Can you remind me why my DC will not get into the same schools I did?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More people are going to college now but schools are the same size

This is actually very much not true...there are over 1 million fewer college students today vs. 10 years ago. Demographics and affordability will continue to drive this lower.

Of course, none of this matters for the T50 schools, but smaller, low-ranked colleges especially in the Northeast are dying.

[Anonymous]

I think also changes in financial aid policies at the very top schools (no loans) have radically increased apps by making the schools accessible to kids who would never have applied twenty years ago because of cost. It also raises the stakes for families that can afford those but not schools one tier down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The first page of this essay explains it pretty well.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/

OP here - thanks for this. I have bookmarked it to read the remaining pages. The first page indicates it is due to increasing HS graduates, and this Brookings article suggests that is due to NCLB increasing accountability. But then, that means the incremental graduates are marginal/low performing, and likely not in the application pool for HYPSM. So it must be due to the increase in international applicants and increase in number of apps per student?

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2020/03/02/are-americas-rising-high-school-graduation-rates-real-or-just-an-accountability-fueled-mirage/amp/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The old folks have been complaining about this process since at least the early 1960s, when Yale folded the then-less-competitive school of engineering into the school of arts and sciences. OP benefitted from a system that put less and less weight on ancestry and more and more weight on academic achievement and then — what? expected that process to stop at the exact point where it would most benefit their family forever? That’s not how a one-way ratchet works.

This. Read fiction from the early 20th century and the talk about going to Princeton to take the entrance exam and then enrolling or not knowing what to do after boarding school and then going to Harvard. The Ivy league used to be the preserve of the wealthy, then some time post WWII, academics started to really matter. We've gotten to the point where, unless you are slap your name on a new dorm wealthy, academics trump almost everything else and, thanks to financial aid, money is no longer a real barrier to entry.

OP here. I don’t think this is true now, nor was it true when I applied 15 years ago. Most of these schools claim they can easily fill a class with valedictorians or perfect SAT scores, but choose not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a sad statement that a HYPSM grad can’t puzzle out the math on this.

LOL - my thoughts too. You should be bright enough to read a single article (or another DCUM thread) and understand it. My thoughts are you are just trying to stir things up - or are just disappointed that somehow your kids don't have a golden ticket. Have solace that they do still have a legacy nudge IF they happen to end up at the top of their class (or if you are VIP and legacy they won't need to be at the top of their class).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:(HYPSM)

Even if they are as intelligent and hard-working as I was?

Acceptancd rates are halved from 10% when I applied to 5% now. Can you remind me why that is?

Sorry, I’ve been out of college for 15 years and now have ES kids and don’t understand why it is so much more competitive all of a sudden.

Here is the answer in a nutshell:

1. The top schools stopped expanding their class sizes in the late 1980s, whereas they had expanded their freshmen classes nearly every year prior since the 1950s. Therefore, there are nearly the same number of graduates from the T20 today as 30 years ago;
2. The number of HS seniors available to apply has grown quite a bit over the last 40 years...we are now at the point where the HS population in the US is actually declining and will decline for the foreseeable future...it likely has peaked unless there is a miraculous turnaround in birth rates which is unlikely to happen (as PP mentioned...the number of kids going to college is actually significantly lower today vs. 10 years ago)
3. The internet and the Common App made it much easier to apply to college. Back in the hand-typed days there is no way you would apply to more than 5-6 schools...now it is fairly easy to apply to 20+ schools...so the theaverage number of applications per HS student increased significantly;
4. TO created a whole new group of kids applying to the top schools that honestly would never have tried previously based on their ACT/SAT score;
5. Schools exacerbate all this because they know their low acceptance rates convey prestige, so they really try to juice their applicant pool to then produce even lower acceptance rates;
6. Schools aggressively started courting international students who are mainly full pay...this again created additional competition;
7. In a sad commentary on how %ages work...many kids look at a 7% acceptance rate and think "well, if I apply to 13 schools, that means I will get accepted to 1"...it is crazy at the privates and top publics around here to hear of all the kids that are now desperately completing their application to ever Ivy-league school...which is almost guarnteeing they will get accepted at exactly zero of those schools because those applications are fairly involved and there is no chance those kids are giving each application the thought, time and attention they require

So...there you have it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first page of this essay explains it pretty well.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/

OP here - thanks for this. I have bookmarked it to read the remaining pages. The first page indicates it is due to increasing HS graduates, and this Brookings article suggests that is due to NCLB increasing accountability. But then, that means the incremental graduates are marginal/low performing, and likely not in the application pool for HYPSM. So it must be due to the increase in international applicants and increase in number of apps per student?

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2020/03/02/are-americas-rising-high-school-graduation-rates-real-or-just-an-accountability-fueled-mirage/amp/

Yeah, I think somewhere else on that site it mentions increases in numbers of apps per student and international students, too, but I might be conflating that with another article I read somewhere. It's probably a combination of a lot of factors, but mainly increase in # of students and apps. China and India's economies have taken off the past 2-3 decades, so there are a lot more in those countries who can afford to come here for their education.

Do look at the rest of the site, too--didn't mean to imply the first page was the only thing to look at. The rest of it is really eye-opening.

Thanks for the Brookings article. I'll take a look at it later. It doesn't seem like accountability would have much effect, but I'll be interested to hear what they say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a sad statement that a HYPSM grad can’t puzzle out the math on this.

LOL - my thoughts too. You should be bright enough to read a single article (or another DCUM thread) and understand it. My thoughts are you are just trying to stir things up - or are just disappointed that somehow your kids don't have a golden ticket. Have solace that they do still have a legacy nudge IF they happen to end up at the top of their class (or if you are VIP and legacy they won't need to be at the top of their class).

I think OP is very smart to deligate the research to others.

[Anonymous]

No test scores and the holistic approach to admissions.

There are somethings your kid just can't control. He can't change is DNA, where he was born or his home situation. When admissions is controlling for that, it really doesn't matter how exceptional grades, test scores and extracurriculars, or even what a good person they are.

The sooner your kid knows that admissions is not 'personal' (though looking for specific traits can really feel that way), the better the will be.

Pick a wide variety of schools and don't let your kid get frustrated. Keep doing their best in life and working hard. That's gotta count for something eventually.

[Anonymous]

I didn't go to HYPSM, and even I can figure this one out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The old folks have been complaining about this process since at least the early 1960s, when Yale folded the then-less-competitive school of engineering into the school of arts and sciences. OP benefitted from a system that put less and less weight on ancestry and more and more weight on academic achievement and then — what? expected that process to stop at the exact point where it would most benefit their family forever? That’s not how a one-way ratchet works.

This. Read fiction from the early 20th century and the talk about going to Princeton to take the entrance exam and then enrolling or not knowing what to do after boarding school and then going to Harvard. The Ivy league used to be the preserve of the wealthy, then some time post WWII, academics started to really matter. We've gotten to the point where, unless you are slap your name on a new dorm wealthy, academics trump almost everything else and, thanks to financial aid, money is no longer a real barrier to entry.

OP here. I don’t think this is true now, nor was it true when I applied 15 years ago. Most of these schools claim they can easily fill a class with valedictorians or perfect SAT scores, but choose not to.

Look at the freshman class averages, they do. It's not hard to pass over one perfect kid for another that has betters ECs when you have thousands of applicants with near perfect transcripts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also hard from around here OP because there are SO many HYPSM grads floating around. Any graduating class from a desirable high school is likely to have 10+ grads per year who are legacy at HYP between 2 parents (be it a large public like Whitman or Langley or a private like Sidwell). legacy status doesn't mean much in the DMV.

We are in Langley pyramid and surrounded my Harvard folks. Many are Harvard grad schools though.

[Anonymous]

OP--if your kids are in elementary don't worry too much. The demographic cliff comes in 2026. The applicant pool will start precipitously shrinking at that point. Google it.

[Anonymous]

Short answer there is good and bad that comes with meritocracy. This is one of the downsides.

And yes, our meritocratic system is far from perfect, but better than the narrow tracks in past generations. Bigger reach, bigger funnel, more competition.

[Anonymous]

I’ll help you OP. It’s a freaking arms race of affluent parents making sure their kids are getting the BEST enrichments, tutoring, mentoring, internships, etc. I occasionally interview for my alma mater and times have CHANGED!

I participated in an engineering program at a local college for girls interested in STEM where we built balsa bridges and went on a tour of the water treatment plant. I have interviewed kids who placed at the Westinghouse science competition or have patents. Patents!
I worked at k-mart and Subway. I babysat. These kids intern at companies in the field they are pursuing.
I was president of the French club and 1st chair trumpet in concert band. These kids are establishing their own charity or leading the advocacy for some pet issue with their city/county/state government.

I was smart and hard working. I was the Tracy Flick of my HS - all the APs, all As, all the sports and clubs. Kids “these days” are accomplishing things at 15-17 that upperclassmen at my selective university were not doing when I was there. If kindergarten is the new 1st grade, I’d wager that 16 is the new 21. I always come away from interviews wondering - how the heck did I ever get in, how the heck will my kids ever have a chance.