Brown wouldn't be the same without its vibrant transfer community, a group that brings a unique perspective - that of another college - to the University's already diverse student body.
The transfer success story is a common one at Brown, but that seems largely the result of individual students' efforts to make their Brown experience what they want it to be - in spite of sometimes being treated by the University as second-class students. Financial aid and orientation programs are substantially less robust for transfers than for traditional first-year students coming to College Hill.
Of course, no one is satisfied with Brown's "need-aware" admission policy for transfer students. But procuring funds to supply a more equitable admissions policy isn't easy: Brown only switched to need-blind admission for its regular applicant pool when President Ruth Simmons arrived on College Hill.
To that end, the Corporation pledged $1 million to bolster transfer aid, which was allocated from the University budget in installations over the course of three years. But this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Need-blind financial aid for transfer students should be the University's ultimate goal, and there are other improvements that can be made in the meantime to the financial aid application process for transfers.
First among these changes should be the loan bracket placement of aid-seeking transfers. Currently, transfer students applying for financial aid are placed automatically in the highest loan bracket, regardless of their actual household income. When transfer students are placed on the waiting list for financial aid, they must make decisions about whether to attend Brown without knowing how their education will be paid for.
And if transfers don't receive aid their first year - either because they didn't apply or because they didn't get off the aid waiting list - they're not eligible to apply for scholarship aid in subsequent years.
On top of all that, transfers interviewed by The Herald expressed general frustration with the Office of Financial Aid. One student expressed "the impression that this policy seems hidden under many layers of bureaucracy." That some transfer applicants were unaware of the implications of the "need-aware" policy (a cryptic term, indeed) is not only troubling but simply disingenuous on the part of the administration.
Transfers are often unfairly squeezed into the machinery of Brown, and their numbers have fluctuated wildly in recent years. According to Dean of Admission Jim Miller '73, there were nearly 60 new transfer students this semester, up from just 22 last fall.
The University needs a more transparent, straightforward - and ultimately, when funds have been secured, fairer - method of dealing with transfer students' requests for financial aid and helping them transition to life at Brown. With equal financial footing and a thorough introduction to College Hill, transfer students will be in a better position than ever before to make the best of their Brown experience.
