Top 50 schools where full pay makes a difference

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

ALL.

Money talks.

Colleges listen.

[Anonymous]

I have heard that many need blind schools are not need blind when it comes to accepting kids off waitlists. Is this true? Which top 50 schools are need aware for waitlists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all of them

it's much easier to get into ANY college if you are full pay

This is not true.

Yes it is. Full pay is a hook.

Money talks.

NO, there is a difference between being full pay (doesn't matter at need blind schools) and a Big donor.
Being a big donor talks. Being full pay does not.

DP - and you are just wrong about that at need aware schools. I am not sure how you could even argue it. Schools don't deny it. It may not rise to the level of a "hook" by a specific definition, but it absolutely matters and helps with need aware college admissions, especially in ED.

huh. Read my post. I'm talking about need blind schools--which is almost all top50 schools.

Then you communicated poorly, because the post you responded to did not specify, and you admit that it does matter at the need aware colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have heard that many need blind schools are not need blind when it comes to accepting kids off waitlists. Is this true? Which top 50 schools are need aware for waitlists?

Most of them, but it doesn't matter, because odds of getting in off the waitlist are very low even for full pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all of them

it's much easier to get into ANY college if you are full pay

This is not true.

Yes it is. Full pay is a hook.

Money talks.

NO, there is a difference between being full pay (doesn't matter at need blind schools) and a Big donor.
Being a big donor talks. Being full pay does not.

DP - and you are just wrong about that at need aware schools. I am not sure how you could even argue it. Schools don't deny it. It may not rise to the level of a "hook" by a specific definition, but it absolutely matters and helps with need aware college admissions, especially in ED.

DP. The issue isn't need-aware schools - by definition, it helps not to have need at need-aware schools.. The issue is that virtually all Top 50 privates are need-blind. Case Western and Wake Forest are the only need-aware schools in the Top 50.

PP not only didn't make that distinction but responded to a post and thread that also did not make that distinction.

I, however, DID make that distinction, which is why it is odd you are taking issue with the point.

The thread is about T50. Not every post needs to specify that.

But ok, we agree that full pay might be helpful - at least, not a negative - at a need-aware school.

[Anonymous]

Can confirm from personal experience that it makes a big difference for Tulane ED

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can confirm from personal experience that it makes a big difference for Tulane ED

The ED acceptance rate at Tulane is 68%.

[Anonymous]

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.

"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.

Rather than try and hide your story of privilege, it's something that you should wear and showcase how you've done so much with what you've been given. Her point was that wealth markers aren't something bad and can be helpful when "shaping" the class in other ways - in terms of signaling to AO.

Wealth markers we discussed in our meeting = boarding school, private prep school, certain ECs (squash, sailing, equestrian, water polo, ice skating, golf, tennis (at IMG), summer programs in Switzerland, etc). So don't hide it, find a way to show immense achievement and growth and the EC can serve two purposes in the application process.

Remember, each T20 has an enrollment management division that parses through the data before they even look at the app - enrollment management is probably the most important function in college admissions (and most of us don't even understand the important function it plays).

Enrollment Management:
https://washingtonmonthly.com/2024/10/29/the-student-recruitment-industrial-complex/

https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-dark-art-of-enrollment-management

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

Its not misinformation. Its my opinion?? Why are you so triggered?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Brown
Dartmouth
Vanderbilt
Georgetown
WashU

This!

[Anonymous]

Wisconsin=TTT

[Anonymous]

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/