Admission to Selective Colleges in 1989
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/1989/11/19/do-you-have-what-it-takes/eeddc744-f24c-4e92-a6a3-517807f3c41e/
"Moreover, some 90 percent of college applicants get into either their first- or second-choice school, according to the American Council on Education. But for a small group of colleges and universities -- perhaps 40 at most -- considered the tops in the nation, the competition is fierce. Selective institutions have always been difficult to get into. But in the last decade or so, with so many academically qualified candidates to choose from, admissions officers acknowledge that many decisions are based on other factors: race, geography, alumni connections, talents, special interests and personality. The process is perplexing for students and parents who have assumed that a stellar academic record and high SAT scores are all that is necessary to ensure acceptance by the prestigious college of their choice. The admissions process itself is grueling for students and college admissions officers alike. " I did not really remember it that way (having attended a selective school mentioned in the article). The trends identified in the article have accelerated so that the selectivity has continued to increase (eg Stanford at the time admitted ~18%). Also, the number of "selective schools" has expanded. But otherwise, you could imagine the article being written this year instead of 1989. |
Anonymous
|
Globalization (ie., competition from well-to-do foreign students), more of the middle and working classes attending college, more women in college, etc.
The number of universities and number of seats in elite colleges have not kept up with the rising supply of students. |
Anonymous
| In 1989, DH got into 4 schools on the T15 universities list, including Stanford; 2 on the T5 LAC list; and 2 on the T5 public universities list. Of course he would have adjusted to today's more competitive environment - and would have probably gotten a bit of a boost for geographic diversity as well as legacy from where he ultimately enrolled - but strongly doubt he would have gotten this kind of a sweep today. |
Anonymous
| Sounds like he was full-pay, too. |
Anonymous
| My sister got into Vanderbilt with an 1100 on the SAT's. Those were the days. Can you even imagine that now? |
Anonymous
|
I applied to 4 schools: Duke, Davison, WFU and UNC (as an NC resident). Got into all 4, and it never occurred to me I wouldn’t. 2 with full rides. UNC was the safety. Crappy NC ruralHS. 2 APs and 1 DE Mid 1400 SAT.
SMH. My kids have gone so much further than me academically, and all 4 of these schools would be reaches for them. |
Anonymous
| It is so very different today. |
Anonymous
+1000 |
Anonymous
It depends on the family. We're not full pay, so need blind with needs being met through grants make no a much better time |
Anonymous
|
In 1989 my best friend in HS was a straight A student in top classes, STEM, Humanities and Arts. She had almost a perfect score on her SATs.
Her college applications went out to 9 places including Ivies and high ranking California colleges. She was rejected from everywhere except her safety, BU. And that's where she went. |
Anonymous
| In 1989 I got rejected from Yale, Princeton and Williams with a straight A average, 1390 SAT and at top prep school. So yes, it was tough then too. |
Anonymous
The SAT used a 2400 point scale in 1989 and that would be equivalent to a 1000 on the current sat you’re not smart enough to create a believable lie |
Anonymous
Um I took it in 1988 and it was a 1600 scale |
Anonymous
And it didn't change to 2400 until 2005 dude |
Anonymous
No it didn't. |