STUDENT-CENTERED SOLUTIONS FOR COLLEGE PLANNING

May is a month when high school Juniors find themselves staring at the seemingly “uphill” portion of the college planning process. Whereas the prospect of “going to college” has been on the radar screen for quite a while, the task of getting there is now approached with a sense of earnestness. The coming months will find students compiling lists and sorting through options in the hopes of happy outcomes. It won’t be easy, though. Just contemplating the upcoming gauntlet of college visits, essay preparation and tests—not to mention the panicked rush to meet application deadlines—can induce waves of anxiety on even the most thoughtfully organized families.

Getting “there”—to the happy endpoint—with a modicum of sanity intact requires an implicit understanding of roles and responsibilities. And it requires recognition that ownership of the process and the outcomes rests with the student.

The question of ownership in the college planning process isn’t easily or comfortably resolved—if addressed at all—within many families. After all, parents have been heavily invested in outcomes for their progeny since birth. College is simply an extension of the litany of experiences that parents intend for their children on the way to establishing happy and productive lifestyles. And who, better than the parents, can make the critical decisions about where and how to apply?

The truth of the matter is that the college application and selection process represents a launching pad for young adults as they emerge from the comforts of home, family and all that is known into a world of self-discovery. They need to recognize—and seize—the opportunities for reasons that are important to them and no one else.

This assertion can be difficult for some parents to swallow. After all, it isn’t easy to give up control and expect an 18-year-old, with little-to-no experience, to make the right decisions in managing a process of this complexity when the stakes are so high. For these parents, peace of mind is found in handling the important decisions themselves—hiring private educational consultants to manage the process, putting kids in pricey test prep programs and paying for access to essay editing services.

When this happens, students become spectators in the planning for their respective futures. Forced to the “sidelines,” they are not able to learn and practice good decision-making skills and experience accountability for their actions in a process that impacts their respective futures. Unable to truly affect outcomes, they are affected by them.

The best outcomes in college planning occur when the student is vested with ownership. After all, the parents aren’t going to college—it is the student who must compete for admission. And it is the student, who, based on the strength of his credentials and preparation, will be given the opportunity to test his skills at the next level educationally.

Achieving this opportunity in a manner that is ultimately rewarding to the student and satisfying to the parent calls for an approach in which parents cede ownership to their students, an approach in which “directing” gives way to “guiding.” Turning over the controls isn’t easy, but at some point it’s necessary. (If you have taught your kids to drive, you know what I mean!) For kids, going to college represents, among other things, the opportunity to step out of their parents’ shadows and into a world of possibilities they can begin to imagine for themselves. And getting there, despite their inexperience and busy schedules, is something they must learn to do for themselves.

The gift of ownership, then, can be incredibly empowering for a young person who is straining to define herself. College admission officers are eager to see how students are emerging as young adults. They want to hear their voices and learn about their accomplishments. They want a measure of the student’s vision and self-confidence that can only come from the student. As a parent, you have done your job in that you have brought her to the point where she can begin speaking for herself. Now, it’s her turn.

Tips to parents for implementing the transition to student ownership:

1. Engage in conversation that gives your student the opportunity to think about and identify his priorities for life after high school.
2. If such priorities include a college education, explore with your student the factors that will be essential –in her mind—to defining a successful experience (i.e. distance from home, style of instruction, social life, etc.).
3. Focus on finding the best college fit. Preoccupation with prestige and rankings often detract from a student’s ability to make smart, student-centered choices.
4. Give your student responsibility for the development of a college list. Encourage a long list at first that includes a range of options. Then help him assess these schools within the context of “fit” and his priorities. Support opportunities to visit colleges whenever possible.
5. Urge your student to maintain a file of information about the colleges that interest her most. The file might include a spreadsheet on which she tracks data and impressions for each college that relate to her priorities.
6. Encourage your student to wrestle with questions such as “What will a college get if it admits you?” and “How might you convince admission officers that you will be a good fit for their schools?” Such conversations will help the student find greater focus when it is time to apply for admission.

As you and your student become immersed in college planning, continue to visit this College Planning Blog for additional blog postings that provide greater insight/guidance with regard to different elements of college planning. In addition, The College Planning Workbook (4th Edition), available in the TAG Bookstore is a great resource for students as they begin to take ownership in the college planning process.

The next two weeks are a point of reckoning for high school seniors. After months, if not years, of searching and sorting through college options, the choice of a college all boils down to the May 1 Candidates’ Reply Date and—what for some students is the $50,000 question—“Where do I send my enrollment deposit?”

Students and parents alike are obsessed with finding the answer as is evidenced by these queries.

From a student, “Is it better to go a school that has given me a $20,000 scholarship, a summer internship opportunity and the promise of a letter of recommendation from the college president at graduation—or should I go to a ‘better’ school that hasn’t given me any of these things?”

And from a parent (unrelated), “Four schools have given our child varying amounts of scholarship assistance. How do we determine which of them represents the best ‘value?’”

In each case, the answer lies within the student. To infer otherwise is to devalue, albeit unintentionally, the young person’s goals, learning style and character. At this point in the decision-making, there are no absolutes that can be applied with certainty.

Each question—and others like them being asked in countless households around the country—seems to imply a natural order among colleges that doesn’t really exist. While it’s true that colleges differ with regard to how they engage young people educationally, the differences are most appropriately defined within the context of what the student brings to the table.

The student who couldn’t decide between an attractive package from one school and the basic offer from another “better” school was allowing the “look of the label” (read: brand name) to influence his assessment. In essence, he was asking, “Which will look better?—rather than, “Which will work better for me?” The truth of the matter is the biggest difference between the two schools is geographic! Given his career goals and hands-on learning preference, the answer should have been clear to him.

Similarly, in asking her question, the parent was comparing brands in an attempt to lend objectivity to the choice of a college without factoring her child into the equation. Rather than asking whether one college versus another was “worth” the difference in out-of-pocket expense to the family, she might have pursued a line of questioning that focused on her child’s comfort level with the various academic cultures and learning environments. In other words, assuming an ability to meet college costs at any of the schools, the questions might have been, “in what type of environment does my child function comfortably and, that said, where is he most likely to be meaningfully engaged such that he can achieve his educational goals?”

In assessing college options, then, it is reasonable to assume that a student really should not be confronted with any that are truly lacking. And, in fairness, the folks raising the questions referenced above were trying to make fine distinctions between good and valid options. They simply needed to recognize that some will fit better than others and, in order to find that fit, they needed to refocus on the students’ core priorities.

As you make your final choice of a college try to ignore the label or brand of an institution. It won’t be easy (and it probably sounds heretical!), but as you are no doubt coming to realize, the labels can be a huge distraction to your decision-making. And, believe it or not, the name of the place you choose now will carry less weight than you imagine after you have graduated from that institution. It is what you do while enrolled that gives greatest definition to your future prospects, both personally and professionally, in life. That’s why finding the best fit is so important!

Instead, focus on your objectives as well as what you have learned about the style and content of a given college’s offerings. As you do, keep the following questions in mind:

1. Which school gives me the best opportunity to achieve my educational goals by virtue of its curriculum, faculty and facilities?
2. In which learning environment will I be able to “do my thing” most comfortably?
3. Which college will challenge me to develop my skills to their fullest?
4. Where will I find a community of “scholars” that brings out the best in me as a person?
5. Which college has demonstrated that it is most likely to invest in my success?

Think for yourself and you can’t go wrong! Happy decision-making!

“Do you think it would be okay if I took some time off before going to college?”

It’s a question that comes up with surprising frequency as students grapple with their post-high school options. And, while the questioner seems to be seeking validation around the idea, there is often an implied and even deeper concern about how colleges themselves might regard such a strategy.

Conceptually, the question of the gap year fits within a broader consideration of what seems to be a required succession of experiences that young people must follow in their academic lives. The lockstep begins with pre-school and, for many, extends right through graduate school. It’s as though kids are placed on a conveyor belt that moves them through a series of prescribed exercises that systematically measures their needs, fills them up with the things they “need to know,” tests them and, assuming they have acquired a “minimal level of mastery,” stamps them as fit for promotion.

While the educational chronology is geared to the presumed developmental and academic needs of each age-group cohort, it often fails to accommodate the nuanced and circumstantial factors that impact young people as they progress along their respective learning paths.

Consider, for example, the young woman who desperately wants to accelerate her progress toward high school graduation because, by age 14, she has exhausted the curricular offerings of her school. Or the young man who is “young” for his eighth grade class. Like many others whose academic tracking puts them ahead of their peers, each is struggling to weigh the desire to remain stimulated intellectually with the need to grow socially and emotionally in age-appropriate ways.

Conversely, there are countless students for whom the task of staying abreast of their peers academically while engaging in a range of activities outside of the classroom has taken its toll. The all out “sprint” through high school finds them mentally and spiritually exhausted as they approach graduation.

Unfortunately, higher education in the U.S. is not a “one size fits all” system that works comfortably for everyone. Moreover, it is important to remember that the best interests of the young person may not always be defined by the chronology of expected experiences. As parents and educators, we need to remain vigilant in support of those interests even when doing so means allowing students to “step off the conveyor belt.”

The solution for many students, then, is seen in the form of the “gap year.” While some students are understandably concerned about their readiness—academic, social or emotional—to move immediately into college, others simply need to be able to step back and breath deeply before taking the next step into life as a full-time college student. Yet others are able to take advantage of personal enrichment opportunities related to travel, service, or work.

So, if you are wrestling with the “gap year question” the answer is straightforward. “Take the time off! Invest in yourself. Do what you need to do to so when you enter college you are ready to embrace the experience with focus and determination.”

The college years should not be entered with hesitation or reservation. Don’t allow your enrollment in a college to be an accident of circumstance. College campuses are full of students who don’t know why they are there. As a result, many of them leave early.

When you enter, do so with a sense of purpose—a conviction that that college campus is where you need to be in order to lay the foundation for future success and happiness. And if you need to take some time away from the classroom to get your head clear or just to try something different before getting started, good for you!

My experience is that colleges value the added maturity and perspective students bring with them after having taken a year off—especially if that time has been spent productively. Admission committees love students who are able to contribute from the perspective of a broad range of life experiences. And, frankly, the age of the entering student is a relative consideration at this stage of the game!

Having said that, you have two options with regard to declaring your gap year intentions. One, you can inform the admission committee of your intent when you apply for admission. Two, you can apply for admission without reference to the gap year and then, upon gaining admission, seek a deferral of your enrollment for a year.

I recommend the latter for two very practical reasons. One, despite the tacit endorsement of the gap year by admission officers, you don’t want questions about your intent to enroll to prejudice their deliberations. Do your level best to gain admission first; then, lay out your plans for the gap year.

Two, and perhaps more importantly, it will be much easier for you to complete the application process while you are still in school. You will be in rhythm with the rest of your peers as you complete your applications and you will have direct access to your school-based support system (counselor, teachers, coaches, etc.) as you pull together the various elements of your applications. Attacking the college application process 8-10 months after graduation will put you at a disadvantage, as you might not have easy access to the people and information you need.

In the final analysis, don’t assume that you need to go to college just because “it’s what you do after high school.” We don’t all work on the same developmental “clock.” For some, college makes great sense right after high school. Others, however, find great benefit in taking some time off. The “gap year” is truly an opportunity to be embraced.

Periodically, I use this space to respond to questions I have received via email or during programs. My intent in sharing both questions and answers is to provide insight into the college-going process and stimulate conversation that leads to informed decision-making with regard to educational futures. As always, your comments are very much valued. To submit a question, contact me directly at Peter@TheAdmissionGame.com.

Dear Peter,
What is the best way to alert the colleges to which my son has applied (for enrollment Fall 2012) that I have recently become unemployed? We submitted our FAFSA for 2011 that reports a family income of $175,000 for the year. However, my position, which accounted for more than half of that total, was eliminated in December.

My son has received some notifications for financial aid already, mostly subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans (very low amounts). He has also received partial scholarships awards prior to submitting the FAFSA.

Should I send a written letter, an email, or call each school so that they can place this information in his record folder?
Jack L.

Dear Jack,
Documentation is the key whenever circumstances change with regard to personal finances and college costs. You need to provide written documentation of the loss of work/income directly to the financial aid offices where your son has applied as soon as possible. In addition to reporting the loss of your job, you’ll need to acknowledge any severance package that might be involved. While this development is not likely to effect any merit scholarships your son has been awarded, it may well change the calculation of your “expected family contribution” (EFC—out-of-pocket coverage of college costs) and, potentially, the amount of need-based aid for which he is eligible.

When your son is in possession of decision letters and financial aid awards from all of his schools, compare the amounts of EFC (subtract the total of grants/scholarships from the total cost of attendance) for each. If he is strongly considering any colleges for which the EFC is much higher, then an “appeal” is in order. Call the financial aid offices at those schools to make sure the new information about your employment has been considered. You might also need to schedule an appointment at which time you can further interpret the situation in person.
Peter

Dear Peter,
My daughter has been talking Spanish since Middle School and is now in Honors Spanish 5. She just held onto a B average for the first and second marking periods, however, she failed the mid-term exam. We are thinking about having her drop out of Spanish and picking up another elective for the second half of the year to relieve some of the stress level for the remainder of the school year. The other option is to continue with Spanish but we are concerned about the impact on her GPA (weighted is 3.8) and her well-being.

The question—will admission officers view the dropped course as a wise decision realizing the student is “in over her head” OR will they assume “she gave up and quit.”
Paula M.

Dear Paula,
Generally speaking, admission officers want to see how students respond to adversity. What do they do next? Do they shrink from the challenge or do they re-double their efforts to meet a reasonable challenge?

Ultimately, the selectivity of the schools to which she applies will determine the degree to which the “blip” on her record affects the outcome. The most highly selective schools are less likely to be sympathetic in their assessments than are those that are afforded a greater measure of latitude in their decision-making. Rest assured that she will find a happy home at a college that values her for her efforts as well as the promise for achieving even greater success on its campus.
Peter

Dear Peter,
In your presentation, you talked about how colleges now operate as businesses. Your point about the impact of ROI (return on investment) as considered by decision makers in the admission process was particularly well taken. Assuming this is the case, then, I have two questions related to “need blind” admission. 1) Is a college that claims to be “need blind” truly taking the financial aspect out of the admission equation? And, 2) Are colleges lying about being “need blind”?
Alan B.

Dear Alan,
By definition, a “need blind” admission process absolutely removes any consideration of financial need (or ability to pay) from its deliberations. As an absolute concept, it would apply to every candidate in every aspect of the admission process. When there are exceptions—for any reason—a college is no longer “need blind.”

Here is a question to ponder: “If ‘need blind’ colleges are committed to access for academically able, but economically disadvantaged students, why are their student populations not more closely proportionate to the general population in terms of financial means?” Is “need blind” truly reflective of actual practice or is it simply a matter of posturing around the morality of access?
Peter

The college admission process can produce some interesting personal dilemmas. One such quandary was brought to my attention in a phone call from a young man who was trying to sort out an Early Decision opportunity. A competitive athlete, he had been approached by a recruiting coach from an NCAA Division III (non-scholarship) school with the suggestion that he convert his application for admission from Regular Decision to Early Decision (ED). Moreover, the coach had assured the young man that if his application for financial aid did not produce the desired assistance from this institution, he would not be held to his commitment to enroll if accepted ED.

The student was understandably excited and confused by this development. While he liked the school very much, he couldn’t say for sure that it was his first choice. This is largely due to his need of financial aid. In fact, the uncertainty of his financial aid situation had led him to actively consider other schools as well. Moreover, he understood the underlying premise of the unconditional commitment to enroll if accepted that is assumed of ED candidates. As a result, he was skeptical of the pitch he had been given by this coach.

My advice to the young man was simple: “If you need to make sure you get the best financial aid possible—and there is a chance other schools might admit you and give you better offers—then don’t give up your right to see those offers by converting your application to ED at one school.”

I pointed out that the coach is behaving unethically in making this suggestion and suggested that he (the student) not compound the problem by heading down that road with him. I’m not sure I told this young man anything he didn’t already suspect to be true, but our chat gave him the confidence to respond to the coach’s overtures.

Whether or not you are a recruited athlete, you need to be vigilant about the ethics of the admission process. This can be especially challenging when you see evidence that others—on both sides of the negotiation—are pushing the ethical “envelope.” Where there are clearly articulated rules, you need to observe them. The desire to get into favored schools should never put you in a place where you compromise your integrity.

Unfortunately, the coach in question was crossing the ethical “line” by asking the applicant to consider an Early Decision application when he knew the young man could only do so conditionally due to his financial situation—clearly a breach of rules governing the ED process. The good news is the young man had the presence of mind to step back and assess the situation objectively.

Now, in case you’re checking the calendar and wondering how this conversation between the coach and the applicant could be taking place as the “round two” deadlines for ED have passed at most schools, welcome to the world of college admission in 2012! These are the days when selective colleges do what they can to pump up their yields on offers of admission while looking for opportunities to reduce the overall number of students they need to admit and, hence, become more selective. For example, each additional ED enrollment reduces the number of low-yielding Regular Decision candidates by four or five at most colleges.

Consider the impact of such a strategy on a larger scale. A college or university that can attract 50 more ED enrollments over the previous year reduces by as many as 250 Regular Decision students it would otherwise need to admit to fill those places in the class. As a result, the more ED enrollments a school can stockpile, the more selective it becomes.

Add to the mix the dynamics of athletic recruitment—even at the NCAA Division III non-scholarship level—and the opportunity for late-season Early Decision conversations emerges. A few other observations are worth noting here.

One, the NCAA forbids Division III athletic recruiters from having any conversation about family finances with the financial aid officers at their respective institutions. In short, an athlete’s potential involvement in an NCAA Division III program may NOT have any bearing on the disposition of his/her financial aid status.

Two, each institution employs slightly different criterion in assessing a student’s financial “need” and then recognizing the comparative strength of her academic credential within the context of its financial aid program. It is not only possible, then, that a recruit’s financial “need” could be read differently from one school to the next, but the strength of her academic credential could also result in differences in the composition of the financial aid awards she receives. Whereas a student athlete may qualify for special consideration academically at one school, at others she may not.

Finally, the late season ED phenomenon is not limited to recruited athletes. Admission officers at many selective schools will keep the application “door” open past formal deadlines as they troll for high-yielding ED conversions well into February of the admission process. Should you be confronted with such an opportunity, just remember—the rules remain the same. If you convert your application to ED, you are making an unconditional commitment to enroll if accepted.

I had a number of conversations over the last several weeks with individuals who wanted to talk about the college transfer process. They were coming at the discussion from a variety of different perspectives ranging from the intentional to the desperate. The one thing they had in common was that they weren’t where they wanted to be—or so they thought.

In light of these conversations, it would seem appropriate to discuss the topic further in this space where the insight gleaned might help both those active in the transfer process as well as families that might be weighing the transfer option as part of the four year educational plan.

Before we look at the transfer process, it is important to acknowledge that many educators agree the optimal learning experience is one that takes place over four years on one campus. While there are certainly great examples of individuals who have pieced together meaningful undergrad experiences at multiple schools, the continuity of one academic program—and the relationships that emerge through it—typically fosters a more holistic experience and often produces more favorable results after graduation.

Opportunities to transfer into institutions are typically contingent on two factors: the availability of space and the availability of funds (for those who may need assistance). For example, schools that experience very little turnover in student enrollment (prior to graduation) may take on few, if any, transfers in a given year. These are places that, by virtue of rigorous admission standards, can make sure the students who enter, either as first-year students or transfers, are well equipped to manage the expectations of their respective classrooms.

Many of them also invest significantly in the various types of support needed for their students to find success. As a result, students who enter usually stay and graduate. Not surprisingly, these are also places that many students seeking to transfer see as “destination schools.”

By contrast, institutions more open to transfers are those that experience greater attrition prior to graduation. Their ability to support transfer students who need financial assistance may vary from year to year depending on the funds available at the time. It is possible, then, that institutions could extend offers of transfer admission but fail to provide the necessary financial aid.

In any case, the admission process for transfer candidates is remarkably similar to that of first-year applicants with several notable exceptions. 1) The high school transcript often takes a “back seat” to the college record in the credential review process. 2) The high school extracurricular record becomes secondary to involvement at the college level. 3) A statement is often required of the “sending” dean of student affairs attesting to the student’s good standing at the institution. 4) Finally, transfer students will be expected to address their reasons for transferring. The more selective the process, the greater the scrutiny that will be given to each factor as admission officers ask the question, “If we admit this student, what do we get?”

Given this background on the process, the rationale for transferring can be considered contextually. While there are myriad reasons for transferring, they tend to fall into one of three categories:

1. Intentional
2. Circumstantial
3. Reactive

Intentional The transfer process is both expedient and intentional for students who plan from the outset to piece together academic experiences at multiple schools. For some, it’s a matter of finances. They plan to address general education requirements at a community college or state university where the cost per credit is much lower before transferring into a four-year college to complete their degree requirements. Others simply need to develop academic competencies (and confidence) before embarking on a four-year degree.

Regardless, students intending to pursue a “2+2” degree path need to make sure the potential destination colleges promise to accept the coursework taken during the first two years and to support the transferring student with need-based financial aid. Many community colleges have negotiated articulation agreements with four-year programs that offer such assurances.

Circumstantial Sometimes, the “best laid” plans fail to accommodate changes in circumstance at a chosen college. For example, unforeseen changes in career interest, access to competitive opportunities athletically, health concerns, or financial support may put a student in the position of having to look for a new college home. When this happens, it is best to work with advisors at the “sending” school to compile a compelling statement in support of the transfer.

Reactive Some of my recent exchanges were with parents, worried that the first-year experience for their students isn’t going so well. Such revelations are never easy especially in light of the time and energy that was expended in the initial college selection process. As a result, parents are often conflicted about what to do—rush to their students’ sides with assurances that a transfer is in order or let things work themselves out on their own.

That the transfer “button” has been touched in any way is often symptomatic of adjustment issues (i.e. homesickness, high school relationship that is “on the rocks,” or envy—“the grass is greener somewhere else”) that do indeed benefit from time, experience and, in some cases, added maturity. My experience is that the vast majority of scenarios that seem highly worrisome at the end of the first semester have all but been forgotten by the end of the second.

Summary: All potential transfer scenarios must be carefully considered, not only for the benefits that seem to be immediately apparent, but for the long-term implications. If you go down the path of the transfer applicant, do so with your eyes wide open and an honest assessment of your rationale for doing so.

Do you know you have rights as a college applicant?

Well, you do. As you apply to colleges, you have the right to certain information about them including information about how much it will cost you to attend. According to the National Association of College Admission Counseling (NACAC), a member organization that includes more than 11,000 college access professionals around the USA and beyond, you have the right to:

• “Receive factual and comprehensive information from colleges and universities about their admission, financial costs, aid opportunities, practices and packaging policies, and housing policies. If you consider applying under an early admission plan, you have the right to complete information from the college about its process and policies.”
• “Be free from high-pressure sales tactics.”
• “Wait until May 1 to respond to an offer of admission or financial aid.”

In order to make good decisions, you need good information and, quite often, a reasonable amount of time in which to consider your options. Toward that end, NACAC further stipulates that:

• “Colleges that request commitments to offers of admission and/or financial assistance prior to May 1 must clearly offer you the opportunity to request (in writing) an extension until May 1. They must grant you the extension and your request may not jeopardize your status for admission and/or financial aid.”
• “Candidates admitted under early decision programs are a recognized exception to the May 1 deadline.”

It is important to note that May 1 is regarded as the “Candidate’s Reply Date”—the date by which admitted applicants must make their final college choices. That date was established years ago to allow students a reasonable amount of time to consider their college options and to give colleges a date by which they could begin the registration process (course selections and housing) for the coming year. If you are not an Early Decision candidate, then, you should be afforded time to process admission decisions and financial aid awards that you receive from various colleges and universities.

That said, it is easy to fall prey to pressures to make enrollment commitments before you are ready. For example, you may have already encountered enticements such as early or “priority” application deadlines associated with scholarships or housing preferences. Some colleges may offer you scholarships that you can only claim by enrolling well ahead of May 1. And, if you applied to schools that offer “Rolling Admission,” you may be offered admission with the expectation that you will submit a non-refundable enrollment deposit—as soon as possible!

If you feel uncomfortable about the conditions that seem to be placed on your admission status, there is probably a good reason to proceed with caution. Listen to your instincts. And recognize the circumstances for what they are. The colleges in question are attempting to secure as many enrolled students as early in the process as possible.

If you don’t feel you are in possession of the information necessary to allow you to move forward comfortably with a particular college, ask for an extension. It’s not likely that your enrollment opportunity will be withdrawn if you miss a deadline (May 1 is the possible exception). And communicate your concerns with your college advisor as well. If the college remains insistent, ask yourself whether this is the sort of place with which you want to be associated for the next four years.

NACAC has produced a number of important documents that help to define ethical, albeit not legally binding, behavior for everyone involved in the admission process. You can learn more about your rights and responsibilities as an applicant at the Policies and Statements page on the NACAC website. Click on “Statement of Students’ Rights and Responsibilities in the College Admission Process.” In addition, you may find the “Statement of Principles of Good Practice,” a document that guides the actions of colleges and universities, to be instructive as well.

It’s official.

On Saturday, October 29, 2011, “net price calculators” will be required elements on college and university websites. In accordance with the federal Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, institutions that enroll full-time, first-time degree or certificate seeking undergraduate students must provide a mechanism on their websites that estimates the net cost of attendance for current and prospective students.

As institutional price tags continue to soar—many are now above $50,000 per year—the resulting sticker shock is seen as a deterrent to many students who might otherwise consider post-secondary educational opportunities. The intent behind the net price calculators (NPC) is to encourage access to higher education by creating greater transparency with regard to the anticipated cost of attendance as defined by the student’s individual circumstances.

In theory, the NPC will calculate an adjusted price for each student that is reflective of that student’s “expected family contribution” (EFC). While the need-based financial aid analysis for college applicants (and returning students) is already rooted in the concept of expected family contribution, the NPC is intended to give families at glimpse at the EFC before the student engages in the application process. With this accomplished, students will be able to proceed with a greater understanding of the likely cost associated with their educational experiences.

To better understand the impact of the NPC, consider that institutions are employing “means-based” pricing models. In other words, at the end of the day they expect you to pay the amount you can afford rather than the listed sticker price. If you are fully self-supporting, you will be expected to pay the sticker price. On the other hand, if you demonstrate that you cannot be fully self-supporting, the NPC will calculate an EFC—a “reduced price”—that you are likely to encounter if admitted and enrolled at the institution.

The reality is the NPC is only an estimate of the price you will pay and it does not forecast your chances of gaining admission. Most institutions engage in differential needs analysis as they assess EFCs for students they might admit. In addition to being able to choose from a range of methodologies (FAFSA, College Scholarship Service Profile, institutional forms), financial aid officers can exercise “professional judgment” in assessing your EFC. As a result, your EFC for a given institution can vary by as much as $10,000 depending on the methodology that is used.

Moreover, the NPC cannot accurately anticipate the manner in which an institution will meet your demonstrated financial need (the difference between the sticker price and your EFC). This is because most institutions utilize preferential packaging in meeting the needs of their admitted students. Depending on your desirability to the institution, your need could be met with a financial aid award that includes a lot of gift aid (grants and scholarships) or a lot of self-help (loans and campus work study opportunities). A financial aid award that includes more of the latter adds substantially to the cost of attendance that you and your family must bear—a cost that the NPC is not likely to identify for you.

The bottom line: net price calculators are not likely to give you the degree of precision in projecting college costs that you might expect. They might give you a “ball park” sense of your out-of-pocket cost, but the final tally could be far different for the reasons outlined above. If you need a very close estimate of your EFC before making a “buying” decision, consult the financial aid professionals at the school in question directly.

The premise behind the NPC is certainly noteworthy. Unfortunately, it is not a failsafe measure nor is it likely to increase the dialogue between families and financial aid officers as the latter will direct the former to the net price calculators their websites.

An unanticipated development emerging from the NPC mandate is that many institutions now have new mechanisms for pre-qualifying, screening and recruiting potential candidates for admission. While most of the related activity is fairly benign, be wary of providing information on an NPC regarding the other colleges to which you are applying. This data is not essential to the calculation of the EFC, and, frankly, it can raise questions about the sincerity of your interest in the institution.