"Need-Blind" and "Need-Aware" College Admissions

"The Choice," the college admissions column at the New York Times, recently ran an article on Hamilton College's decision to move to "need-blind" admissions. Hamilton, in other words, will no longer consider a student's ability to pay as part of the admissions decision. The college will cover the added financial aid costs associated with "need-blind" admissions through a gift from trustees and a fund-raising campaign. A representative from the college noted that the college will continue to meet the full demonstrated need of every admitted student.

I imagine most of us would agree that this is a move in a positive direction. After all, should a student's financial situation prevent him or her from attending a good college? And doesn't the privileging of wealth go against the educational ideals of most colleges?

"Need-aware" admissions, however, can sometimes be more humane than "need-blind." All colleges have finite financial aid resources. If a college with "need-blind" admissions runs out of financial aid dollars before meeting students' financial needs, the results can be ugly. Students and their families may find themselves in a position where they have to take on an unreasonable and unwise amount of debt to pay for college. Many "need-aware" schools will argue that it is a better policy to meet the financial needs of all incoming students than to provide financial aid packages that fall far short of what students can realistically pay.

Share your thoughts on this controversial issue below. Should all colleges have "need-blind" admissions, or only those like Hamilton that can afford to meet the financial needs of all accepted students?