creekland Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Continuing on our pre-med undergrad search, our latest visit was Franklin & Marshall College. We visited on an "Open House" Saturday. Franklin & Marshall is a small (roughly 2300) LAC located in Lancaster, PA. It is right in Lancaster, but is its own campus and doesn't have a total "urban" feel to it. The buildings are a pleasing brick and absolutely everyone was friendly and helpful. They are another "Top 50" LAC and have average stats of 28-31 for the ACT. They are also locally well-known as a great place for future pre-meds - hence - our visit. Overall, this school seems right in line with many of TWTM mindset. They emphasize broad learning in small classes. Like many small schools, there are no large classes here with most having fewer than 30 and essentially all having less than 50. All are taught by profs. There were several profs around on this day - and I do mean SEVERAL - and every single one we heard from loved their students and interacting with them. They know everyone in their classes and you'll be missed if you skip a class. Even youngest who was tagging along got to sit and talk one on one with an earth science prof about ethnobotany. He loved that part - and the prof didn't mind that he wasn't one of the "target" seniors. Students at this school do not choose a major until the end of their 2nd semester. Prior to that you take general ed classes and work to get a feel to "find your path." Research options abound - roughly 2/3rds of students get engaged in it and it can start freshman year. You can even do research in a department that is not your major. Interdisciplinary majors are encouraged. Interaction with profs is highly encouraged. It seems like a terrific school for the student who isn't certain of what they want to study and who wants "hands on" options. Dorm life centers around houses (very similar to Yale and Rice for those who know about those schools). Students are placed in a dorm freshman year and stay associated with that dorm for their whole four years there, even if they live elsewhere later. Some seminar classes are even taught in the dorms freshman year. The dorm room we saw on the tour was small, but adequate. We supposedly saw the smallest dorm. They offer different housing options (doubles, singles, suites, etc). Dorms are co-ed by room (not in the room), but with single sex bathrooms. Roughly 30% of the guys and 20% of the gals opt for Greek life. The rest do not. They have one dining hall, but it had several options including Kosher and Vegan as well as all the basics. They do try to buy local and even offer a bus to the Lancaster Farmer's Market weekly for students who wish to shop there themselves. We did not get to eat in the dining hall as they had lunch catered for us. The gym and libraries were typical for small schools - perfectly adequate for my pre-med wannabe who doesn't care as much about such things. They have a large pool... Speaking of pre-med... they don't call it pre-med. There it's "Pre Healing Arts." That was a new one for us... and, unfortunately, the adviser was not there that day to talk to - really strange for a school well-known in the sciences IMO, but that's the way it goes. Supposedly they have "Early Assurances" (whatever that means) with local med schools and the adviser is supposed to be good at getting kids ready for the MCAT. He's also supposedly on top of the new MCAT that will be around for my guy's year and already looking at what students will need class-wise for it. While their med school acceptance rate varies, it generally is around 85%. Another new one for us... F&M is a MAC school - not a PC school, but we were assured PCs would work. Artwork abounds here - everywhere - in every building and plenty outdoors. Theater is big too - as is music. The school has a great reputation in town and is loved. Students often assist with service projects locally. They have a primate lab - one of the few undergrad schools on the east coast with one. Homeschoolers are treated the same as ps kids when it comes to admission. They do not require or request SAT 2 scores. They do like to see AP and/or cc classes and will generally offer credit for a 4/5 or cc, but the usual pre-med exclusions apply. IF you are homeschooling in a non-regulated state (PA is a regulated one), then they'll look carefully at your homeschool supplement to try to determine "fit." Regulated states they don't care as much about and trust the transcript. With all that though, the adcom I spoke with told me they are very open to homeschooling and show no bias against (or for) them. F&M is also a test optional school. If your student didn't test well or you just don't like the tests, they are willing to look at other materials for admittance. When it comes to financial aid, they are a need-based aid school ONLY. This means they offer no merit aid. However, with need-based aid they say they pledge to meet 100% of institutionally recognized need based on the college profile. They do NOT say "no loans" so take that for what it's worth. My overall thoughts? It's a great school and one middle son would love. However, we're leaning toward not applying ($60 application fee!) due to the no merit aid deal. While it's definitely true that our personal economy is in the pits right now and middle son would likely get a bit of aid, IF the economy were to pick up, then we'd be saddled with the whole bill. Since we have other "good merit aid" schools that middle son also likes... we'll likely stick with those. I guess as I get more involved with this process with a high stat kid, I liken it more and more to athletic scholarships. A top athlete most often receives aid to come to a school to be in their program with the idea that they help keep the program good. I like it when a top academic kid gets similar treatment. Plus, as I said before, while need based aid could be great for us now, if our situation changes, we'd be out a bit of $$ that could be saved toward med school. BUT, for those who either can totally afford the school or who know their income isn't likely to change need-based aid wise, I give a big thumbs up for Franklin & Marshall. We all did like the school - especially the professors we met. They were knowledgeable, cared about their students, offered oodles of research opportunities, and it all seemed to make for a great learning environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Thanks for your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Your college visit reports are awesome - thank you!!! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Lancaster is a very art-based city. Your kid will love it here! I like that F&M has stores and restaurants around the college as well as downtown. In the summer, there is a tennis camp held for the city kids at F&M's courts (if your child is into tennis and would be willing to coach, that would be something to look into volunteering for). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kareni Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Thanks for your latest report, creekland; I enjoyed reading your experiences. I thought I'd link this older thread on Franklin and Marshall which gives some additional insights. Regards, Kareni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thanks for your latest report, creekland; I enjoyed reading your experiences. I thought I'd link this older thread on Franklin and Marshall which gives some additional insights. Regards, Kareni That previous thread reminded me of something else. Franklin & Marshall highly recommended prospective students sit in on a class or two if they wanted to get a feel for the place. They invited everyone from Saturday to come back on a weekday if possible. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thank you so much for that review! It is especially timely as it was on ds and I's "long list". Unfortunately, dh's income is steady and just high enough to not qualify for "need based" aid, yet not enough to afford to right such large checks for college. We can take it off the list. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thank you so much for that review! It is especially timely as it was on ds and I's "long list". Unfortunately, dh's income is steady and just high enough to not qualify for "need based" aid, yet not enough to afford to right such large checks for college. We can take it off the list. Faith I was disappointed to find out they had no merit aid possibilities. I asked a financial aid representative directly and got a direct answer, so I'm positive I'm not wrong. She told me they changed to need-based aid only a few years back and have no regrets. They like the students they've been able to attract with their policy (her words). Apparently they want the wealthy, those who need significant aid, and those who are satisfied with what the profile says they can pay, but not those in the middle who might have other circumstances. Being underemployed for the last three years we've used a bit of our savings as well as purely lost a significant bit of it in the downturn. If our income picks up in the next four years I'd like to work on replacing some of it, not just writing a larger check to a college. I suppose we could also just choose to remain in the lower income range and not try to get back to normal, but that seems really "wrong" to me. At a different college we'd still have to take on any need-based aid payments, but if merit aid is part of the package, it wouldn't be the whole thing. I like to be optimistic and think our income will improve sometime over the next four years. There definitely is a possibility. Besides, this kid has high stats. It's nice to be rewarded for that IMO. If he were going to a school where all of the kids had his stats, I'd understand not getting merit aid as he would be "average", but his stats are significantly above their average. While most other things about the school were attractive/appealing and I'm sure he'd enjoy it, the financial part is just not a fit for us. And that part is a deal-breaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I was disappointed to find out they had no merit aid possibilities. I asked a financial aid representative directly and got a direct answer, so I'm positive I'm not wrong. She told me they changed to need-based aid only a few years back and have no regrets. They like the students they've been able to attract with their policy (her words). Apparently they want the wealthy, those who need significant aid, and those who are satisfied with what the profile says they can pay, but not those in the middle who might have other circumstances. I understand completely! We had to pull our 429 college savings out in 2008, the height of the real estate bust, tanking of Wall Street, banks on the run, you know the drill. We lost half of what we put in! HALF!! We had $30,000.00 saved up for dd and all the 429 was worth on the day we absolutely had to order the check in order to have it here in time to pay towards her classes, was $15,000.00 and change. We were given a 20% discount for paying the whole $15,000.00 up front because that was the estimate of three years costs...thankfully, she had a lot of merit aid so $5,000.00 a year for pre-med is "whew". But, the reality is that it hurt her and us. She will have to take a break at the end of the year and work as a paramedic for a couple of years before going back. She doesn't want student loans and I respect that. It's just so discouraging to know that she wouldn't have to be taking that break from school if we hadn't lost so much on that 429. According to our investment advisor, it was not in volatile stocks/mutual funds, just a very, very bad time to have to be cashing it out. GRRRRR... As for the "need based only aid", well they are selling themselves short. My sister's alma mater went to that policy a few years ago stating that they were perfectly happy with the quality of students they were attracting. It's become a rich kid party school since then and has fallen in ranking every.single.year! Many of the students they would have had can't afford to go there without some scholarships. Last year's incoming freshman ACT average dropped to 22! My two nieces go there because a rich relative writes very large checks every year for them. I am appalled at the lack of standards and how easy they have it. I know lower ranking state schools that have FAR higher standards than this school. It's only a matter of time before they completely ruin their reputation. I hope that doesn't happen to Franklin and Marshall because by all accounts, it appears to be an excellent school. But, I know the handwriting is on the wall at this other LAC now that their rather short-sighted policy has been in place for nearly eight years. Oh well, there are plenty of great options out there and ones that reward the hard working student. Though ds would like to have visited, to be honest, we are going to end up spending a lot of money driving all over creation looking at schools and it certainly doesn't hurt to get one crossed off the list before spending a lot of money to check it out. Creekland, I really do so appreciate your college reviews. We've got some time before we have to get going on this in earnest and I am grateful to be able to benefit from your experiences. For anyone out there looking for a public STEM university with an excellent US News and World Report rating along with some pretty good marks from college confidential, but that also functions more like a smaller private institution, I'll be posting a college review of Michigan Technological University in Houghton sometime after November 13th. We are taking ds there as we hope that he can begin to narrow his focus and settle into a final college preparatory plan. He'll be speaking with the head of the anthropology department as well as a senior anthropology/archaeology major who is minoring in geology. Ds's interests fall into the history/geology/physics with a passion for art history as well. We are trying to help him narrow this down into some sort of educational path and we are not fans of the undeclared major. We are finding more and more schools that do not have a standard "gen-ed" path for the first two years of school. Instead, gen-ed is not so general. College Writing is C.W. for Science, C.W. for humanities, C.W. for pre-med, etc. We've found several STEM schools in which the gen-ed is more focused and in which kids are grouped by majors for their classes, sometimes even being housed together by major...Michigan State University does this for pre-vet and pre-med. Some of the classes are actually provided in a lecture hall in the "house". I've just met a kid who took college writing as a pre-vet major and then decided to change to social work...he's taking college writing all over again. On some levels it seems like a scam for colleges to capitalize financially on students who switch majors that are not related disciplines. On the other hand, it could also have some serious benefits I am not aware of due to the focus of the classes, but I do know we do not want to be throwing money down that hole so we feel it's pretty important for ds to be fairly certain "what he wants to be when he grows up" before his first semester of college begins. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 This is a bit of a thread derailer, but the F&M financial aid situation gives me an opportunity to climb on my soapbox. About the time my son began his high school years, I remember reading in the NY Times that an official from a well known university was quoted saying that his institution expected parents to use their homes as ATMs to pay for college. Obviously this is not applicable to the super rich or the opposite end of the spectrum. I really thought that after the 2008 market collapse that colleges would rethink that concept--but apparently not. Certain elite schools have always had skewed demographics. Yet it seems that a few decades ago, middle income people could afford (with some sacrifice) college tuition even at private schools. But $200K+ is another story. I just do not understand how it is in the best interest of a college to lose middle class students. Grumble, grumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I'm confused. (I enter this tentatively and because we will be going down this road in the near future) I keep hearing "needs based" vs. "hard working". Are there not hard working, needs based students? Is it really evil that they are holding the scholarships for those that truly cannot afford college in any way? Can you child consider getting a job to help pay for college or perhaps starting at a smaller, more affordable college, then transferring? I'm asking because I truly don't understand how this all works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I'm confused. (I enter this tentatively and because we will be going down this road in the near future) I keep hearing "needs based" vs. "hard working". Are there not hard working, needs based students? Is it really evil that they are holding the scholarships for those that truly cannot afford college in any way? Can you child consider getting a job to help pay for college or perhaps starting at a smaller, more affordable college, then transferring? I'm asking because I truly don't understand how this all works. "Hard working" is not a term I have heard from college financial aid officers. Could you explain? About those affordable schools: many suggest starting at CCs which may work for some students. But it is not the best option for all given that CCs vary in quality, course options, etc. Transferring is not always a smooth operation. CCs that have articulation agreements with public unis make the transition smoother, but even then there can be problems. For example, a student at my local CC who transfers into engineering at NCSU would still need to do at least three years at State despite an Associate's. Our CC simply does not offer the math and science needed by a STEM student. Further, some of us love the philosophy of the LAC. My son has small classes with professors. If he were attending a state uni, it would be a completely different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 .......As for the "need based only aid", well they are selling themselves short. ...... Oh well, there are plenty of great options out there and ones that reward the hard working student. ..... In between that was a commentary on wealthy partiers (not sure what that had to do with the needs based students; obviously they would not be wealthy). It seems to me that the schools are giving priority to those hardworking students that have a greater need of financial assistance (?), but that is being complained about here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisabees Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thanks for the report. F&M is only 1 1/2 hours from us and we haven't even looked for two reasons. One, the Greek life is too dominant for ds. Two, they stopped giving merit aid. Ds wants/needs a small LAC, so the only way we can afford one (!!) is if he gets substantial merit. Yes, it really limits a middle class family when an institution provides only needs-based aid. Of course, it is wonderful that schools allow low-income students to go to college. But, in our income range, we would have to spend 50-60% of our income on tuition. I am not alone, I know. Fortunately, there are plenty of great LACs with good merit, although there is a lot of compromising to be made with regards to region, Greek life, intellectual life, sports, etc. Many of us were limited due to finances and we made the best of it, if not loved where we landed. Our kids will be fine also. It just stinks that we have to settle and pay an arm and a leg to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 In between that was a commentary on wealthy partiers (not sure what that had to do with the needs based students; obviously they would not be wealthy). It seems to me that the schools are giving priority to those hardworking students that have a greater need of financial assistance (?), but that is being complained about here? Apparently you have yet to tango with FAFSA let alone the dreaded Profile?? Your comment that you "keep hearing" about needs based vs. hard working led me to conclude you were hearing this from colleges. My error. No one wants to deny lower income students educational opportunities. The problem is that colleges assume middle class families have saved for college from the getgo and that they can offer a healthy percentage of their income and assets for tuition. Many middle class families are stunned when they learn that their Expected Family Contribution is $20K or $30K annually for one child. This is why many of us look for schools that continue to offer merit aid. Unfortunately many of the elite colleges do not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 I'm confused. (I enter this tentatively and because we will be going down this road in the near future) I keep hearing "needs based" vs. "hard working". Are there not hard working, needs based students? Is it really evil that they are holding the scholarships for those that truly cannot afford college in any way? Can you child consider getting a job to help pay for college or perhaps starting at a smaller, more affordable college, then transferring? I'm asking because I truly don't understand how this all works. There certainly are hard working needy students. Middle son is actually one of those right now. ;) If our finances were to be guaranteed to continue the way they are over the next 4 years, F&M could be a good place for him. BUT, in our situation, hubby is a Civil Engineer and we own our own house/farm with a small mortgage plus a couple of rental properties. Since he is self-employed our income is not steady. For years we made a decent amount (and saved a decent amount). Then the economy hit. Right now he literally has NO jobs he is working on and just a couple of possibilities down the road. I'm subbing in school for classes I wouldn't have touched other years just to pay our bills. The past 3 years the work has been on a downward path (amount of work and income). Last year for the first time we actually got a tax refund. Normally we pay in a good amount. Over the three years we've both used and lost significant amounts of savings. The College Profile is likely to show us with assets upping our Fafsa EFC (Estimated Family Contribution). Our Fafsa is incredibly low right now. BUT, are conditions now going to continue for 4 more years? I really hope not! I want to get back to a decent income and I'd like to replace our savings for retirement. If my guy goes to F&M with good need-based aid, then work reappears or hubby goes back to working for another firm (a good possibility) then it's suddenly going to put us back in an income range we haven't been in for the past few years. Our savings tanked with the economy (6 figures lost) and may or may not come back. Cashing out now means it's all lost. It won't look like we need aid though, so we'll suddenly be expected to pay $50,000+ for college. OR, he can go to a nice merit aid school and perhaps go for free or low cost. If we can up our income or savings come back, then we can assist with med school. It didn't take us long to cross "no merit aid" schools off his list. It's not just F&M, Yale is off too, but he didn't like that one for other reasons as well. Yes, there are hard working needy and non-needy students. Even if we were non-needy I'd still lean toward merit aid most likely. I find it hard to fathom paying $200,000+ for something that can cost much less and still be as good, but that's purely hypothetical for me right now. If money were truly no object I might just tell my guys to go to their #1 picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Apparently you have yet to tango with FAFSA let alone the dreaded Profile?? Your comment that you "keep hearing" about needs based vs. hard working led me to conclude you were hearing this from colleges. My error. No one wants to deny lower income students educational opportunities. The problem is that colleges assume middle class families have saved for college from the getgo and that they can offer a healthy percentage of their income and assets for tuition. Many middle class families are stunned when they learn that their Expected Family Contribution is $20K or $30K annually for one child. This is why many of us look for schools that continue to offer merit aid. Unfortunately many of the elite colleges do not. I've dealt with FAFSA with my own schooling. I don't know anything about a "Profile". I can understand why you would want merit aid. It just felt like people were putting down needs based aid. I apologise if I misunderstood. I never understood going off of a parent's income to start with. Of course, when I went to college (other than the course I took as a double dipping highschooler), I was married and my parent's income was not counted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Creekland, thank you for helping me to understand :) I do appreciate it. We're not middle class, so it's difficult to see how this affects others at times. My folks were middle class though, but in many ways I did not benefit from the typical middle class luxuries, my younger brother from that side did. We work our tails off here to give the best we can, and I have a middle classed friend that complains regularly about being "poor". Then she told me the other day that we made her "feel good" to be around because we were poorer. They are in no way poor. They CHOOSE to spend $$ on classes, camps, and trips. My kids only get to go to church camps, retreats, and tennis camp due to scholarships. If I had the money to pay their way through all of it, I would in no way call myself "poor". So maybe that recent occurance was colouring the way I was "hearing" ya'll over the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 Creekland, thank you for helping me to understand :) I do appreciate it. We're not middle class, so it's difficult to see how this affects others at times. My folks were middle class though, but in many ways I did not benefit from the typical middle class luxuries, my younger brother from that side did. We work our tails off here to give the best we can, and I have a middle classed friend that complains regularly about being "poor". Then she told me the other day that we made her "feel good" to be around because we were poorer. They are in no way poor. They CHOOSE to spend $$ on classes, camps, and trips. My kids only get to go to church camps, retreats, and tennis camp due to scholarships. If I had the money to pay their way through all of it, I would in no way call myself "poor". So maybe that recent occurance was colouring the way I was "hearing" ya'll over the internet. It may sound strange, but in a large way I'm glad we were hit by the financial crisis. I grew up relatively poor (not super poor, but certainly not middle class), but our boys were raised middle class. Losing a bit of our income and savings has been beneficial at letting all of us figure out the importance of things (or lack of importance of things). The two younger boys have been super good at pulling together and giving up quite a bit. My oldest missed the bulk of our change... and is still not quite "getting it." :confused: I kind of wish he'd been here for all of the change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Creekland, thank you for helping me to understand :) I do appreciate it. We're not middle class, so it's difficult to see how this affects others at times. My folks were middle class though, but in many ways I did not benefit from the typical middle class luxuries, my younger brother from that side did. We work our tails off here to give the best we can, and I have a middle classed friend that complains regularly about being "poor". Then she told me the other day that we made her "feel good" to be around because we were poorer. They are in no way poor. They CHOOSE to spend $$ on classes, camps, and trips. My kids only get to go to church camps, retreats, and tennis camp due to scholarships. If I had the money to pay their way through all of it, I would in no way call myself "poor". So maybe that recent occurance was colouring the way I was "hearing" ya'll over the internet. Mommaduck, let me apologize for not being more specific. In my original post, what I was refering to was actually hoping that Franklin and Marshall has not adopted a policy of "need based only not related to achievement" as my nieces' college has. The reason for this is that a. FASFA is set ridiculously low. At $50,000.00 per annum, most families automatically do not qualify. With tuition, room, and board at many public institutions hitting $20,000 and up, that means that a student whose parents cannot afford to pay 1/3 up to 1/2 of their annual income to college expenses is automatically unable to attend regardless of how fine a student that person may be. $50,000.00 is not upper middle class, it is not well-to-do, in many areas of the U.S. $50,000.00 may barely provide reasonable housing, ulilities, car and car insurance, forget savings. FASFA also assumes that from the time the child is born, income has incrementally increased and not decreased nor have their been any mitigating circumstances so parents have always been able to save for the child's education. Of course, this is not the least bit representative of reality. So, what has happened because of this policy at my sister's alma mater which is also my two nieces' school, is that a huge number of really great students cannot attend. That leaves a chasm of applicant choice based solely on income only ie. well-off enough to right a check for $32,000.00 per year or parents are very low income earners. Right off this sets the school up for a disadvantage because the bulk of college applicants to LAC's, looking at the demographics of the past decade, are those whose parents made more than the FASFA cut-off but given stagnating wages, stock market failings, investments not growing, and the housing market causing property assets to decline, the pool of those who can afford to right a check for that kind of money has GREATLY dwindled. The school I am referencing put a needs based only - based solely on FASFA - policy in place eight years ago. Since then the number of applicants has dropped every year, the number of high achieving incoming freshman have dropped, and the number of students whose parents can afford to write that check has dropped. Of the students whose parents or in the case of my nieces, a grandparent, can afford $32,000.00 a per year per kid can also afford $50,000.00 which means that if the student can get into an Ivy or top of tier 1 school, then they aren't going to choose this school. Which means, that the high income kids at this school are there because they didn't achieve enough to get in somewhere else. I wish it weren't true. But, 8 years ago when my sister graduated and the last year that the school offered merit based aid, the school GPA for incoming freshman was 3.25 and the ACT average was almost 27 (26.85 if I remember correctly). Since implementing the policy, that average has sunk to a GPA of just barely over 2.5 and an ACT score of 23. Now obviously there are definitely low income kids who are great students who choose to attend there or the scores would be even lower. However, for the averages to be that low, they aren't high in number nor are their higher income/high achiever students. In order for the average scores to drop that much, it means that the average scores of their best students dropped along with the average score of the bottom of the freshman class that was admitted. It means that one or both of two things happened - by eliminating merit based aid, they eliminated a lot of worthy students from attending and/or in doing so their reputation suffered enough that the students who can afford the institution without aid and can achieved well enough to get admitted to a more selective school are going somewhere else. There are two other big indicators that this is an ill-conceived policy. Last year they had 1300 freshman spots open. They took in only 3500 applications (from a height of 6000 when my sister attended there and it was a more selective school with openings for only 950 freshman) and of those 3500 they accepted a whomping 78%...not a selective rate of admissions at all. This means they accepted 2730 students. Of those, only 938 attended. They only filled 72% of their freshman seats. That's not a good ratio for a private school. The midwest has been hit very, very hard financially and the unemployment rate is HIGH. A private school that advertises it gives out a whomping huge amount of needs based aid one would think would have a freshman class bursting at the seams because incomes have dropped so badly in the midwest. Such is not the case. This indicates to me that by eliminating a huge pool of qualified applicants from the admission's pool they've really hurt their reputation badly. Every single year since they implemented their policy, the school has fallen in the US News and World Report ranking. My niece just told me they are on the verge of losing a level of accredidation as well. It can't be a coincidence. Additionally, it has destroyed, literally completely dismantled, the fine arts department. Historically, music and art at top tier LAC's have always based "who gets in" on merit. Kids practiced their fingers and lips to the bone, painted to the wee hours of the morning, and their parents paid scads of money for their children's lessons all for that elusive dream of majoring in music or art at a fine institution, all for the glorious scholarship. This school eliminated merit based scholarships across the board. That means that if your parents made $62,000.00 a year and scraped by on banged up used cars so you could have the sterling silver flute with the fine tone for your college audition and $50.00 an hour for lessons with the local college prof, Interlochen Fine Arts Camp every summer - experience at camps of this nature being a virtual necessity for admittance to the competitive music departments, and...the school then expects them to write a check for $32,000.00 every year...slightly more than half their annual earnings because at that income level you don't qualify for need based aid according to FASFA - Bye bye school! When I was a piano performance major, we were required to take 18-21 credit hrs. per semester in order to graduate and practice 4 hrs. per day minimum. If you do the math (3-4 hrs. of homework per credit hr. taken plus 28 hrs. of practice), having a job in order to work one's way through school is not an option. Additionally, I can't think of any job I've seen recently that is open to a high school graduate with a starting pay high enough that if would truly help them pay for an LAC. Therefore, what has happened, is that the number of students admitted to the fine arts departments that can actually afford to attend as dropped so low (remembering that when your reputation tanks, the kids whose parents can afford to send them to an IVY or conservatory or top of the top tier LAC's will encourage them to look elsewhere) that they can't fill their spots with qualified individals and because music and art lessons from highly qualified teachers is very expensive, unfortunately, not all that many low income students are applying for music and art degrees. In eight years, the school has gone from a thriving fine arts department, to only offering art as an art minor or for education majors and music for music education majors. Sacred music, art history, photography, composition, and performance are gone. They are down to only two full time music faculty positions and the rest are adjunct professors. They can no longer fill all of the positions in the school orchestra and so now it's listed as a "community band". NOT GOOD! Given that LAC stands for Liberal Arts College - the Arts part is about gone and with that their rankings. I have absolutely NO problem with need based aid. None whatsoever because I fully believe that college should not be the province of the wealthy, but when a policy of assisting qualified applicants becomes as narrow as need based on FASFA, it's bound to come back and bite that college right in the rump or at least that is my prediction as long as FASFA cut-offs are unrealistically low. The above school now has a very strong party reputation (something it was not known for when my sister attended) and an embarassingly low graduation rate. Sorry I wasn't more specific before. I did not mean to offend anyone. From a personal perspective, even if we could afford such a school for dd - you know, write that check every year - she wouldn't be inclined to attend a school that didn't acknowledge her hard work in some tangible way. I think there are probably a lot of other kids and parents who feel the same way. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thank you, Faith, I understand better now. On one hand, I can see where the school is coming from. Living near F&M, most of the people here would feel over the moon wealthy if they were bringing in 50k. On the other hand, I do understand that someone earning 64k most likely have larger living expenses and 32k would cut drastically into that, especially if you live in certain areas of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 So, what has happened because of this policy at my sister's alma mater which is also my two nieces' school, is that a huge number of really great students cannot attend. That leaves a chasm of applicant choice based solely on income only ie. well-off enough to right a check for $32,000.00 per year or parents are very low income earners. Right off this sets the school up for a disadvantage because the bulk of college applicants to LAC's, looking at the demographics of the past decade, are those whose parents made more than the FASFA cut-off but given stagnating wages, stock market failings, investments not growing, and the housing market causing property assets to decline, the pool of those who can afford to right a check for that kind of money has GREATLY dwindled. Faith Faith, it was interesting to read about what happened with that specific college, and I have to say, quite a bit of it makes sense. I had just never thought about it before. I'll fully agree that if we had the money to pay full freight somewhere, I'd be inclined to pay that at the "best" academic place we could afford. I suppose F&M is figuring they are that best, but for the really high stat kids, they probably aren't all that often. Who knows? I can say that when we have colleges who are literally either offering my guy money or talking about how he would be competitive for whatever merit aid programs they have it was rather off-putting to hear "no" to our merit aid question. Would a highly recruited athlete choose to go to a school where they had to pay full freight over a school offering them scholarships - esp when the full freight school wasn't necessarily a better program? (A good program, but not necessarily a better one.) I could see it happening for a top of the top program, but not often otherwise. One would need to really be in love with the program - and we're not in this case. We did like a bit about it, but not enough to be in love to the tune of potentially having to pay 50K+ per year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Faith, it was interesting to read about what happened with that specific college, and I have to say, quite a bit of it makes sense. I had just never thought about it before. I'll fully agree that if we had the money to pay full freight somewhere, I'd be inclined to pay that at the "best" academic place we could afford. I suppose F&M is figuring they are that best, but for the really high stat kids, they probably aren't all that often. Who knows? I can say that when we have colleges who are literally either offering my guy money or talking about how he would be competitive for whatever merit aid programs they have it was rather off-putting to hear "no" to our merit aid question. Would a highly recruited athlete choose to go to a school where they had to pay full freight over a school offering them scholarships - esp when the full freight school wasn't necessarily a better program? (A good program, but not necessarily a better one.) I could see it happening for a top of the top program, but not often otherwise. One would need to really be in love with the program - and we're not in this case. We did like a bit about it, but not enough to be in love to the tune of potentially having to pay 50K+ per year. Absolutely! I think really think this is where the rub comes. I don't know many who would pay the full bucket for a program that is not a WHOLE LOT better than the one offering the kid a bucket full of merit scholarship. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medstudent Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 This affected me as well when i was applying to colleges, so I'm playing devil's advocate here a bit. I think the problem is that these financial issues haven't happened in a vacuum. People have been affected, but so have universities and especially private LAC's for which a lot of the money comes from wealthy alumni (who can no longer afford to share as many of their millions with their alma mater). I know it seems ridiculous that schools that charge 50k a year have financial difficulties, but if I remember correctly tuition only really covers like 25% of true costs (I may be completely fabricating this number, but I remember something similar). Schools are always in a competition with one another- one school gets green dorms, everyone has to get green dorms. One school has a campus in Rome and one in London, everyone else struggles to get those. A university that is stagnant and doesn't grow doesn't attract donors. This leaves less money for scholarships. I think the issue with merit aid is that with a limited pool of money for financial aid, the more "politically correct" choice will always be to save that money for the extremely poor and meritorious. When thinking of middle class kids on an individual basis, this seems unfair (I was on the same boat a few years ago), but you have to think of the applicant pool as a whole. Would you rather tell the trustees, the donors and the outside public that you're spending 10 million dollars on the kids who busted their butts in an inner city public school while living in low-income housing, always taking the bus and working part time to help the family out...or would you rather say that you're helping the white kids whose parents make 60k a year? i totally understand that that's not a lot in many parts of the country, and that taking 40k out of those 60 can't be done. But the thing is...it technically could. If the family is making 20k a year, then it LITERALLY can't. And so when schools are choosing who to give the money to, that's who they choose. Another issue is that "merit money" is a tricky thing to define. A lot of the time some of the kids with the best grades, SAT scores etc also had the best opportunities. Maybe they went to a well-renowned private school where they had better guidance and support. Maybe they had moms who could afford to quit their jobs and focus 100% on their education. Maybe they had SAT prep classes, tutors, internships. I'm not saying every middle class kid does- far from it- but all that background isn't on an application. They don't know if mom and dad payed for you to go to this or that famous summer camp or if you had a scholarship, they don't know if that A+ in chem was due to your own hard work or a private tutor or your mom was a chemist before she started homeschooling you. They don't know if you had a SAT prep class or not. Someone who is making 60-70k a year can technically afford those things, so they can't possibly know if you did or not. And I would argue that the very-low-income child who couldn't possibly afford those things SHOULD get more aid than the one who did. There's just no way to measure true effort. Anyway, I hope this makes sense. I genuinely do understand the situation because I was in it- I had some (not a lot) merit aid for college, my mom paid a small portion, I had two work-study jobs every semester, and took out loans for the rest. I lived at home during the summers and took public transportation to work. It wasn't terribly glamorous, and I had almost zero free time, but it was my solution based on the fact that I really wanted to go to this private university and I really didn't like my public one. Even though I have some loans from there, I don't regret it for a minute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 There are pros and cons to both types of aid and I'm perfectly ok with any college choosing to dole out their $$ as they see fit. But I'm also ok making the decision that fits us the best based on what choices they made. I'm confident that my guy will be an asset to whichever school he goes to and many schools have great opportunities for him. If we cross a few off our list for this reason (or any reason), the final school he attends will still be a great choice. I'm actually thinking he's likely to come down to 2 schools and will probably lose sleep over which of the two he picks if they are financially equivalent (or close enough). I'd be happy with either if they are financially affordable. But we still have two to visit if we get around to it (he might be satisfied with his choices as they are). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 i totally understand that that's not a lot in many parts of the country, and that taking 40k out of those 60 can't be done. But the thing is...it technically could. If the family is making 20k a year, then it LITERALLY can't. And so when schools are choosing who to give the money to, that's who they choose. Exactly. One would simply require a radical lifestyle change and the other simply has no room to move. That's one thing I was referring to above. The fact that those that say they can't "afford" may very well be able to afford, but "can't" due to living at a higher standard of living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 There are pros and cons to both types of aid and I'm perfectly ok with any college choosing to dole out their $$ as they see fit. But I'm also ok making the decision that fits us the best based on what choices they made. Absolutely! And I don't think anyone would blame you :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah in FL Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Thanks for this review! My dh is from Lancaster and he never had much to say about F & M ( I think familiarity breeds contempt:)), so I really didn't know much about the school at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted September 28, 2011 Author Share Posted September 28, 2011 Thanks for this review! My dh is from Lancaster and he never had much to say about F & M ( I think familiarity breeds contempt:)), so I really didn't know much about the school at all. No problem. Everyone locally that I've talked with like the college and think it does a good job producing intelligent graduates, but of course, I didn't talk with EVERYONE locally. ;) We live about an hour away. F & M has a great reputation here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.