"We want to ensure that no student admitted to Princeton feels that he or she cannot attend because it would present a financial hardship," said Princeton President Harold T. Shapiro. "We have made all of [these] improvements with that goal in mind."
Amherst made a similar, though less fiscally substantial, decision last year when the Board of Trustees voted to eliminate loans for low-income students, or students who come from families with a combined two-parent income below $32,000.
"We made a significant move in removing the loan burden," Dean of Financial Aid Joe Paul Case said of last year's decision. "Student borrowing between last and this year has been more than cut in half."
Case added that Princeton's move may have had to do with their "effort to be more socio-economically diverse," since Princeton currently provides only 40 percent of its student body with financial aid. "They're second lowest in the Ivy League and certainly below our 45 percent," Case said.
Dean of Admission Tom Parker emphasized that Amherst was not going to go right out and jump on the bandwagon.
"What Princeton does is not going to have any impact on what we do," he said. "It's not as if we're suddenly going to lose some students to Princeton that we would not otherwise have lost. We were kind of ahead of the game anyway because we don't require loans from low-income students."
"It is not a huge number that we're pulling away from Princeton as it stands," said President Tom Gerety.
Case said that Princeton's announcement "challenged other institutions-notably Harvard, Yale and Stanford-to stand up and make some adjustments."
"What's going to happen, I think, is almost axiomatic. I think Yale and Harvard are going to do what Princeton has done, which will have no great effect," said Parker. "If any of our core competitors-Dartmouth, Williams, Swarthmore, Columbia, Duke, Brown-did it, that in fact would pose a threat because the students who come here over those schools do it generally for pretty small reasons."
Even if Amherst's direct competitors do not follow Princeton's lead, the Princeton decision inevitably brings to light the feasibility of Amherst making such a move.
"We could do it if we had to," Assosiciate Treasurer Peter Shea said of Amherst's fiscal ability to eliminate loans.
Gerety estimated that it would cost Amherst an additional $1.3 million per year to completely eliminate loans.
Shea emphasized that Amherst would be at a significant disadvantage as compared to Princeton in making such a large financial committment. "Princeton's endowment is, on a per student basis, three times the size of ours," he said.
The situation could pose a particularly grim scenario for schools with endowments even lower than Amherst's. "I'm somewhat alarmed that, as the very wealthiest institutions escalate these financial aid policies, it makes it more and more difficult for the rest of us . . . to play on the same playing field," said Wesleyan Senior Associate Dean of Admissions Gregory Pyke.
Gerety said that part of the difficulty in making a change would be projecting the long-term financial impact on the College. "Where are we headed in 20 years?" he asked.
"The financial aid budget has been one of our most difficult to predict," Gerety added. "As soon as you change your policy on it, it changes people's behavior."
For example, Gerety explained that there has been a significant jump in the need base of the incoming class since the College moved to eliminate loans for low-income students last year, dedicating a $900,000 annual expenditure toward it at that time.
Gerety added, however, that there was certainly more to the decision than the cost. "It's not just feasibility in terms of wealth," he said.
"Princeton has done something that is in some sense morally right," said Gerety, adding, however, that in this case, "your moral commitments require wealth."
Gerety said that Amherst would also have to consider the impact that Princeton's decision would have on the appearance of Amherst as an institution. "My job is to make sure the College is a good and better place. Part of good and better is prestige relative to Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Stanford," he said. "I think we'll have to look at it competitively, as well as morally."
Parker explained that Princeton already has to fight certain stereotypes that many students harbor.
"Princeton is in a bit of a hole because they are perceived to a much greater degree than Amherst and others as a school for the wealthy," said Parker. "That shows up in the accepted students' questionare."
"They have a lower percentage of students on aid, and we have higher percentage of students of color, too," added Parker. "Right now, we're in really good shape."
Ashley Simonsen contributed to this article.