美国留学 让你无需为费用担忧的美国名校

Need-Blind是美国大学在招生时对奖学金的一种类别,主要针对本科生。采取Need-blind奖学金的大学,在录取学生时不考虑学生的资金需求和家庭收入情况,只要符合录取条件则给予录取,录取后如果学生提供的资金证明显示家庭收入不足支付学费和生活费时,学校将提供奖学金,弥补学生家庭资金的不足。简单来说,只要学生优秀,被大学录取,不会因为家庭经济困难而失学,因为大学会为你支付学费和生活费。这真是十足的communism思想。

当然,这种奖学金政策也是建立在经济基础上的,大学需要财大气粗才行,所以美国只有少数大学提供Need-blind的奖学金,如哈佛大学、耶鲁大学、达特茅斯学院、普林斯顿大学、麻省理工学院、阿姆赫斯学院和本文提到的威廉姆斯学院等几所大学。

然而,金融危机的出现,不管是公立大学的政府预算还是私立大学捐赠资金,都受到很大影响,这也导致一些大学不得不修改其奖学金政策。

近日,美国著名的文理学院--威廉姆斯学院（Williams College,著名歌手王力宏的母校）鉴于捐赠资金的减少,不得不宣布放弃对国际学生Need-blind的奖学金政策。

威廉姆斯学院每年提供给国际学生的奖学金高达400万美元,这笔开支在金融危机下对学校来说是一笔沉重的负担,所以今年不得不宣布放弃Need-blind的奖学金政策。

那么取消Need-blind后会有什么影响呢？取消Need-blind并不意味着学校不给国际学生提供奖学金,而是学校在录取时会关注学生的奖学金的需求,如果一个学生条件尚可,符合录取要求,但如果这个学生对奖学金需求非常大（如需要学校提供所有学费和生活费）,则学校会权衡一下,有可能就不录取这名学生。如果这个学生没有奖学金需求或者奖学金需求比较少,则学校有可能录取。但如果这个学生非常优秀,万里挑一,则即使学生对奖学金需求高,学校也认了,这样的学生是稀缺资源,肯定也会录取并提供奖学金。所以,对于国内想申请该校的学生来说,申请时就要讲究策略。如果家庭条件不错,为了提高被录取的概率,可以在申请时注明放弃奖学金申请；如果自身条件很好,则可以坚持需要奖学金。

附Williams College简介：

从艾姆赫斯特学院（Amherst College）出发,沿着91号高速公路向北,在麻省西北重镇格林菲尔德 （Greenfield, MA）向西走上2号路,大概60公里左右就到了一所很偏僻却优雅的小镇, 威廉姆斯镇 (Williamstown, MA)。这个小镇按照中国的看法最多是个村级单位（人口不足4000）,但是就在这个“村子”里面,却坐落了一所无论是little ivies （小常春藤联盟）还是 little three （小三杰）中都赫赫有名的学院。也是我们今天要讲述得乱世隐者—威廉姆斯学院(Williams College)。

之所以称其为乱世隐者。是因为威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)不仅在艺术方面有独到的成就,更是与世无争。从来不费心的去参加评比和竞赛或者作广告来证明自己是美国No.1 的大学。做好自己的事情高于一切是它的宗旨。 而其校训 “E liberalitate E.”（我自自由）也完美的阐述了它的办学理念。

威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)的投资创办人是美国陆军的埃菲拉姆。威廉姆斯（Ephraim Williams）上校。他出身显贵,并在麻省西部有大片的田地。在他的遗嘱中写道,如果有一天我不幸牺牲,那么我的财产将贡献给我的家乡,西豪萨克镇(West Hoosac)。并为其建立起一所能够教育未来子弟的学院。 当他在1755年9月8日在纽约州乔治湖（Lake George, NY）战死后。它的家乡为了纪念他。 将名字改为了威廉姆斯镇(Williamstown, MA)。而1793年新成立的大学则被命名为威廉姆斯学院（Williams College）。

威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)可以说出生以来历经坎坷。几次面临着财政危机,搬迁危机,以及麻省第一古老大学--哈佛大学的挑战。（当时的哈佛认为,麻省需要一所大学就够了,因此几次向麻省政府提出取缔威廉姆斯学院）甚至在1821年,他们的校长 Zephaniah S. Moore,因为试图搬迁威廉姆斯学院不成,于是带着自己的十五名学生弃校而走。投奔了艾姆赫斯特学院（Amherst College）,并成为了其第一任校长。 在这一次次打击之中,威廉姆斯学院仍然顽强的坚持者。 秉承我自自由的理念。 在新校长Harry C. Payne,以及资助人Heman Humphrey的带领下,走出了困境。自此人才辈出。（除了一名美国总统詹姆斯?加菲尔德以外,名单太多,不好多列,具体可以看网址：/wiki/List_of_Williams_College_people）

1859年,恢复元气的威廉姆斯和成立不久的艾姆赫斯特两校进行了美国第一次校际棒球赛,开创了校际体育对抗的先河,并延续至今。威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)还是美国第一所使用毕业典礼和学士毕业服装的学校。 1970年,威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)由单一男校变为男女混合校。

今天的威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)是一所集人文,科学和社会科学三位一体的综合性学院。拥有24个学术类型,31个专业,以及2个硕士项目（文艺历史学以及经济发展学）。与康州的密斯提克港博物馆(Mysitc Seaport maritime museum)以及英国的牛津大学有紧密地关系。 其学年制度是美国独一无二的4-1-4 制度（2个完整学期+ 一个冬季学期）。 并且有著名的威廉姆斯年度贵宾演讲。 1996年曾经邀请过前美国总统布什,98年是著名小提琴家马友友,2006的演讲人是著名水下摄影师Chuck Davis. 此外,学校还拥有一所全国著名的艺术馆威廉姆斯大学艺术博物馆,馆藏艺术品价值超过20亿美元。以及一个拥有15万份音像图书资料的图书馆,Chapin Library。

地址：Williams College, Williamstown, MA 01267

威廉姆斯学院 (Williams College)小资料：

所在地: 威廉姆斯镇 (Williamstown, MA)。

建立时间: 1793

2009-2010学年在校学生人数: 本科生2168,研究生56人；2009年秋季录取率：20.4%（6,017人申请,1,229人被录取）

全职教授: 318人

在校平均一年花费 (2009-10): $49,880美元

现任校长：Morton Schapiro

学校代表颜色: 紫色。

学校吉祥物：紫色的母牛 Purple Cow

学校格言：E. liberalitate E (我自自由)

奖学金发放情况：

Class of 2013 Financial Aid Statistics （2009年秋季入学学生奖学金发放统计）

专业：

Architecture & Related Programs 建筑系

Area, Ethnic, Cultural, & Gender Studies,地区,文明,性别文化系

Arts, Visual & Performing 艺术表演系

Biological & Biomedical Sciences 生物,医药系

Business, Management, & Marketing 商学系

Computer & Information Sciences 电脑系

Education 教育系

Engineering 工程系 （生物,机电,建筑,化学工程）

English Language & Literature 英语系

Foreign Language & Literature 外语系（中文,日文,法文,德文,俄语,西班牙文）

History 历史系

Mathematics 数学系

Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies 复合学习系

Philosophy & Religion 哲学宗教系

Physical Sciences 物理科学系 (天文,化学,地理,物理)

Psychology 心理学系

Social Sciences 社会科学系 (考古,经济,政治,社会学)

附Williams College 临时校长对奖学金政策改变的公告：

To the Williams Community,

Financial aid has been much on the minds of members of the Williams community as we have thought about ways to control the growth in its cost that would align with the great value we place on having a diverse community.

The process of setting the College’s price is complicated and at odds with how the world generally works. Since we live with this system every day, we tend to forget that outside of Williams and a small number of similar colleges, there may be no business or organization that charges for its goods or services only what an individual can afford to pay. That is amazing. (More so when you consider that even the top price that is charged covers only about half of what the College spends per student.)

The system has worked remarkably well. We have been able to make the benefits of a Williams education accessible to strong students from all economic backgrounds. And, while parents do make sacrifices to send their children here, when we ask them if it was worth it, 98% say yes.

As astonishing as this system already was, it became more so when a few years ago we dropped loans from all aid packages and began to admit all international students without regard to their ability to pay.

We could take those steps because our endowment had been growing at quite an amazing rate. Since that is no longer the case and apparently will not be the case again anytime soon, the College has needed to cut expenses virtually everywhere. Given the value we place on affordability, the only exception has been financial aid, which grew again this year (by about 12%) and will grow next year.

What we have explored are ways to control the growth in overall spending on financial aid that would be consonant with our commitment to broad financial accessibility. One way was to reintroduce modest loans in the aid packages of some students. Families with low incomes will still not be expected to borrow. When, beginning with the Class of 2015, we go back to something that resembles the loan program that was in place until fall of 2008, Williams will continue to be attractive to students of all incomes and we will have a wonderfully strong and diverse student body.

This will also be true as we begin to admit international students somewhat differently than we have in recent years, beginning with the class entering this fall.

Until the Class of 2006, Williams each year maintained two pools of international applicants: those who had applied for aid and those who had not. We admitted only a few who had applied for aid. All other admitted international applicants were among those who could pay the full fee. For the last several years we admitted international applicants without regard to their ability to pay. We also let the percentage of international students in the class drift up to a range of 5% to 8% (though one year it topped out at 9%); any higher would have been financially unsustainable. This enabled us to matriculate a cohort of international students with significantly more presence and diversity, to the great advantage of us all.

But as a result, the cost of international aid in the last decade rose by more than 200% (more than $4 million). In the College’s changed financial situation, that rate of growth is unsustainable. One way to reduce it would be to have fewer international students. But no one wants that and no one wants it to be the case that all of our international students are able to pay the full fee.

The way to avoid either of those outcomes is to use intelligently some form of need-awareness for international applicants. This does not mean going back to the two-pool system in place before the Class of 2006. It also does not mean that the Financial Aid Office will compute the need of each international aid applicant and the Admission Office will then admit the most desirable international applicants until the aid runs out.

The Admission Office will know which applicants have applied for aid, as it does now, but will not know the level of each applicant’s need. The office will then look at the international pool as a whole and aim to build an entering cohort that is not only academically strong but that is geographically and economically diverse and that in terms of aid approximates a rough dollar target that will begin where it is now and grow over the years at a rate slower than it has been. This new system should result in entering cohorts of international students that roughly resemble the one that we are blessed with now and at a rate of cost increase that is sustainable. When four classes have been admitted this way the increase in our international aid budget should be about $1.2 million less than it would have been. We do not expect this change to affect dramatically the pool of international applicants, which is extremely strong.

I understand how unsettling it is for many members of our community to have to contemplate altering our aid practices somewhat. Even with the changes we have adopted, however, the system by which Williams determines how much to charge aided families will still be among the most generous in the history of higher education, as it should be, and among the most amazing anywhere in the broad economy. And we will continue to serve and to benefit from a wonderful and diverse community of students.

With regards,

Bill Wagner

Interim President