High Academic -- SAT/ACT and Timing?

2017 took ACT in June after soph. year. Combination of athletic ability and that ACT score was too low to matter until son took the SAT during January of his junior year (after several months of tutoring). I'm not sure if that January SAT score was what made his athletic ability relevant at many high academics, or if it was just a coincidence.  I do know that SATs/ACTs of 2100/33 or higher, help EVERYONE relax. 

smokeminside posted:

2017 took ACT in June after soph. year. Combination of athletic ability and that ACT score was too low to matter until son took the SAT during January of his junior year (after several months of tutoring). I'm not sure if that January SAT score was what made his athletic ability relevant at many high academics, or if it was just a coincidence.  I do know that SATs/ACTs of 2100/33 or higher, help EVERYONE relax. 

Thanks. Your story illustrates the quandary -- most kids will do significantly better on the standardized tests later (spring of junior year? fall of senior year?) than they will sophomore year.  Particularly if they prep for the test. Similar situation, I guess, to the advice with respect to baseball skills, "don't showcase until you have something to show" . . .

And it's sort of interesting what the College Board has done with the new PSAT/NMSQT test (well, maybe it's not all that new, but they definitely didn't do it when I was in high school) -- the scores are on the same scale as the SAT, and, according to the College Board "shows you how you would have scored that day on the SAT."

So I was thinking a kid could use his PSAT/NMSQT as a proxy -- without having taken the actual SAT or ACT -- and maybe get some credit from the coaches for "projectability"!! LOL  But of course, it would be great to hear if any HSBBW folks used that approach  . . .

With the changes to SAT looming, 2017 focused on the old SAT first and took it November of Junior year, then retook it in January (final version of old test format, which he wanted because he scored 98th percentile in Writing, which was being phased out because apparently nobody cares about writing anymore). After taking a six-week prep course, he scored 200 points higher, so money well spent. 

Then he shifted his attention to ACT and took it in April so that he had both SAT and ACT scores prior to HF in June.  When we figured out that getting just a little bit higher ACT might mean more academic money at the D3's where there is no athletic money, he retook the ACT in September of his Senior and scored 2 points higher.  And sure enough the Net Price Calculators on some college sites are showing more merit money with the higher score.  So again, well worth it to retake it.

I don't think PSAT counts for much other than the chance at National Merit Scholar.  But some of the high academic coaches will start looking at kids based on the high PSAT as a Sophomore and then wait to see the results of the SAT/ACT when they are juniors.  My recommendation is if your son got a strong PSAT score, take the SAT first, and do it early in Junior year.  Leave a few months for a retest, then shift to ACT and get both done before the Summer leading into Senior year.  Several coaches at the academic schools told us they value the test scores much more than GPA.  One told us "GPA will get our attention, but SAT/ACT determines if we stay interested."

Several coaches at the academic schools told us they value the test scores much more than GPA.  One told us "GPA will get our attention, but SAT/ACT determines if we stay interested.

THIS, plus I would add, the full Junior year transcript matters, both for rigor and gpa.  Transcript through sophomore year doesn't seem to provide enough info for the highest academic schools.

Son took SAT during fall of Junior year and score was said to be good enough for target Academic Index.It used to be easy to measure SAT based on PSAT..now things have changed. Spoke to head of guidance last weekend who said new SAT scored are inflated. Students getting into HIGH academics with certain score previously are falling in lower percentiles. If my son were going through now I would probably encourage him to take ACT.

One thing to consider as plans are made: I strongly recommend AGAINST taking the ACT and SAT on back to back weekends.  It wasn't helpful in our experience.  Just to amplify my comments above:  Son took ACT "cold" in June before Jr. year.  Score: 27  Took weekly  hour long lessons with an SAT/ACT prep tutor from Sept through end of November in fall of Jr. year.  Focused primarily on ACT structure, but took SAT first weekend in December 2015. Score: about 1910, for three sections.  Then he took ACT on the very next weekend, the second weekend in December.  Score: a disappointing  28.  He was very frustrated after having spent so much time preparing and having his score go up only one point.

Decided to take the very last offering of the old SAT in late January, 2016.  Figured he didn't have anything to lose since he knew it was highly likely he'd have to take it AGAIN, and the format would change the next time.  Did NOT study at all in the intervening month.  Raised his total SAT to 2140.  Retired from SAT/ACT testing.

I'm convinced that taking the SAT and ACT on back to back weekends was a mistake for my son. He was mentally fatigued after the first test.   One month later, away from the test taking stuff. was a great decision for him. 

I don't want anyone to disagree with me, because I want to be right about something, anything, any one thing in this cray cray process.

My son is a 2018 and has been getting recruited by the high academic schools. We were told by coaches that while his grades were very good they needed to see the standardized test scores. We were also told to take them ASAP (this was in September of this year) so that if the first time the scores were not good he could take the test again. 2018 took the test in October and did well. The response from the schools has been noticeable --  there is an increased intensity now that they are certain he can make it thru admissions.

I'd take the tests early enough such that you have time to study some more and potentially take them again and improve.

Take the tests as early as a kid is ready.  A good use of rising junior summer is to take the prep course while school doesn't intrude. S tested in September junior year.

b i g m a c posted:

I'd take the tests early enough such that you have time to study some more and potentially take them again and improve.

Absolutely. The only caveat is that if a kid is on a slow track in math, he may struggle with the ACT, in particular, as it tends to have more Trig and Algebra 2 questions than  the SAT or PSAT.   (according to my kids' prep tutor )  So taking the test in Sophomore year may not be helpful except as practice.

My son just took the ACT as a Freshman this past weekend with no prep.  Is there a ballpark average of how much an ACT score improves from Freshman to Junior year? 

d-mac posted:

My son just took the ACT as a Freshman this past weekend with no prep.  Is there a ballpark average of how much an ACT score improves from Freshman to Junior year? 

D-Mac,

No idea on data other than my own.  First time he took ACT was spring of sophomore year.  DID NOT STUDY AT ALL.  Took it cold.

Score was not horrible (north of 25), but not what he needed for high academic consideration.  He had two HA- HCs scold him for a less than glowing score.  One even said, "I don't care if you took it cold.......you're a smart kid, I can tell it by looking at you.  I know you can do better."  Priceless!!

Son studied an online ACT program 2nd half of summer.  Took Sept. 10 ACT  earlier this fall.  Added 5-pts and was committed to HA 30-days later.  

d-mac posted:

My son just took the ACT as a Freshman this past weekend with no prep.  Is there a ballpark average of how much an ACT score improves from Freshman to Junior year? 

d-mac, I found this: http://blog.prepscholar.com/wh...rade-act-/-sat-score

It says about 200 points for the SAT and about 5 points for the ACT is an average increase between 9th and 11th grade, so it's pretty significant.

2019Dad posted:

d-mac posted:

My son just took the ACT as a Freshman this past weekend with no prep.  Is there a ballpark average of how much an ACT score improves from Freshman to Junior year? 

d-mac, I found this: http://blog.prepscholar.com/wh...rade-act-/-sat-score

It says about 200 points for the SAT and about 5 points for the ACT is an average increase between 9th and 11th grade, so it's pretty significant.

 

 

Interesting.  5 points could mean very different things to different students.

16  improves to 21.  From possible JC student to possible State U student.

26 improves to 31.  From possible U of State student to possible U of State or good private scholly student.

31 improves to 36. Full ride wherever you wanna go, baby!

I thought schools took the highest score (rather than average them) which is why students will take them as early as their freshman year for practice, student athlete or not.  Is this not true? 

Schools say they will either take the highest single score or some even superscore by taking the best section scores and adding.

S was told by Ivy coaches before Junior year, which scores would clear the bar. (30 ACT min.)

All of the information in this thread is very helpful.

5 point ACT improvement seems about right, I could see that being even more with prep, though. 

Goosegg posted:

Schools say they will either take the highest single score or some even superscore by taking the best section scores and adding.

S was told by Ivy coaches before Junior year, which scores would clear the bar. (30 ACT min.)

Goose, that's a good rule of thumb. Someone -- I don't remember who -- on this Board said that for a RHP, if your top velocity and ACT added up to 120, you were in good shape at an Ivy (e.g., 30 ACT and 90 mph).

The Ivys use something called the Academic Index (AI), which weights standardized test scores and GPA and comes up with a number. The lower the AI, the better you need to be at baseball. Good analysis of it at Tier 1: www.tier1athletics.org/2012/11...ademic-index-number/

And they have a good calculator: www.tier1athletics.org/2012/10...dex-calculator-2016/

Just by way of example, a kid with an ACT of 30, an unweighted GPA of 3.6, and 680 apiece on two SAT subject tests would have an AI of 210, and would be in good shape.

One thing I didn't see in the Tier 1 materials is that each coach needs to deliver a team AI, in addition to the minimum threshold for each individual athlete. What this means is that if a coach wants a stud player with, say, a 180 AI, the coach will likely need to balance that with a recruit with a really, really high AI. Net, net, the higher your AI, the better off you are.

So, back to the original question.....High Academic -- SAT/ACT and Timing?

My two cents and experience....the higher the baseball level the recruit is being considered for high academic schools, the sooner he needs to have his academic house in order.  Some D1 recruits are being genuinely considered for Stanford, Ivys, others and it is a great idea to have those ACT/SAT ready to compare offers that can be coming in from other power conference D1s.  In addition, the more traditional power D1 academic schools are recruiting earlier and earlier.  I'd suggest late soph year or early junior year IF the recruit is ready.  We are talking about a small number of recruits nationally.   

Other recruits that are not getting that genuine level of D1 power conference interest can wait until early junior year or whenever they are ready to take the SAT for high academic schools.  These recruits will be in communication with some D1 mid-majors, Ivys, Patriot and D3.

JMO and experience.

2019Dad posted:

Goosegg posted:

Schools say they will either take the highest single score or some even superscore by taking the best section scores and adding.

S was told by Ivy coaches before Junior year, which scores would clear the bar. (30 ACT min.)

Goose, that's a good rule of thumb. Someone -- I don't remember who -- on this Board said that for a RHP, if your top velocity and ACT added up to 120, you were in good shape at an Ivy (e.g., 30 ACT and 90 mph).

 

2019Dad,

That was me.  Just an armchair theory of mine, that an RHP with an ACT of 30 + FB of 90 = 120, and a ticket to just about anywhere you want.  The Golden #120 is what I call it.  It really is the number an RHP seeking HA-D1 school should shoot for, but not 100% necessary.  Mine only got to #118 (sum of his FB and ACT) at the time of his commitment.  I've seen other HA-D1commits (RHPs) with as low as #114 (based on PG posted data, could be old #s too)  But the Golden #120 need to only serve as a goal, a target.  

If an RHP hits it?  Great.  He can pick just about any school he wants.  If he falls short by 2-4pts, he is still in a good position.  #114 could mean 86FB and a 28ACT, still a good position for HA.  D-1 or D-3 would then be question?  But still a door opener at HA, I'd say.

Golden number for an LHP in D-1?  #118?  FB-88, ACT-30, or 87/31?  These are just "door opening" or "conversation starting" numbers. 

Now before someone starts poking holes in my theory, let me reiterate: these are just "door opening" numbers; this is not all it takes to "pick your school."  I realize a 90mph FB is not the only thing being considered,  having secondary pitches, pitchability, etc.  is arguably more important, as is what the needs of team are, etc.  

But an RHP with 90/30, 88/32, 92/28 will get a lot of introductory interest.  And as Fenway points out, the earlier the ACT part of that equation can be plugged in?  The easier life is for everyone involved, especially the RC.

So when you hear that schools have offered  freshmen  or even first semester 8th graders are those offers then just conditional upon tests, grades and meeting other academic entrance requirements (etc etc)  or can they be pulled like offers are in football as a "non-committable" if they find a better fit.  I'm assuming until a LOI is signed it's all just verbal.   Not in this situation just curious. 

Thanks, #1 Assistant Coach.  I think your theory is a good rule of thumb.

One other thing about the Ivy League: if a kid can clear the baseball and academic bar, it can be a much better financial deal than the typical D-1 baseball scholarship. For example, at Princeton, if your family income is <$120,000, 100% of tuition is covered by grants (no loans). From Princeton's financial aid brochure:

Yale has a similar program. Each school is a little different, but for many student-athletes, the Ivy deal can be better than a traditional baseball scholarship to another D-1.

Yes, those really early offers and commits have an expectation that a player will take the SAT/ACT tests in Junior year and that their GPA and test scores will meet their minimum standards.  Stanford told us at one of their camps one of the reasons they have not sought commits from Freshman and Sophomores is that there were too many kids they started following with interest with really high GPAs only to find they could not meet the test scores needed to make it.  Coach said we'd be surprised how many "athletic name" high schools inflate their athlete GPAs and that is why they wait.  But as Fenway wisely noted--if Stanford is showing interest, you start those tests as a sophomore so you can validate your a legit candidate to be admitted.  The higher academic D3s know they are not likely to secure a commitment until a kid is a senior so there is more time.

Another thought on the mindset of combining FB-Velo with the ACT score (or a converted SAT to ACT score), is it forces the player to realize that even though he may have an 88mph FB as a sophomore, or even as a Junior, that he may be closing doors on himself if that's the only number he focuses on?  That the ACT# and the SAT# are equally important data points for many colleges, especially HA ones.  That they should go hand in hand as far as getting noticed,  or getting your foot in the door, or beginning the conversation with a HA.

"Hey RHP-son, you may have an 88-FB, but your 22-ACT score gives you a grand total of #110 points."    If kid can see that the goal is "120" for HA, not just 88, 89, or 90 (for an RHP for example), he may then be inspired to hit the test books as hard as the weighted balls, or he may just decide it's time to take his 88-FB to Mid-Major State U instead.

Again, as has been previously mentioned on this thread,  the earlier that a viable ACT/SAT test number can be plugged in the equation?  The better. 

As a  recruit a  RHP was told by Ivy HC that a 2000 SAT  (old three part)"would be nice". After three attempts and some superscoring he hit the mark. Was a weekend starter as a freshman and would occasionally hit 90 mph. One Ivy coach told us that the team average (of 2400 SAT max) was about 2100.

2019Dad posted:

There are a number of threads running right now about the Stanford Camp, AZ Junior/Senior Fall Classic (and academic games), etc.

For posters who have sons who (a) were interested in high academic schools, and (b) attended Stanford or HeadFirst the summer after sophomore year (and/or the academic game at the Junior Fall Classic in October of junior year), did your son:

(1) Take the SAT or ACT as a sophomore?

(2) Rely on the PSAT (taken sophomore fall) when coaches asked about test scores?

(3) Something else? 

Thanks in advance.

My son started doing standardized testing ( ACT/ SAT) as a rising Jr. Late summer before JR year. And he didn't test well. We went w/ the high dollar tutors and after 2-3 attempts and 2,000 in tutor bills put together a sufficient score. Good enough to get a green light from admissions on a pre-read at an Ivy. But it was a hell of a lot of work. And in the end he didn't commit to the Ivy .....Son had a high GPA though. And subsequently graduated valedictorian.

So, to more specifically help you w/ your question: W/ AZ fall classic , Stanford Camp , etc what he did was ride his GPA ( he was always a 4.0/ 4.1 ) and for testing he would tell RC's he was in the process w/ tutors. And that worked out good because the RC's would call and text him asking about updated test results.

what we learned was that GPA carries as much weight as test scores. Even more w/ Ivy's . The infamous 'AI' ( Academic Index ) formula gives a more favorable result or score for High GPA vs High Standardized test scores

StrainedOblique posted:

2019Dad posted:

There are a number of threads running right now about the Stanford Camp, AZ Junior/Senior Fall Classic (and academic games), etc.

For posters who have sons who (a) were interested in high academic schools, and (b) attended Stanford or HeadFirst the summer after sophomore year (and/or the academic game at the Junior Fall Classic in October of junior year), did your son:

(1) Take the SAT or ACT as a sophomore?

(2) Rely on the PSAT (taken sophomore fall) when coaches asked about test scores?

(3) Something else? 

Thanks in advance.

My son started doing standardized testing ( ACT/ SAT) as a rising Jr. Late summer before JR year. And he didn't test well. We went w/ the high dollar tutors and after 2-3 attempts and 2,000 in tutor bills put together a sufficient score. Good enough to get a green light from admissions on a pre-read at an Ivy. But it was a hell of a lot of work. And in the end he didn't commit to the Ivy .....Son had a high GPA though. And subsequently graduated valedictorian.

So, to more specifically help you w/ your question: W/ AZ fall classic , Stanford Camp , etc what he did was ride his GPA ( he was always a 4.0/ 4.1 ) and for testing he would tell RC's he was in the process w/ tutors. And that worked out good because the RC's would call and text him asking about updated test results.

what we learned was that GPA carries as much weight as test scores. Even more w/ Ivy's . The infamous 'AI' ( Academic Index ) formula gives a more favorable result or score for High GPA vs High Standardized test scores

 

As always, more than one way to skin a cat.  One of the great things about this site. 

Great story S.O.!!

2019Dad posted:

There are a number of threads running right now about the Stanford Camp, AZ Junior/Senior Fall Classic (and academic games), etc.

For posters who have sons who (a) were interested in high academic schools, and (b) attended Stanford or HeadFirst the summer after sophomore year (and/or the academic game at the Junior Fall Classic in October of junior year), did your son:

(1) Take the SAT or ACT as a sophomore?

(2) Rely on the PSAT (taken sophomore fall) when coaches asked about test scores?

(3) Something else? 

Thanks in advance.

2018 took ACT Sept Junior year, scored well enough to have a 213 Academic Index for Ivy's

Son had at least a 3.7 at the time of signing up for Oct 20th AZ Fall Junior Classic, he didn't have his ACT score yet and hadn't taken the PSAT yet  

Because my son wasn't on a team competing in the AZ Fall Classic we had to find a team and apply to the one day High Academic Tryout.  I called Tracy, the focal point of the event.  She told me most Juniors are accepted and to include skills video on the application if we can.  When in doubt they'll look at the video vs tracking down coaches which of course will vouch for their player.  Son had good tryout, made team, great experience, very well run event.

For HF Jupiter last month son had ACT score to relay to coaches.  Son played very well, rec'd attention, but not offer type attention.  My observation is Coaches were hunting Pitchers first, and the ones that already scored a high ACT had real offer like conversations.  See PG early offers for Ivy's:  Pitchers with high ACT's.  Son has D1 measurables in all areas, just not sub 7.0 in 60yd yet.  He's working it and hopefully by June HF it will all come together.

A lot of this is positioning: continue refining skill, keep getting in front of coaches, the more they see you the more it helps.

Pretty sure my son's HS started with PSAT/SAT as a freshman, I know he took the SAT sometime during Sophomore year for "practice".

He officially took the SAT and ACT in the fall of his Junior year, and did better on the ACT than SAT, so we focused on that one.  He took it again in the late spring of that year in an effort to improve on his original 30 and got the same score, with the subtest results different enough to superscore to a 31. Never did any active prep, he just didn't want to invest the time, which I thought was a mistake as I think he could likely gotten to a 32-34 given the mistakes he was making and knowing his own weaknesses (he's an extraordinarily slow reader, though we've never sought a clinical diagnosis). he had plans to try a third time, but got accepted before the test took place, so didn't bother.

I wanted him to get the 33/34 if he could, assuming it would open more college doors, but he was exceptionally good student with the most rigorous course load he could take at a very high achieving school.  He ended up top 3% of his class (held back only by students who took more than his 11 APs) and an AP National Scholar, and those factors ended up being much more important to the schools that were interested in him than his median-to-slightly-below ACT for those schools. Maybe if he'd been athletically talented enough and had wanted to go to an Ivy/Stanford type school we'd have spent a little more effort towards getting the test scores up to be more competitive in that pool.

The impression I got from pretty much everyone we talked to was that academic rigor was more important to schools at his academic level than test scores were (at least past some threshold values for the test scores).  Maybe that's different if you're looking at schools where the spread of student academic talent is wider and the tests get used as more of comparison tool?

An argument I've heard is that GPA is unreliable because a 3.0 at school A could be harder to come by than a 4.0 at school B,  and therefore schools rely on standardized test scores more. But your point about rigor makes me realize that rigor has a built-in standardized testing component, because if a kid has taken 10 AP or IB courses, he also should be in the process of taking 10 AP or IB tests, and those should be a good tool for comparison.

JCG posted:

An argument I've heard is that GPA is unreliable because a 3.0 at school A could be harder to come by than a 4.0 at school B,  and therefore schools rely on standardized test scores more. But your point about rigor makes me realize that rigor has a built-in standardized testing component, because if a kid has taken 10 AP or IB courses, he also should be in the process of taking 10 AP or IB tests, and those should be a good tool for comparison.

Concur JCG, I think the ACT or SAT are the first bona fide filters the High Academic Coaches use. The Coaches probably don't even scrutinize a transcript of a Soph or Junior until they see an initial ACT or SAT.  Then comes the level of difficulty of course load (AP's/Honors)

Gov posted:

2018 took ACT Sept Junior year, scored well enough to have a 213 Academic Index for Ivy's

 

213 is fantastic, Gov! 

Over the years, I've helped quite a few folks with Ivy and High Academic baseball recruiting not to mention been through the gauntlet with my own son a few years ago.  Here is my read on the GPA/ACT/SAT/academic rigor question that has come up.....first, it is all relative to the recruits baseball skills.  Second, the coach is only going to have so much (quantifiable) equity with the Admissions committee every year.  In other words, he can only advocate for a couple impact players with lower GPAs/SATs/academic rigor per year.  For the non-impact recruit it is advisable and assumed your son has outstanding SAT/ACT scores, incredibly rigorous courses and a high GPA in those rigorous courses...these are a given.  Not only is the potential recruit competing for admissions/recruitment among other baseball players (based on ACT/SAT & baseball skills), the Admissions committee is looking at the potential recruit in the context of the general student population (previously mentioned AI).  By far, the single most common dynamic that trips up a potential Ivy or high academic baseball recruit is not high enough SAT or ACT score.  It isn't even close with the other dynamics mentioned assuming the recruit is at the right baseball talent level.  So, understanding your baseball skills, demand & goals becomes real important as a potential Ivy or high academic recruit and parent begin to think about when to take the SAT and ACT and hope to score high enough.  JMO

JCG posted:

An argument I've heard is that GPA is unreliable because a 3.0 at school A could be harder to come by than a 4.0 at school B,  and therefore schools rely on standardized test scores more. But your point about rigor makes me realize that rigor has a built-in standardized testing component, because if a kid has taken 10 AP or IB courses, he also should be in the process of taking 10 AP or IB tests, and those should be a good tool for comparison.

Exactly

Don't sleep on the PSAT October of Junior Year. Lots of schools offer up to "full rides" depending on how they finish (Commended, Semifinalist, Finalist & Scholar). My 2018 got his score this week, index 219 which in AZ that would make him at least a NMSF. He has also taken both ACT & SAT early (did OK) and then scored very well his 2nd time around. He will be taking each test one more time, to leave no doubt for IVY & Service Academy entry. Coaches have stressed that he take lots of Honors and AP classes and stay above a 3.5 GPA. Also agree, don't test back to back, each test has it's own format and timing. 

http://thecollegematchmaker.co...nal-merit-finalists/

StrainedOblique made an important observation about the high cost of tutors and test prep for the SAT/ACT tests.  With the SAT, my 2017 took it first time with no test prep and did very well.  But knowing he was going to eventually take the ACT later, we signed him up for an unlimited test prep service offered on weekends at a nearby location.  So he retook it and scored 210 points higher, then used the service for both the initial ACT and subsequent retest and did very well and then upped it again another 2 points. 

So was the improvement really worth it?  We are still waiting for admission decisions at several high academics, so it is too soon to tell.  But beyond the admission decision, it almost certainly will be on merit money.  He is likely going to wind up at a D3 with no athletic money, so the private school cost would be out of reach without significant merit money.  Using the Net Price Calculator on several of his interest school websites, the improvement in the SAT/ACT score will add anywhere from $2K to $5K more dollars when I compare the results from his old score versus the improved score.

We can debate whether the SAT/ACT should really be that significant in a college decision.  But for those parents with younger kids who want to play college baseball and don't have GPA's over 4.0, I would argue spending the money and preparing to do very well on these tests should be just as important as finding a strong travel ball team and good private hitting or pitching coaches.  It is a real pain for the kids--my 2017 moaned a lot, said the classes were boring, would rather have cleaned his room, etc.  But the results he got may be the difference in making a strong academic private school affordable due to the merit money.

FWIW, I don't think test scores are the only thing that matter for merit aid, at least not at all the high academics (I know there are a lot of median level schools that use them as a bright line test, though). My son ended up with the max award for a variable amount scholarship at his school, despite a below-median ACT for his class.  He's also receiving an enormous amount of need-based aid, since both his parents are middle school teachers, and I get the impression that the school mixes and matches on both merit and need-based awards to put together the financial packages it wants.

jacjacatk posted:

 get the impression that the school mixes and matches on both merit and need-based awards to put together the financial packages it wants.

Exactly.  

Here in CA where several schools in the UC system are very highly ranked, also have become very difficult to get into, and typically do not give a lot of aid to middle class families, I have a theory, based on anecdotal evidence, that the high academic privates make a point of matching what they expect the family's cost of attendance will be at a UC.  The more middling privates will often come in with a lower cost of attendance than the UC.

JCG posted:

jacjacatk posted:

 get the impression that the school mixes and matches on both merit and need-based awards to put together the financial packages it wants.

Exactly.  

Here in CA where several schools in the UC system are very highly ranked, also have become very difficult to get into, and typically do not give a lot of aid to middle class families, I have a theory, based on anecdotal evidence, that the high academic privates make a point of matching what they expect the family's cost of attendance will be at a UC.  The more middling privates will often come in with a lower cost of attendance than the UC.

It's not just the HA schools. Private and  out of state public schools understand the way the UCs are impacted right now and the caliber of students that are being turned away by the UC system. Rather than see those students either bounce to a JC to do a 2-year stint and then transfer into a UC school or attend a CSU school, they offer the students attractive pricing which is comparable to attending a UC at in-state rates to entice them to attend. It works for the schools as they end up getting higher caliber students into their doors, for the students who get to attend otherwise fine research universities, and for the parents who in cases like mine really see no downside financially speaking.