Yes, my impression is the Dartmouth model has something like 89 different types of data, and a very large part of the point is to automate the contextual evaluation of transcripts and test scores. Without that, this would be a worthless tool. So, colleges would have to be willing to make clear how that sort of context was influencing their evaluation of academics.
But it is not like these colleges are shy about discussing these principles, with examples. So maybe they would not be so reluctant to have that particular sort of internal policy made more concrete, particularly if it actually helped them market to these target populations.
Like, they seem to have a common lament that they feel like they still donāt get enough FGLI applications, nor applications well set up for success (I am thinking of the Yale and Dartmouth Deans suggesting not enough such people were submitting test scores). If a tool like this could make it easier to see that yes, with this test score and such you absolutely do have a chance at such and such school, they might welcome that.
Yes, I am not at all against work study as a concept, but in the context we are discussing all this, the exact amount of work study a college puts into its aid package by implication affects the amount of grant aid the college has to put into its aid package.
And from the studentās perspective, while again I am not against some work study, that is still to me part of the price of the college you have to pay. They are accepting your payment in the form of work versus cash out of pocket, but still, that is a real cost. Indeed, if nothing else it is an opportunity cost, because you could presumably work those same hours for money to save or give to your family or whatever if you didnāt need them for work study.
So to get back to the point of this lawsuit, while it is fine for colleges to independently determine some work study is a good idea, if competing colleges get together and agree they will require work study, or even more agree how much work study they will require (including as a function of other things), then that is again a form of price fixing that would normally be illegal absent an exemption.
Brown also has free textbooks if a student receives aid, at least for the first couple of years. They were finding that students werenāt buying needed books, and that impacted their academic success.
Do kids still buy a lot of textbooks? S22 has only purchased one or two. He has rented a few (typically around $50 for the semester) and other professors arenāt using textbooks. Granted he is a psych major and he isnāt at an Ivy, but still. His book bills (such as they are ) are much less than I paid 30 years ago. Literally, itās the only thing that hasnāt been more (much more) expensive.
Sure but in some cases (like my D22), the work expectation is all for personal expenses and books. She does not pay the college anything at all. I do have a contribution, but I donāt give her any spending money so her work covers books, fun stuff, cell phone and most clothes.
I did just go back and reran the calculators. D24 applied to six schools. Two have a work expectation that includes expecting her to pay part of her tuition & fees bill. One (like D22ās college) has a work expectation but it is for personal expenses only so while she would be paying for her books & other non-billed expenses, she would not be paying the college anything directly. The remaining three have no work expectation at all for students, and two of those three appear (if I am reading the NPC results correctly) to be saying that their institutional grant will help cover her personal expenses and books so presumably sheāll get some sort of refund or stipend. The six colleges vary in the parental contributions though so it is comparing apples to oranges a bit. Still I just wanted to confirm that there are colleges with no work expectations at all. Of course my children will work no matter where they go simply because it is a familial expectation.
I think this is all a good sign that at least some schools with CSS profiles may still be taking multiple siblings into account since most of those estimates are lower for D24 than they were for D22 two years ago at similar colleges. I am assuming at least some of that is because I will now have two students in college. It may also be that the pell grant formula is more generous for some families.
ETA: Come to think of it, my guess is that my entire post may be tangential to the lawsuit though. Were any colleges loan & work-study free during the years that the lawsuit addresses? I have a feeling that no-loans at a tiny handful of colleges is a relatively recent phenomenon. So ten years ago even the most generous of colleges were probably packaging loans as part of their aid.
These schools have very high endowments. Yaleās endowment is over $40B when its settlement amount is approximately $18M. I donāt think the settlement costs will be passed to the students and families to bear.
Just wanted to clarify. It may be that they have no work expectation for some students. I donāt know if similar packages are offered to students from families which have higher household incomes but still receive some aid.
This sort of thing is why I do think it important to understand what āneedā they claim to be meeting, separate from what forms the $ comes in. I remember quite clearly that when my college made it mandatory for all students to have computers, it was explicitly stated that it was instituted as a requirement so that the cost of a computer would be included in the need calculations.
But then thereās fuzzier stuff like transportation to/from the place. Itās great if you get a āfull rideā to e.g. Case Western. But if you have no ārideā and cannot afford one to get to Cleveland, did you really get a full ride to Case?
Just to noteā¦Georgetownās endowment at $3.3 billion is modest compared to peer institutions. Its ability to finance students is nowhere near others it is accused of colluding with in computing aid.
Such claims are believable for individual applicants with a strict definition of āneed blindā, meaning not looking at the FA numbers associated with the applicant.
However, most college admission factors have some correlation to FA need, so consideration of such necessarily affects the overall need of the entire class. Adjusting the weighting of such factors can adjust the overall FA need, without looking at individual FA numbers.
Yes, I donāt mean to take a hard line on what should be included in cost of attendance. I do think the lived reality for some families is that things like that familyās travel and personal expenses are going to be higher if the kid attends the college versus goes to a local college or no college. In cases like that I think the expenses are fairly called cost of attendance.
But that is kinda semantics. I think the important point is your observation that colleges can, and sometimes will, compete in this area. So restricting that competition by agreement among competitors would normally be illegal in the US.
According to The Daily Northwesternās article, Dartmouth & Vanderbilt have also settled.
Dartmouth settled for $33.75 million on February 23, per its college newspaper (link below).
According to The Washington Post (link below), Dartmouth & Rice are at $33.8 million each, it had the same $43.5 million for Northwestern, and listed $55 million for Vanderbilt. So perhaps Riceās agrement was slightly less than the $34M originally reported?
From the Dartmouth paper, these are the schools that still havenāt settledt:
As of time of publication, the seven schools that have not settled are the California Institute of Technology, Cornell University, Georgetown University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Notre Dame, the University of Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins University.
I am cynical so I never believed anyone was truly āneed blindā in admissions. I also get a kick out of schools telling us to ājust take out a loanā when we push back on tuition being unaffordable.
This was news to me, and I was not able to find a thread about this anywhere on CC (if its here already, apologies and please merge this). Anyone familiar with this big class action suit or planning to join it?
Certain current and former financial aid recipients brought a proposed class action lawsuit in January 2022 against Brown University, California Institute of Technology, University of Chicago, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Duke University, Emory University, Georgetown University, Johns Hopkins University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northwestern University, University of Notre Dame, University of Pennsylvania, William Marsh Rice University, Vanderbilt University, and Yale University (the āDefendantsā or āUniversitiesā).
The lawsuit alleges that the Universities conspired in violation of the federal antitrust laws regarding principles, formulas, and methods of determining financial aid. The Action also alleges that as a result, the Universities provided less financial aid than they would have provided had there been full and fair competition. The Universities have alleged that Plaintiffsā claims lack merit; that the Universitiesā financial aid policies were legal and pro-competitive, and financial aid awards were not artificially reduced; that the Universities have valid defenses to Plaintiffsā allegations; and that Plaintiffsā claims would have been rejected prior to trial, at trial, or on appeal.
Plaintiffs have reached settlement agreements (āSettlementsā) with Brown University (āBrownā), University of Chicago (āChicagoā), the Trustees of Columbia University (āColumbiaā), Trustees of Dartmouth College (āDartmouthā), Duke University (āDukeā), Emory University (āEmoryā), Northwestern University (āNorthwesternā), William Marsh Rice University (āRiceā), and Vanderbilt University (āVanderbiltā), Yale University (āYaleā). As part of the Settlements:
Chicago has agreed to make a settlement payment of $13.5 million.
Emory has agreed to make a settlement payment of $18.5 million.
Yale has agreed to make a settlement payment of $18.5 million.
Brown has agreed to make a settlement payment of $19.5 million.
Columbia has agreed to make a settlement payment of $24 million.
Duke has agreed to make a settlement payment of $24 million.
Dartmouth has agreed to make a settlement payment of $33.75 million.
Rice has agreed to make a settlement payment of $33.75 million.
Northwestern has agreed to make a settlement payment of $43.5 million.
Vanderbilt has agreed to make a settlement payment of $55 million.
Iām not cynical by nature but Iām a realist. It is contradictory to claim āneed blindā but to have a consistent ratio of full pay to FA from year-to-year. Many of these contradictions are in headlines. There is no need to read full articles or data to see it. Need blind is and always was a marketing term, not a legal term.
I recall recently seeing a headline in a mainstream national news source that Princeton plans to be ā70% FAā by a certain date. Thatās a plan, not an accident.