Anonymous wrote:If you are full pay, Would you pay full price for
Emory
BC
UMiami
Villanova
GWU
….going down the rankings list, LMU?
Is there a cutoff for private colleges? Where you tell your kid to just take merit elsewhere, or go in state? What is your cutoff, or are you full pay so you will full pay anyplace ?

(If you are not full pay, and need FA, instate, or merit, please don’t respond, your considerations are different)

DC1 was interested in STEM so we were OK with full pay for T20ish schools as long as they were good in that domain and of course other personal factors.. This eliminated schools like Emory, Wash U, etc. but added in USC and Harvey Mudd. This also included the top 3 Publics (all OOS). UVA also made the cut because it was in-state.

DC2 does not have the grades for Tier1 schools and there's no way we are paying full fare at those levels (60K+ tuition) for a lower-tier school. Don't mind paying if tuition is down to the $40K level as long there's a good fit and strong programs. This is pretty much every OOS public university (with a few exceptions) and lower-tier Privates (after merit) out there.

Fortunately child 1 is at a public with merit and child number 2 is only considering publics, BUT I honestly think we would have only considered full pay for Ivy, Stanford and MIT. Last year child 1 turned down BU, CWRU and Lehigh after 25-30k merit because they were still too pricey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Why would you say he's a 3.9?
But I agree that you just move on from a rejection. There's plenty other schools and your kid will do great.

3.9 unweighted and 4.4 weighted. (Our school only gives +0.67 for weighted classes).

You way undersold your kid when you were trying to make your point. The schools report GPA's based on weighted GPAs. But no matter now. Villanova admissions are weird anyway. You guys dodged a bullet.

It is weird, considering he was accepted EA at Tulane, which I think statistically is more difficult than Villanova. (Not saying that Tulane is a better school than Villanova; only that their EA acceptance rate is much lower than Villanova's ED acceptance rate.)

We are full pay at a private school that is lower than your list. It is the right fit for my DC.
When you have a child that has a hard path in getting through MS and HS - you rethink a lot of assumptions on costs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Why would you say he's a 3.9?
But I agree that you just move on from a rejection. There's plenty other schools and your kid will do great.

3.9 unweighted and 4.4 weighted. (Our school only gives +0.67 for weighted classes).

You way undersold your kid when you were trying to make your point. The schools report GPA's based on weighted GPAs. But no matter now. Villanova admissions are weird anyway. You guys dodged a bullet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Why would you say he's a 3.9?
But I agree that you just move on from a rejection. There's plenty other schools and your kid will do great.

and thank you it stung at the time but in retrospect I'm glad it wasn't a deferral - it would have been very challenging for all of us to let it go and focus on other schools. I definitely understand why people who have been through this advise students to not have one "dream school." My kid has about 5 that he'll hear from in RD that he really likes, along with Indiana, so he's in good shape.

When my kid was looking at Villanova, and looked at all the naviance data, all I could conclude was that it hated her Catholic HS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Why would you say he's a 3.9?
But I agree that you just move on from a rejection. There's plenty other schools and your kid will do great.

3.9 unweighted and 4.4 weighted. (Our school only gives +0.67 for weighted classes).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Why would you say he's a 3.9?
But I agree that you just move on from a rejection. There's plenty other schools and your kid will do great.

Anonymous wrote:We are full pay anywhere. We found that with our kids' stats, they got merit at schools more in the T80 range and chose to attend those schools over full pay at U Roch, though we would have paid for U Roch if they had wanted to go. Rejected from Villanova a few yrs ago, but with 3.5/1500.

I admit I do not understand why Villanova wouldn't take a 3.9/1480 ED full pay, and that is the frustration of the opaque admissions process, we just don't know the reason. The 3.9 should have been enough. BC and Villanova are looking for top grades moreso than scores, close to 4.0 unweighted. Large chunk admitted without scores at BC, not sure about Villanova.

That was my kid ... I will say that coming from his small school, there is one student who got in ED1 - female, psych major (my kid applied to Business). She had an UW 4.0 but weighted was not much higher - no rigor whatsoever (e.g., now as a senior she is in standard precalc, no AP sciences ever, and no AP language.) Legacy and test optional. In the EA round that was just released, literally no one from the class (at least 5 kids applied) was accepted. Perhaps Villanova doesn't like our high school? I dunno. Thankfully my son has moved on mentally/emotionally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.l

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Looking at DS's jesuit HS stats for BC average accepted was a 4.3GPA --but I see now you were talking about Villanova.

It's going to depend a lot on your kids and their needs. My kids had academic interests that were STEM based and both were most interested in larger research universities. We are Maryland residents, and they could get into UMD, which was very good for their interests. We were only willing to pay more than that if the educational experience or opportunities were better than they would have at UMD. That was a pretty small list of schools. It included Haverford, MIT, Caltech, Princeton, etc. We let them apply to two other large public universities that were comparable to UMD, so they would have a backup (for both in was Minnesota and Wisconsin), but we told them flat out we would not pay for UCLA, for example. They both got into one of the schools we agreed we would pay more for, and that's where they went. If they had expressed different interests, or had some other compelling needs, our "worth it" list would have changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Congrats to your son! And I think many in this board have crap reading comprehension and can’t tell the difference between UW and W.

Thank you

We are full pay anywhere. We found that with our kids' stats, they got merit at schools more in the T80 range and chose to attend those schools over full pay at U Roch, though we would have paid for U Roch if they had wanted to go. Rejected from Villanova a few yrs ago, but with 3.5/1500.

I admit I do not understand why Villanova wouldn't take a 3.9/1480 ED full pay, and that is the frustration of the opaque admissions process, we just don't know the reason. The 3.9 should have been enough. BC and Villanova are looking for top grades moreso than scores, close to 4.0 unweighted. Large chunk admitted without scores at BC, not sure about Villanova.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re full pay no matter what and in fact 3 of those schools are at the top of my juniors list. What I’m now questioning is if there’s any advantage to being full pay. I kind of thought it would give you a bump but now that I can see our school’s scattergrams, it doesn’t look like it. You still have to be pretty near perfect to get into BC and Villanova (and probably the others). Still need a 4.0+, right? Is there any advantage?

If may give you the edge -- with all other things being equal with another applicant. But your full pay kid still needs a weighted 4.0+ to get into BC and Villanova.

Villanova and BC are both need blind, so any full pay thumb on the scale wouldn't come into play unless there was a waitlist.

FYI, my 3.9UW/1480 kid was rejected ED1 from Villanova (and we are full pay.)

Sorry but 3.9/1480 was just not competitive enough at any price. You only might get a full pay edge if the application is in all other respects equal to another.

Lol, apparently not, but he's also a 4.4weighted, max rigor, top 5% of class, 550+ service hours, pilot's license and a bunch of other extracurriculars. Gold medals 3 years straight in French Grand Concours, I could go on. Oh, well. He has already been accepted EA at IU Kelley (Hutton Honors College + merit money) so Villanova's loss.

Congrats to your son! And I think many in this board have crap reading comprehension and can’t tell the difference between UW and W.