Please be honest- How much, if at all, does full pay help?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you really think the the University of Wisconsin has enough applicants from West Potomac High that they have any idea about the quality of the school? Do you think they have the manpower to look into it, or do you think they say 4.6, maybe glance that the data sheet, and move on? These schools are being inundated with applications and they no longer have the easy first cut that SATs and ACTs provide

Yes.

https://admissions.wisc.edu/meet-our-team/

Again, these people are professionals, the schools have long-evolved institutional knowledge and data, and they work hard. If their systems didn't work they would change them. I don't know why you think otherwise as there is no reason to.

Of course we could stop all this discussion and you could just ask them: https://admissions.wisc.edu/contact-us/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many colleges/universities, even highly selective ones, love international students (with the right test scores of course) because they pay full-tuition and then some. Can't tell me even though they are "need blind", application reviewers and read between the lines, like where the kids live (zip code which give clues on income), parent education level/profession, public or private schools (they know that families that live in certain zip codes and attend the big 3 in DC private are most likely paying full tuition and will likely pay full at their school). Especially with COVID, many schools (maybe not the top 20) have to seriously look at their financial health.

"Need Blind" is not truly so blind, there are other factors schools can look at to gather info on potential revenue.

"Can't tell" you? Despite 100% consistent assertions to the contrary, and not a single bit of evidence to support your claim, including not one confession from the thousands of former need-blind adcoms, a few dozen of whom have written tell-all books?

Clearly no one can tell you.

But we can tell everyone else. Schools that claim to be need blind in admissions are, in fact, need blind in admissions.

DP. This is form over substance. These colleges are “need blind,” yet somehow, all of these schools end up with admissions classes that are far wealthier than the general population. The very most competitive schools can be “need blind” because they are very rich (Harvard) and know that college acceptance criteria favors the wealthy, so that (along with very generous policies regarding admissions of legacies) will guarantee a relatively wealthy student body (and low, and behold, it always does). So, while they can say they don’t go looking for rich people, the rich people come to them in large enough numbers that it’s not an issue.

The colleges a tier below that have to rely on acceptance criteria favoring the rich, and when it doesn’t to the extent that it affects their solvency, they quietly become need aware (Carleton). There has been much discussion on higher Ed Boards and publications regarding how many colleges can afford to take this approach in a time when revenue is way down due to covid (sports, dorms, dining). Not to mention the loss of full pay foreign students. Like many on this board, I’ve been the recipient of pleas from my usually very well-funded alma mater for increased donations to cover the shortfall. What will they do if the alumni don’t cover it? There were quite a few stories last spring regarding people getting calls from normally highly competitive colleges offering spots off the wait list under the condition that no financial aid would be available. Sounds to me like a clever way to ensure a given number of full pay students without technically abandoning the “need blind” promise. These colleges will find a way to pay the bills, and I suspect that they aren’t going to advertise it as a change of policy when they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many colleges/universities, even highly selective ones, love international students (with the right test scores of course) because they pay full-tuition and then some. Can't tell me even though they are "need blind", application reviewers and read between the lines, like where the kids live (zip code which give clues on income), parent education level/profession, public or private schools (they know that families that live in certain zip codes and attend the big 3 in DC private are most likely paying full tuition and will likely pay full at their school). Especially with COVID, many schools (maybe not the top 20) have to seriously look at their financial health.

"Need Blind" is not truly so blind, there are other factors schools can look at to gather info on potential revenue.

"Can't tell" you? Despite 100% consistent assertions to the contrary, and not a single bit of evidence to support your claim, including not one confession from the thousands of former need-blind adcoms, a few dozen of whom have written tell-all books?

Clearly no one can tell you.

But we can tell everyone else. Schools that claim to be need blind in admissions are, in fact, need blind in admissions.

DP. This is form over substance. These colleges are “need blind,” yet somehow, all of these schools end up with admissions classes that are far wealthier than the general population. The very most competitive schools can be “need blind” because they are very rich (Harvard) and know that college acceptance criteria favors the wealthy, so that (along with very generous policies regarding admissions of legacies) will guarantee a relatively wealthy student body (and low, and behold, it always does). So, while they can say they don’t go looking for rich people, the rich people come to them in large enough numbers that it’s not an issue.

The colleges a tier below that have to rely on acceptance criteria favoring the rich, and when it doesn’t to the extent that it affects their solvency, they quietly become need aware (Carleton). There has been much discussion on higher Ed Boards and publications regarding how many colleges can afford to take this approach in a time when revenue is way down due to covid (sports, dorms, dining). Not to mention the loss of full pay foreign students. Like many on this board, I’ve been the recipient of pleas from my usually very well-funded alma mater for increased donations to cover the shortfall. What will they do if the alumni don’t cover it? There were quite a few stories last spring regarding people getting calls from normally highly competitive colleges offering spots off the wait list under the condition that no financial aid would be available. Sounds to me like a clever way to ensure a given number of full pay students without technically abandoning the “need blind” promise. These colleges will find a way to pay the bills, and I suspect that they aren’t going to advertise it as a change of policy when they do.

You have typed a lot of words here. Despite their number they seem to agree that need blind colleges are in fact need blind so no applicant should be afraid to ask for financial aid when applying to them.

No one is helped by anecdotes that begin “There were quite a few stories...” That is the kind of conspiracy thinking that is poisoning this country. Let’s deal in facts please.

[Anonymous]

There are a lot of good answers.

Another way to look at it is what size of donation is required to be prioritized for admission.

Harvard is 5-10 mil.
UVA is probably 500K-1 mil (guess).
At need aware school, a small donation will get you prioritized.

Prioritized may not be the right work, but it is meant to mean if you meet the minimum expected quals. So, at Harvard, with a 10 mil donation, a 4.5 GPA with 1500 SATs would probably get it. 3.5 would not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cash isn't king, there are too many full pay applicants. GPA, however, is king...

How can something as inconsistent and easily manipulated as GPA be king? Most schools don't even post their average GPA on the CDS and those that do often show that they are reporting for a small percentage of student GPAs, and they don't disclose how they (re)calculated the GPA anyway.

Because test optional schools need a way to compare students and most don’t have the resources to know or care about which privates and public are more or less challenging than others in a random metro area hundreds of miles from their campus. The school will manipulate the GPA Toni weight it or strip PE and art and to turn it into a class rank of that isn’t provided, but it’s all going to be based off of GPA this year because there is nothing else to compare unhooked kids

+1. High school comparisons and the high school profile only go so far. I suspect there will be a lot of unexpected results next month.

This conspiratorial thinking and these unfounded conclusions are not helpful. Colleges do know the schools, have a history, and mine data on the success of students from them. They also know how to read the data from the profile and compare it to other applicants. They know what they are doing and organizationally they have been doing it a very ling time.

That doesn't mean they are perfect - but it means they mostly won't make mistakes and they will build the class they need.

The main reason for that is that it is pretty easy for them to pick qualified students, and the highly competitive colleges have plenty to choose from. You've all heard them say they could replace their entire accepted class with the next batch, then do that again, and never notice. It's been said at virtually every top-20 presentation I have attended.

PP is right. GPA is king and always will be.

Do you really think the the University of Wisconsin has enough applicants from West Potomac High that they have any idea about the quality of the school? Do you think they have the manpower to look into it, or do you think they say 4.6, maybe glance that the data sheet, and move on? These schools are being inundated with applications and they no longer have the easy first cut that SATs and ACTs provide

Exactly, yet they can pull median income for a zip and figure out where the deep pockets are with next to no effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of good answers.

Another way to look at it is what size of donation is required to be prioritized for admission.

Harvard is 5-10 mil.
UVA is probably 500K-1 mil (guess).
At need aware school, a small donation will get you prioritized.

Prioritized may not be the right work, but it is meant to mean if you meet the minimum expected quals. So, at Harvard, with a 10 mil donation, a 4.5 GPA with 1500 SATs would probably get it. 3.5 would not.

How would this work exactly? Let’s say someone made a donation. Hoe would they match that to an applicant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cash isn't king, there are too many full pay applicants. GPA, however, is king...

How can something as inconsistent and easily manipulated as GPA be king? Most schools don't even post their average GPA on the CDS and those that do often show that they are reporting for a small percentage of student GPAs, and they don't disclose how they (re)calculated the GPA anyway.

Because test optional schools need a way to compare students and most don’t have the resources to know or care about which privates and public are more or less challenging than others in a random metro area hundreds of miles from their campus. The school will manipulate the GPA Toni weight it or strip PE and art and to turn it into a class rank of that isn’t provided, but it’s all going to be based off of GPA this year because there is nothing else to compare unhooked kids

+1. High school comparisons and the high school profile only go so far. I suspect there will be a lot of unexpected results next month.

This conspiratorial thinking and these unfounded conclusions are not helpful. Colleges do know the schools, have a history, and mine data on the success of students from them. They also know how to read the data from the profile and compare it to other applicants. They know what they are doing and organizationally they have been doing it a very ling time.

That doesn't mean they are perfect - but it means they mostly won't make mistakes and they will build the class they need.

The main reason for that is that it is pretty easy for them to pick qualified students, and the highly competitive colleges have plenty to choose from. You've all heard them say they could replace their entire accepted class with the next batch, then do that again, and never notice. It's been said at virtually every top-20 presentation I have attended.

PP is right. GPA is king and always will be.

Do you really think the the University of Wisconsin has enough applicants from West Potomac High that they have any idea about the quality of the school? Do you think they have the manpower to look into it, or do you think they say 4.6, maybe glance that the data sheet, and move on? These schools are being inundated with applications and they no longer have the easy first cut that SATs and ACTs provide

Exactly, yet they can pull median income for a zip and figure out where the deep pockets are with next to no effort.

LOL you guys are funny.

One one hand you say they can easily choose students by zip codes and median incomes, even though it would be dishonest for them to do so. But they can’t read a detailed report and a full transcript with counselor recommendations tell the value of a GPA at one of the high schools they work with every single day.

Wow these adcoms are quite inept except when they are being devious; but then they are Lex Luthors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of good answers.

Another way to look at it is what size of donation is required to be prioritized for admission.

Harvard is 5-10 mil.
UVA is probably 500K-1 mil (guess).
At need aware school, a small donation will get you prioritized.

Prioritized may not be the right work, but it is meant to mean if you meet the minimum expected quals. So, at Harvard, with a 10 mil donation, a 4.5 GPA with 1500 SATs would probably get it. 3.5 would not.

How would this work exactly? Let’s say someone made a donation. Hoe would they match that to an applicant?

PP Has no idea and has pulled all this right out of her backside, because she knows nothing about it. If she did, she would have explained the terms “development office” and “development admit”.

If you are really curious how this works, read “The Price Of Admission” by Daniel Golden.

[Anonymous]

My personal opinion, being full-pay out-of-state at places like UC-Boulder, WI-Madison, and etc. does help this year. Any institution with need-blind admissions and large endowments=NO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best schools are need blind. Full pay helps with second tier schools and where you are a marginal admit. Sorry, OP, but you can't buy your way into a top school only by being full pay. Full pay plus donating a building, maybe. Full pay alone? No.

College isn't like DC privates schools, where money does all the talking.

This is not really correct after the past two years and huge revenue hits to most colleges. Outside of the few schools with huge endowments (and that is a very small group), full pay is to mean more to most schools than in recent years, probably for the next 3 to 5 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aspirations of need blind acknowledged, the pandemic has made those who are full pay the golden goose for ALL schools. And this is expected to impact admissions for the next 3-5 years. Cash is king in this environment and we are seeing it being played out at area school already with how ED/EA admissions results are playing out...

No not all schools. Not at need blind ones. Typing "ALL" in "CAPS" does not change that.

Unclear how many schools will remain need blind in current environment.

[Anonymous]

I work at a university. What we've been told is that financial need affects the students on the bubble. If a student is on the cusp (qualified, but not strong student-- like within 2-3% of the cutoff line (whatever that is), they will look at whether we have depleted financial aid. So strong students will be admitted without looking at financial need. Weak students (more than 2-3% from that hypothetical threshold) would not be admitted (without admissions folks looking at financial need). But if you're close to that threshold, they look at the budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aspirations of need blind acknowledged, the pandemic has made those who are full pay the golden goose for ALL schools. And this is expected to impact admissions for the next 3-5 years. Cash is king in this environment and we are seeing it being played out at area school already with how ED/EA admissions results are playing out...

No not all schools. Not at need blind ones. Typing "ALL" in "CAPS" does not change that.

Unclear how many schools will remain need blind in current environment.

That's a completely different topic. Schools can and do change their approach, but announce it publicly, like Wesleyan.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/01/wesleyan-shifts-away-need-blind-policy-citing-financial-and-ethical-concerns

When they say they are need blind, they are. When they say the are not, they are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cash isn't king, there are too many full pay applicants. GPA, however, is king...

How can something as inconsistent and easily manipulated as GPA be king? Most schools don't even post their average GPA on the CDS and those that do often show that they are reporting for a small percentage of student GPAs, and they don't disclose how they (re)calculated the GPA anyway.

Because test optional schools need a way to compare students and most don’t have the resources to know or care about which privates and public are more or less challenging than others in a random metro area hundreds of miles from their campus. The school will manipulate the GPA Toni weight it or strip PE and art and to turn it into a class rank of that isn’t provided, but it’s all going to be based off of GPA this year because there is nothing else to compare unhooked kids

+1. High school comparisons and the high school profile only go so far. I suspect there will be a lot of unexpected results next month.

This conspiratorial thinking and these unfounded conclusions are not helpful. Colleges do know the schools, have a history, and mine data on the success of students from them. They also know how to read the data from the profile and compare it to other applicants. They know what they are doing and organizationally they have been doing it a very ling time.

That doesn't mean they are perfect - but it means they mostly won't make mistakes and they will build the class they need.

The main reason for that is that it is pretty easy for them to pick qualified students, and the highly competitive colleges have plenty to choose from. You've all heard them say they could replace their entire accepted class with the next batch, then do that again, and never notice. It's been said at virtually every top-20 presentation I have attended.

PP is right. GPA is king and always will be.

Do you really think the the University of Wisconsin has enough applicants from West Potomac High that they have any idea about the quality of the school? Do you think they have the manpower to look into it, or do you think they say 4.6, maybe glance that the data sheet, and move on? These schools are being inundated with applications and they no longer have the easy first cut that SATs and ACTs provide

Exactly, yet they can pull median income for a zip and figure out where the deep pockets are with next to no effort.

LOL you guys are funny.

One one hand you say they can easily choose students by zip codes and median incomes, even though it would be dishonest for them to do so. But they can’t read a detailed report and a full transcript with counselor recommendations tell the value of a GPA at one of the high schools they work with every single day.

Wow these adcoms are quite inept except when they are being devious; but then they are Lex Luthors.

They can choose between students by zip, and this is all a favored status for a given HS will ever amount to end of the day. Anyone who says HS reputation plays a role has no way of knowing how ability to pay factors in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

LOL you guys are funny.

One one hand you say they can easily choose students by zip codes and median incomes, even though it would be dishonest for them to do so. But they can’t read a detailed report and a full transcript with counselor recommendations tell the value of a GPA at one of the high schools they work with every single day.

Wow these adcoms are quite inept except when they are being devious; but then they are Lex Luthors.

They can choose between students by zip, and this is all a favored status for a given HS will ever amount to end of the day. Anyone who says HS reputation plays a role has no way of knowing how ability to pay factors in.

Yes they DO have a way, and they know exactly how it figures in.

According to their need blind/aware policy. Exactly.

If they are need aware, they don't need to calculate the median income per zip code. They look at the financial data submitted.

If they are need blind, they do not consider it. At all.

End period.