small fixes to make this process more sane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want to make things saner, do the following:

1. Get rid of Test Optional. A school should either require the test or be test blind. TO all of a sudden makes a school's average SAT score a 1550 when it was 1470 the year before TO came into existence. So much stress and strategizing over whether to submit or not;

2. Make every kid check a box Yes or No...did you use a college counselor or any 3rd party help outside of your family or school. If you check Yes, your application will be subject to a more stringent standard. This would decimate the 3rd party college counseling business and make it more sane for all. Sure, some people may lie and click No, but they could say they conduct random audits (even if they don't);

3. Same disclaimer for any NPOs or businesses that the kid claims to have founded on their own. Your application will be subject to a random audit where the AO will ask pointed questions on how you incorporated it, why did you have to create it (vs. volunteer or work at an established company), how did you create the Board, what is your transition strategy when you get to college, etc.

Those are my 3 suggestions.

+1 to number one. I think it's crazy - at my kids' college the average SAT is crazy high, meanwhile on the parent facebook page, there are a million kids struggling in pre-calculus- that means many didn't have the SAT or AP score to pass out of PC, let alone calculus, but also it looks like every kid got a 750 on math SAT, which just cannot be true.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to see kids use PSAT instead of SAT. I disliked the decision making around SAT - how to get a seat, when, how often. And how it just lingers for a full year. There's alway the ACT if people didn't like the PSAT score, but in a largely TO world, I think the PSAT/SAT should move to be more like an AP exam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

Unless the consumers (or government) demand better. the CDS didn't come about til the Obama admin made it happen.

I dislike fatalism in general, but in areas that impact kids I especially dislike it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

there are no studies that pull out athlete donor legacy .. by school. if you have one, I'd love to see a link

Did you google the book I listed by name?

[Anonymous]

Who the hell is applying to more than 20 schools??? I can't imagine that number is that high.

Most kids at our school top out at around 8-10.

[Anonymous]

I think/hope states will put money into their flagships, make admissions clear, and tuition very low.

Look for more programs where state gives you a 20k loan that pays for half your 4 year degree and that loan is forgiven after 10 years if you do x or y or z.

Going to your state school should be the default for smart kids.

to make this happen, I think public schools will move away from giving FA to undocumented students

[Anonymous]

You’re opting into applying to the most popular schools.

This ain’t “crazy” if you stop letting the hype tell you that there are only a few schools worth going to.

[Anonymous]

If everyone would stop submitting the SAT when it’s optional, the colleges couldn’t use it.

But most will cry about how stressful and unfair it is, but make their kid do it anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

there are no studies that pull out athlete donor legacy .. by school. if you have one, I'd love to see a link

Did you google the book I listed by name?

that book that relies on 1999 stats from Yale that had no athletic/donor/legacy data? yeah, I googled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

That admission rate for ED is generally higher, but if you separate out unhooked from hooked applicants, ED makes no didference at all.

That is in direct conflict to studies that have been done, in addition to being anti-common sense.

I'll do the work for y'all I guess:

https://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-chapter/dp/0674016203

This book―based on the careful examination of more than 500,000 college applications to fourteen elite colleges and hundreds of interviews with students, counselors, and admissions officers―provides an extraordinarily thorough analysis of early admissions. In clear language it details the advantages and pitfalls of applying early as it provides a map for students and parents to navigate the process. Unlike college admissions guides, The Early Admissions Game reveals the realities of early applications, how they work and what effects they have. The authors frankly assess early applications. Applying early is not for everyone, but it will improve―sometimes double, even triple―the chances of being admitted to a prestigious college.

Their research is unequivocal; applying Early Action (EA) is the equivalent of a 100-point boost in SAT score. While applying Early Decision (ED) is the equivalent of a 150 + point boost in SAT score.

Most of the selective schools that use these programs refute this evidence. They argue that the pool of students who apply early is much stronger, and that is why the acceptance rates are higher. But, the authors' research strongly rebuts this. To the contrary, they found there is very little difference between the early applicants and the regular ones. They actually found that EA applicants were slightly stronger. But, that ED was slightly weaker.

I could go on...

ED definitely benefits the college more than the student, but absolutely offers a boost to the applicant. This is especially true for need-aware colleges.

Run the NPC and see if the college is affordable. If it is, and the college is a clear first choice, you should apply ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

there are no studies that pull out athlete donor legacy .. by school. if you have one, I'd love to see a link

Did you google the book I listed by name?

that book that relies on 1999 stats from Yale that had no athletic/donor/legacy data? yeah, I googled.

Well then you didn't read it. I sure did. And the data was from way more than Yale, there were 500,000 applications analyzed by two admin professionals and an economist.

Why are you lying?

Is it because you said there was never a study done without that data and then you were shown one?

This is when an honest interlocutor says "mea culpa".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

That admission rate for ED is generally higher, but if you separate out unhooked from hooked applicants, ED makes no didference at all.

That is in direct conflict to studies that have been done, in addition to being anti-common sense.

I'll do the work for y'all I guess:

https://www.amazon.com/Early-Admissions-Game-Joining-chapter/dp/0674016203

This book―based on the careful examination of more than 500,000 college applications to fourteen elite colleges and hundreds of interviews with students, counselors, and admissions officers―provides an extraordinarily thorough analysis of early admissions. In clear language it details the advantages and pitfalls of applying early as it provides a map for students and parents to navigate the process. Unlike college admissions guides, The Early Admissions Game reveals the realities of early applications, how they work and what effects they have. The authors frankly assess early applications. Applying early is not for everyone, but it will improve―sometimes double, even triple―the chances of being admitted to a prestigious college.

Their research is unequivocal; applying Early Action (EA) is the equivalent of a 100-point boost in SAT score. While applying Early Decision (ED) is the equivalent of a 150 + point boost in SAT score.

Most of the selective schools that use these programs refute this evidence. They argue that the pool of students who apply early is much stronger, and that is why the acceptance rates are higher. But, the authors' research strongly rebuts this. To the contrary, they found there is very little difference between the early applicants and the regular ones. They actually found that EA applicants were slightly stronger. But, that ED was slightly weaker.

I could go on...

ED definitely benefits the college more than the student, but absolutely offers a boost to the applicant. This is especially true for need-aware colleges.

Run the NPC and see if the college is affordable. If it is, and the college is a clear first choice, you should apply ED.

the most recent review (2019):
"This book is outdated by many years."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

there are no studies that pull out athlete donor legacy .. by school. if you have one, I'd love to see a link

Did you google the book I listed by name?

that book that relies on 1999 stats from Yale that had no athletic/donor/legacy data? yeah, I googled.

Well then you didn't read it. I sure did. And the data was from way more than Yale, there were 500,000 applications analyzed by two admin professionals and an economist.

Why are you lying?

Is it because you said there was never a study done without that data and then you were shown one?

This is when an honest interlocutor says "mea culpa".

it was published in 2004. sorry, but this is not relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The process is crazy. And the kids are suffering. I sometimes wish there was more groundswell for small fixes.

Would you agree to any of these? Or something else?

You can't apply to more than 20 schools via common app.

or

You can't sit for SAT or ACT more than twice (each, if you must). Nobody is up in arms that you can't take the AP exam over and over. you take it, if it's good you include it. if not, you move on. I know seniors who are waiting for scores from their Oct exam to see if they should include in their ED. These are kids who took it several times in Junior year. It's too much. I'd really be fine with a one and done SAT. or just use PSAT data.

or

Colleges must disclose Athlete and Legacy numbers in their ED data. I don't think ED is as beneficial for unhooked kids as we've been led to believe. But kids think they have to play this game

Sorry to criticize as I know you have good intentions, but none of your suggestions make anything better.

- As pointed out above, the first is already true
- The second would create more stress than the alternative. No one is forced to take it many times. How would removing the option from kids who think they can improve help anyone?
- Every study that has ever been done shows that ED is a massive boost at most colleges (although it may vary by college). Read books like The Early Admissions Game, or others. ED benefits kids who have a clear first choice, although everyone knows it benefits the college more.

Everyone knows this is a difficult process. Maybe it should be. The fact remains that if there was "a better way", the colleges would adopt it. You can't expect them to not act in a way that is not in their interest.

there are no studies that pull out athlete donor legacy .. by school. if you have one, I'd love to see a link

Did you google the book I listed by name?

that book that relies on 1999 stats from Yale that had no athletic/donor/legacy data? yeah, I googled.

Well then you didn't read it. I sure did. And the data was from way more than Yale, there were 500,000 applications analyzed by two admin professionals and an economist.

Why are you lying?

Is it because you said there was never a study done without that data and then you were shown one?

This is when an honest interlocutor says "mea culpa".

it was published in 2004. sorry, but this is not relevant.

So you have just made the claim that ED has changed since 2004.

What evidence do you have to support that claim, and how does it invalidate the data? You know the same claims you are making were made back then. The authors talk about that in the book you haven't read. That's why they did the study and wrote the book!

Also, you are moving the goalposts from "there never was as study" to "the study done is too old".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Craziness is all parent driven. I don't think any of your suggestions would improve the process at selective schools. There is more demand (both US & Int'l) than seats. There are thousands of colleges in the universities in the US. The vast majority are not selective.

As the parent of a child who's about driven me nuts for the last year, I call bs. Wanting to attend a selective school is ALL him. I applied to a handful of safeties in my time. I've begged him to consider doing the same. He's reaching, not me.

NP. I agree that sometimes kids are just different than their parents. But parents can play a huge role in shaping their child's values. Why does your son value a selective school? Is it his peer group? How did he end up with that peer group?

At my child's school I notice a lot of parents pushing over the years and then, when their Junior year child is a ball of stress, they try to back off and/or they complain about "the system". It's too late by then. The child has internalized every lesson along the way: why they need to be in a good school system, why they need good grades, why they need to keep doing the extra curriculars they don't like, why they need to continually climb up the ladder in the extra curriculars they do like, why they should have certain friends, why they should take certain classes, why they need to visit colleges, why they need to test prep. You can't shift gears right at the end and expect your kid to go alone.

And by you, I mean parents. Obviously I don't know your specific circumstance or what you have or have not done.