I do think that the focus of popular universities is moving west and south.

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

I think the Northwestern LACs in general are very underrated. I am convinced it’s because of continued antagonism towards Reed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

That's wishful thinking. Merit aid is not tied to income, so nothing saying it brings more MC families in. Merit aid is something schools offer when they are trying to grow their applications, but by design it's a limited time offer (at least they'd like it to be). A school like Reed has exited that phase, and can focus all their aid into need. The next level is to offer even more need based aid, like packages with zero loans, and to more income levels.

Nothing saying it will bring more middle class families in but... logic! If someone is a mega-millionaire, do you think they care about saving $20k a year on their kid's education? Do you think they would turn down Williams because they got $35k from Dickinson? of course not. Merit aid appeals to families for whom $50-100K is a lot of money and for whom that kind of money is so important they are willing to accept a lower "prestige" degree. Rich people apply ED and that is half the class. They are price insensitive and just want their kid to go to the best school possible. Not so rich people evaluate offers RD. There are some exceptions where rich people are swayed by the merit award, but I think it's odd to argue that these sums of money matter more to people who have a lot of money as opposed to people who don't have a lot of money.

LOL that "Reed has exited that phase." Reed is dog poop compared with the list of schools that offer merit aid provided above. Reed's test score profile is inferior to all of them.

The merit aid schools will win long-term because there will be no reason for top students to pay a premium for what will be a non-premium product.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

That's wishful thinking. Merit aid is not tied to income, so nothing saying it brings more MC families in. Merit aid is something schools offer when they are trying to grow their applications, but by design it's a limited time offer (at least they'd like it to be). A school like Reed has exited that phase, and can focus all their aid into need. The next level is to offer even more need based aid, like packages with zero loans, and to more income levels.

Most of the top LACs outside the east coast offer merit aid, including (in descending US News order):
Claremont Mckenna
W&L
Davidson
Grinnell
Richmond
Colorado
Macalester
Harvey Mudd
Kenyon

These schools are well positioned to climb the rankings over the next decade, as their need only competitors limit their addressable market to low income and highly affluent. As they climb the rankings, as many of them have been, they will draw more affluent students who are not focused on merit aid and just want to be part of the excellent student body. Mark my anonymous words.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

Collusion? Please explain.
Instead of cherry picking the southern schools that you know that offer merit aid, how about doing some research:
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/higher-education/higher-ed-watch/merit-vs-need-based-aid-what-the-research-says-2/
"research shows that the increasing availability of merit aid has largely come at the expense of low-income students"

+1. It is cherry picking. The Johnson Scholarship is an aberration at W&L (min 4.13 gpa) and, like the Jefferson at UVA was and is designed to lure the most high stats kids that would otherwise go Ivy. Duke’s is the same but only hands out 7-8 merit scholarships and they, coincidentally, almost always go to URM or first generation who might otherwise go Ivy. The rest pay $82-88k a year as we did. (The Jefferson is not run by UVA but by alums who wanted to offer full rides to scholars heading IVy). That’s why these southern schools do it but those scholarships are few and far between. The argument about Bates is twisted logic.

It's not cherry picking. Richmond also does merit scholarships. Not offering merit scholarships is an Ivy thing that became an east coast thing. Merit is much more prevalent outside the east coast and frankly it is probably why schools like Duke and Vandy are right up there with Ivy League schools now, if not superior. With respect to LACs, I think having the ability to offer merit aid is a HUGE long-term advantage now that a degree costs 80k/yr. What these need only schools have created is a situation where half the kids get almost full rides (because they are low income) and half the kids pay full price (because their parents are investment bankers). This is not healthy and the pool of families willing to pay full price will probably shrink as we get towards 100k/yr. Especially when there are reasonable alternatives that may rank slightly lower in USNWR (and with average test scores that are practically the same).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

Collusion? Please explain.
Instead of cherry picking the southern schools that you know that offer merit aid, how about doing some research:
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/higher-education/higher-ed-watch/merit-vs-need-based-aid-what-the-research-says-2/
"research shows that the increasing availability of merit aid has largely come at the expense of low-income students"

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2022/12/08/following-antitrust-expiration-merit-and-athletic-scholarships-become-an-option-for-the-ivy-league/

It's kind of obvious that any dollar that potentially goes to not low income students doesn't benefit low income students. But there is sooooo much money out there for low income students. Is it the end of the world that some money is used for other priorities? By this logic, all athletic scholarships should be cancelled. Even schools that provide some merit aid seem to primarily provide financial assistance based on need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

Collusion? Please explain.
Instead of cherry picking the southern schools that you know that offer merit aid, how about doing some research:
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/higher-education/higher-ed-watch/merit-vs-need-based-aid-what-the-research-says-2/
"research shows that the increasing availability of merit aid has largely come at the expense of low-income students"

This is about another suit against the Ivies for agreeing to no athletic scholarships, but it includes some about the merit aid collusion

Back in 1991, the US Department of Justice sued the Ivies and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for illegal price-fixing because they (1) agreed among themselves to grant financial aid only on the basis of financial need, and (2) decided collectively how much to offer students admitted to more than one school. All the defendants settled except MIT, which lost a trial before prevailing in the US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit in 1993. That litigation is what led to the now-expired antitrust exemption.

But the 3rd Circuit’s 1993 rationale isn’t helpful to the Ivies today. Back then, the court rejected the government’s accusation that the schools’ cooperation on financial aid increased tuition for other students. But subsequent work has concluded that the government was probably right. Among the students who end up paying more are those who might otherwise receive athletic scholarships.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-03-11/ivy-league-athletic-scholarship-lawsuit-exposes-cartel-like-behavior

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

Collusion? Please explain.
Instead of cherry picking the southern schools that you know that offer merit aid, how about doing some research:
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/higher-education/higher-ed-watch/merit-vs-need-based-aid-what-the-research-says-2/
"research shows that the increasing availability of merit aid has largely come at the expense of low-income students"

+1. It is cherry picking. The Johnson Scholarship is an aberration at W&L (min 4.13 gpa) and, like the Jefferson at UVA was and is designed to lure the most high stats kids that would otherwise go Ivy. Duke’s is the same but only hands out 7-8 merit scholarships and they, coincidentally, almost always go to URM or first generation who might otherwise go Ivy. The rest pay $82-88k a year as we did. (The Jefferson is not run by UVA but by alums who wanted to offer full rides to scholars heading IVy). That’s why these southern schools do it but those scholarships are few and far between. The argument about Bates is twisted logic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL

Collusion? Please explain.
Instead of cherry picking the southern schools that you know that offer merit aid, how about doing some research:
https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/higher-education/higher-ed-watch/merit-vs-need-based-aid-what-the-research-says-2/
"research shows that the increasing availability of merit aid has largely come at the expense of low-income students"

Anonymous wrote:Haverford is overrated. Franklin Marshall is underrated. FM grads actually make more than Haverford and most if not all of the NESCACS.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/search/?search=Franklin%20and%20Marshall%20College&page=0&sort=threshold_earnings:desc&toggle=institutions

If you're evaluating colleges based on likelihood of moving into the top 1%, sure, Haverford is a poor choice.

Haverford is overrated. Franklin Marshall is underrated. FM grads actually make more than Haverford and most if not all of the NESCACS.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/search/?search=Franklin%20and%20Marshall%20College&page=0&sort=threshold_earnings:desc&toggle=institutions

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

With the exception of the wealthiest colleges, financial aid offices have to make choices how they give out monies to familes, and rightly so they prioritize the neediest families. I do not see anything "snooty" about that.
Your frustration really should be targeted towards financial aid calculators, which colleges use to determine who should get aid.

I have no problem with schools that only offer need based aid, but I also have no problem at all with schools that offer merit based aid in addition to need based aid, and as I explained, I think it is very valuable that these schools exist and provide options to students whose families are not poor but also not rich enough where 80k a year makes sense for a bachelors degree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP. You're talking about how you'd like the world to work to benefit you. Ideally merit aid should be unrelated to need, meaning it's given to any applicant the school wants to attract. That includes many wealthy applicants, and yes some some schools specifically target wealthy families, why wouldn't they? Coupons often encourage people to spend more, they often are handed out selectively, this isn't unique to colleges.

Not really. My DC is headed off to a school that provides merit aid but we will not be getting any. I am happy this school provides merit aid because it means DC will be surrounded by many strong students from middle class/upper middle class backgrounds, some of whom probably got into very top ranked schools. The school provides both need based aid and merit aid. Again, wealthy people don't really care about 10-30k discounts. Perhaps some of the merit aid does go to what you might consider a "very wealthy" kid - so be it. He or she earned it. The savings can be spent on grad school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Merit aid is not based on the price of tuition. Merit aid offered by colleges is used to game the rankings. Reed is wholly uninterested in giving money to wealthy, high stats kids to up its rankings on USNews. Also, many, many highly regarded colleges and universities are now charging around $80K for tuition, room, and board--regardless of whether they offer merit aid or not.

That is an unfair assessment of merit aid. All colleges want to attract the best students they can (and climb the rankings). Need blind financial aid is also a tool to attract students who might otherwise feel disadvantaged in the application process. Does merit aid really target the wealthy? All things being equal, a wealthy kid would go to the most prestigious school he gets into, not the one that is providing the largest discount. Merit aid therefore really targets the middle class or upper middle class kid who qualifies for little or no financial aid. In the context of LACs, a family that is borderline for need based aid would probably hesitate to shell out 80k a year (versus much cheaper in state alternatives, for example) and would be wise to do so. So if such a kid wants the LAC experience, merit aid may be the only possibility. Should this kid be denied that opportunity? Only lower middle class and wealthy kids should have access to it?

Your attitude is very snotty. Schools that provide merit aid are doing a tremendous service to families in the middle and appropriately rewarding some of our country's best, hardest working kids.

DP - it they are correct. This is what kowtowing to USNWR has done to our nation’s colleges and universities. Any college counselor will tell you tgst the very top schools don’t offer merit aid any more because they don’t have to. You must drop to second or third tier schools to get any sort of substantial award and that almost always us in exchange for something tge schools want that is reportable to USNWR. Top GpA, top SAT. Top ACT. Two small SLACs you’ve never heard offered my kid a full ride because if his ACT score.

It is the practice of east coast schools to avoid merit aid, largely mirroring long established Ivy League practices, which were rooted in collusion. Many great schools outside the east coast provide merit aid and various other scholarships. Vandy. Duke. W&L (ten percent of the school gets a merit based full ride). Davidson has merit based full rides. Every school wants the best students- and providing generous financial aid in general is a way to get students in the door. You are just framing this as kowtowing to USNWR for merit aid schools. Yes, lower ranked schools need to be more aggressive with merit aid to attract top students. It's only natural and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone at these schools is better off if they can attract a nice group of very strong students. Duke proivdes merit aid while Bates does not- does that make Bates better than Duke? LOL