptances against the financial aid from the ED school. This notion that an ED acceptance means pulling all other apps is incorrect - you can decline an ED offer based on better relative affordability of another school. And don’t start bringing up “financial calculators” etc etc - only you and your family know what’s affordable. And the more options for students the better - colleges hate this logic as it shifts the power dynamic. And the wealthy contingent hates it because the “pulling all other apps” completely favors the wealthy where cost is no issue.

I'm sure you won't disclose but I'd love to know where you received all this misinformation.
But sure enough, I came here to ask if all people truly applied ED were prepared to pay full or up to the college's estimate of your need. And as case above, clearly not.

I suspect they’re confused and don’t mean ED. Especially since the application left open is public, I’m guessing they meant scea/rea?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s a huge advantage that you can put yourself in the ED pool. We need in state or merit aid so can only apply ED in state. Full pay is an advantage at every school that has ED. It won’t help you over the other ED applicants. But it will over the other kids who can’t put themselves in the ED pool for financial reasons.

I don’t fully understand this. My DC applied TO to T15 ED, as we felt that was the best shot for acceptance. She was admitted with no financial aid. She left her app open for UC Berkeley, where she is likely a strong candidate. Not sure which she will choose. My point is concern about finances or affordability shouldn’t prevent you from applying ED to top choice - you can and should also apply to a full slate and evaluate those acceptances against the financial aid from the ED school. This notion that an ED acceptance means pulling all other apps is incorrect - you can decline an ED offer based on better relative affordability of another school. And don’t start bringing up “financial calculators” etc etc - only you and your family know what’s affordable. And the more options for students the better - colleges hate this logic as it shifts the power dynamic. And the wealthy contingent hates it because the “pulling all other apps” completely favors the wealthy where cost is no issue.

Isn’t this pp saying they applied/accepted ED, but instead of accepting the ED offer, they continued applying elsewhere to compare all offers?
Isn’t this exactly was ED was designed against?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A recent Your College Bound Kid podcast addressed this and clearly made the case that there are no need blind schools. They all know the financial make up of the class and strive to hit a balance. As a recent financial advisor put it, they didn't get $million/billion endowments by giving away their money. Full pay is absolutely a hook at every point in admissions, but I think it really helps when schools go to their waitlists.

I share your skepticism but legally schools that claim to be need blind cannot directly take into account a kid’s financial profile. Need blind schools are not need blind in the sense that they can statistically estimate the profile of the class with the assistance of enrollment management software. So they use zip codes and high schools to make sure that the class as a whole has a lot of full pay kids without knowing the specific details of each applicant. At the end of the day they need to make sure x percent of the class is full pay - you can do that without knowing the specific details of each kid.

[Anonymous]

Full pay matters at some of the small liberal arts schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Full pay matters at some of the small liberal arts schools.

By definition every single “need aware” school, and more of the top 30 LACs are need aware than people sometimes realize, including:
Carleton
Haverford
Smith
Wesleyan
Colgate
Colby
Bates
Colorado
Bryn Mawr
Kenyon
Macalester

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, not at the top 20, or maybe even top 30 anymore. So many are able and willing to pay full price, and with test optional, it still won't matter

What do you mean nope? There are many many schools where it does help even if they are not up to your standards.

My standards? I said it didn't matter for top 20 or 30 (said nothing about my standards). My point is at top schools, full pay isn’t the hook you think it is