Scarcity of "elite college" slots in US relative to other countries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting piece in Jeff Selingo's newsletter. But I don't see US elite colleges increasing their supply, so it's a bit of a moot point.

On a day when early-decision applications are due at many selective institutions, it’s important to remember one reason why these colleges remain “highly rejective” is because they choose to keep their freshman classes small.

As Olivia Roark reports, the five top-ranked universities in the U.S. News & World Report rankings—Princeton, MIT, Harvard, Stanford and Yale—enroll about 6,400 freshmen in total each year and 32,000 undergrads in all.

In the rest of the world, including Brazil, South Africa, and Canada, the top 5 universities have 100,000+ undergrads.



What’s happening: Applications to selective colleges have jumped during the pandemic when most of the institutions dropped their testing requirements for admissions. But institutions didn’t expand their incoming classes; they just rejected more students.

—Then two events this past summer put more pressure on selective colleges to either expand or rethink who they’re admitting.

First was the Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions.

Second was the release of a report by economists showing wealthy applicants get into Ivy-plus schools at a higher rate than everyone else with the same SAT/ACT scores.
View from the north: The top-ranked universities in Canada enroll way many more undergrads than those in the U.S.

To fill the undergraduate seats at the five top-ranked universities in Canada with students from highly ranked U.S. institutions, you would basically need the undergrad population from the top 25 national universities in the U.S. News rankings.

—In many ways, the U.S. is more like India. The top five Indian universities on the U.S. News Best Global Universities list enroll roughly 15,000 students. The institutions in India are astoundingly small for a country of 1.4 billion people.

The top 5 approach makes it easy for the person doing the analysis but is really silly for looking at the U.S. education system. There are at least 30 or 40 universities here that are great and programs classes that are roughly on par with what HYPSM provide.

Not sure I get this approach. U.S. population is about 10X the size of Canada. I would argue another way of looking at this is that the U.S. should have 10X the number of schools that are at the top 5 level in Canada rather than expecting them all to be stuffed into the top 5 in the U.S., whatever that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting piece in Jeff Selingo's newsletter. But I don't see US elite colleges increasing their supply, so it's a bit of a moot point.

On a day when early-decision applications are due at many selective institutions, it’s important to remember one reason why these colleges remain “highly rejective” is because they choose to keep their freshman classes small.

As Olivia Roark reports, the five top-ranked universities in the U.S. News & World Report rankings—Princeton, MIT, Harvard, Stanford and Yale—enroll about 6,400 freshmen in total each year and 32,000 undergrads in all.

In the rest of the world, including Brazil, South Africa, and Canada, the top 5 universities have 100,000+ undergrads.



What’s happening: Applications to selective colleges have jumped during the pandemic when most of the institutions dropped their testing requirements for admissions. But institutions didn’t expand their incoming classes; they just rejected more students.

—Then two events this past summer put more pressure on selective colleges to either expand or rethink who they’re admitting.

First was the Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions.

Second was the release of a report by economists showing wealthy applicants get into Ivy-plus schools at a higher rate than everyone else with the same SAT/ACT scores.
View from the north: The top-ranked universities in Canada enroll way many more undergrads than those in the U.S.

To fill the undergraduate seats at the five top-ranked universities in Canada with students from highly ranked U.S. institutions, you would basically need the undergrad population from the top 25 national universities in the U.S. News rankings.

—In many ways, the U.S. is more like India. The top five Indian universities on the U.S. News Best Global Universities list enroll roughly 15,000 students. The institutions in India are astoundingly small for a country of 1.4 billion people.

The top 5 approach makes it easy for the person doing the analysis but is really silly for looking at the U.S. education system. There are at least 30 or 40 universities here that are great and programs classes that are roughly on par with what HYPSM provide.

Not sure I get this approach. U.S. population is about 10X the size of Canada. I would argue another way of looking at this is that the U.S. should have 10X the number of schools that are at the top 5 level in Canada rather than expecting them all to be stuffed into the top 5 in the U.S., whatever that is.

Honestly we probably do. Many of the schools in the 50/60/70s in ranking are very good schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting piece in Jeff Selingo's newsletter. But I don't see US elite colleges increasing their supply, so it's a bit of a moot point.

On a day when early-decision applications are due at many selective institutions, it’s important to remember one reason why these colleges remain “highly rejective” is because they choose to keep their freshman classes small.

As Olivia Roark reports, the five top-ranked universities in the U.S. News & World Report rankings—Princeton, MIT, Harvard, Stanford and Yale—enroll about 6,400 freshmen in total each year and 32,000 undergrads in all.

In the rest of the world, including Brazil, South Africa, and Canada, the top 5 universities have 100,000+ undergrads.



What’s happening: Applications to selective colleges have jumped during the pandemic when most of the institutions dropped their testing requirements for admissions. But institutions didn’t expand their incoming classes; they just rejected more students.

—Then two events this past summer put more pressure on selective colleges to either expand or rethink who they’re admitting.

First was the Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions.

Second was the release of a report by economists showing wealthy applicants get into Ivy-plus schools at a higher rate than everyone else with the same SAT/ACT scores.
View from the north: The top-ranked universities in Canada enroll way many more undergrads than those in the U.S.

To fill the undergraduate seats at the five top-ranked universities in Canada with students from highly ranked U.S. institutions, you would basically need the undergrad population from the top 25 national universities in the U.S. News rankings.

—In many ways, the U.S. is more like India. The top five Indian universities on the U.S. News Best Global Universities list enroll roughly 15,000 students. The institutions in India are astoundingly small for a country of 1.4 billion people.

The top 5 approach makes it easy for the person doing the analysis but is really silly for looking at the U.S. education system. There are at least 30 or 40 universities here that are great and programs classes that are roughly on par with what HYPSM provide.

Not sure I get this approach. U.S. population is about 10X the size of Canada. I would argue another way of looking at this is that the U.S. should have 10X the number of schools that are at the top 5 level in Canada rather than expecting them all to be stuffed into the top 5 in the U.S., whatever that is.

Honestly we probably do. Many of the schools in the 50/60/70s in ranking are very good schools.

Yup!

If people would just step back and recognize this. Heck even most of the T100 (with 70-100 still being very good schools with lots of really smart kids) And anyone with a 1500+/3.7+UW should get into almost any they apply to in the 40-100 range. There are even many in those where CS/Business/Eng are NOT impacted majors (ie everyone who wants to major in it can, as long as they get a C or better in the beginning courses).

Once you recognize this, applying to college is just as simple as it is in Canada. And as affordable too, because many from 50-100 will give your 1500+ kid amazing merit as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting piece in Jeff Selingo's newsletter. But I don't see US elite colleges increasing their supply, so it's a bit of a moot point.

On a day when early-decision applications are due at many selective institutions, it’s important to remember one reason why these colleges remain “highly rejective” is because they choose to keep their freshman classes small.

As Olivia Roark reports, the five top-ranked universities in the U.S. News & World Report rankings—Princeton, MIT, Harvard, Stanford and Yale—enroll about 6,400 freshmen in total each year and 32,000 undergrads in all.

In the rest of the world, including Brazil, South Africa, and Canada, the top 5 universities have 100,000+ undergrads.



What’s happening: Applications to selective colleges have jumped during the pandemic when most of the institutions dropped their testing requirements for admissions. But institutions didn’t expand their incoming classes; they just rejected more students.

—Then two events this past summer put more pressure on selective colleges to either expand or rethink who they’re admitting.

First was the Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions.

Second was the release of a report by economists showing wealthy applicants get into Ivy-plus schools at a higher rate than everyone else with the same SAT/ACT scores.
View from the north: The top-ranked universities in Canada enroll way many more undergrads than those in the U.S.

To fill the undergraduate seats at the five top-ranked universities in Canada with students from highly ranked U.S. institutions, you would basically need the undergrad population from the top 25 national universities in the U.S. News rankings.

—In many ways, the U.S. is more like India. The top five Indian universities on the U.S. News Best Global Universities list enroll roughly 15,000 students. The institutions in India are astoundingly small for a country of 1.4 billion people.

The top 5 approach makes it easy for the person doing the analysis but is really silly for looking at the U.S. education system. There are at least 30 or 40 universities here that are great and programs classes that are roughly on par with what HYPSM provide.

Not sure I get this approach. U.S. population is about 10X the size of Canada. I would argue another way of looking at this is that the U.S. should have 10X the number of schools that are at the top 5 level in Canada rather than expecting them all to be stuffed into the top 5 in the U.S., whatever that is.

Honestly we probably do. Many of the schools in the 50/60/70s in ranking are very good schools.

Yup!

If people would just step back and recognize this. Heck even most of the T100 (with 70-100 still being very good schools with lots of really smart kids) And anyone with a 1500+/3.7+UW should get into almost any they apply to in the 40-100 range. There are even many in those where CS/Business/Eng are NOT impacted majors (ie everyone who wants to major in it can, as long as they get a C or better in the beginning courses).

Once you recognize this, applying to college is just as simple as it is in Canada. And as affordable too, because many from 50-100 will give your 1500+ kid amazing merit as well.

1500+ puts you in the 99th %ile. Why don't we focus on some more realistic metrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting piece in Jeff Selingo's newsletter. But I don't see US elite colleges increasing their supply, so it's a bit of a moot point.

On a day when early-decision applications are due at many selective institutions, it’s important to remember one reason why these colleges remain “highly rejective” is because they choose to keep their freshman classes small.

As Olivia Roark reports, the five top-ranked universities in the U.S. News & World Report rankings—Princeton, MIT, Harvard, Stanford and Yale—enroll about 6,400 freshmen in total each year and 32,000 undergrads in all.

In the rest of the world, including Brazil, South Africa, and Canada, the top 5 universities have 100,000+ undergrads.



What’s happening: Applications to selective colleges have jumped during the pandemic when most of the institutions dropped their testing requirements for admissions. But institutions didn’t expand their incoming classes; they just rejected more students.

—Then two events this past summer put more pressure on selective colleges to either expand or rethink who they’re admitting.

First was the Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions.

Second was the release of a report by economists showing wealthy applicants get into Ivy-plus schools at a higher rate than everyone else with the same SAT/ACT scores.
View from the north: The top-ranked universities in Canada enroll way many more undergrads than those in the U.S.

To fill the undergraduate seats at the five top-ranked universities in Canada with students from highly ranked U.S. institutions, you would basically need the undergrad population from the top 25 national universities in the U.S. News rankings.

—In many ways, the U.S. is more like India. The top five Indian universities on the U.S. News Best Global Universities list enroll roughly 15,000 students. The institutions in India are astoundingly small for a country of 1.4 billion people.

The top 5 approach makes it easy for the person doing the analysis but is really silly for looking at the U.S. education system. There are at least 30 or 40 universities here that are great and programs classes that are roughly on par with what HYPSM provide.

Not sure I get this approach. U.S. population is about 10X the size of Canada. I would argue another way of looking at this is that the U.S. should have 10X the number of schools that are at the top 5 level in Canada rather than expecting them all to be stuffed into the top 5 in the U.S., whatever that is.

Honestly we probably do. Many of the schools in the 50/60/70s in ranking are very good schools.

Yup!

If people would just step back and recognize this. Heck even most of the T100 (with 70-100 still being very good schools with lots of really smart kids) And anyone with a 1500+/3.7+UW should get into almost any they apply to in the 40-100 range. There are even many in those where CS/Business/Eng are NOT impacted majors (ie everyone who wants to major in it can, as long as they get a C or better in the beginning courses).

Once you recognize this, applying to college is just as simple as it is in Canada. And as affordable too, because many from 50-100 will give your 1500+ kid amazing merit as well.

1500+ puts you in the 99th %ile. Why don't we focus on some more realistic metrics.

Simply because those are the metrics kids have that people on DCUM are complaining there is a scarcity of "elite schools" for them to attend. Pointing out that kids with those stats will get in many excellent schools.

Also, many in the 60-100 range are easily attainable for someone in the 1250-1300/3.5UW gpa. My own kid got into 6 of those, 4 of the 6 with excellent merit (the other 2 were state schools and they don't give merit and certainly not to OOS students with those stats).

[Anonymous]

Haven’t read through the thread, but Yale actually expanded undergrad access over the past 8-10years by adding two new residential colleges. I am not sure when was the last time that the other top schools tried to widen access.

https://news.yale.edu/2017/08/23/first-students-be-welcomed-two-new-residential-colleges-week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"They choose to keep their freshman classes small."

Yet when a college with a finite campus expands with satellite options (Northeastern), we lose our minds.

Some top schools could expand if they tossed up new dorms and made classes bigger, but the experience wouldn't be the same.

If more people expanded the idea of what "elite" was, they might include more of the big state universities that definitely have room for their kid.

That’s exactly the issue: these colleges are more concerned with maintaining their “experience” and cache than they are about expanding access.

As they should be. Why should Harvard or MIT be concerned with expanding access? If they expanded they would loose their appeal. They are not state universities, they are private universities who get to choose how they run their business.

They all take millions of government dollars, both directly and indirectly, so yes we get to tell them how to run their business.

Not how it works.

Actually it does work that way. If they want to get research dollars from the feds.

Contact your rep in congress. “I pay taxes that fund university research, and Yale still didn’t take my kid. There oughta be a law!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read through the thread, but Yale actually expanded undergrad access over the past 8-10years by adding two new residential colleges. I am not sure when was the last time that the other top schools tried to widen access.

https://news.yale.edu/2017/08/23/first-students-be-welcomed-two-new-residential-colleges-week

Didn’t Princeton recently expand?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read through the thread, but Yale actually expanded undergrad access over the past 8-10years by adding two new residential colleges. I am not sure when was the last time that the other top schools tried to widen access.

https://news.yale.edu/2017/08/23/first-students-be-welcomed-two-new-residential-colleges-week

Didn’t Princeton recently expand?

Yes, but the entire Ivy league barely has more undergraduates than Texas A&M.