Why do selective schools market?

[Anonymous]

They want the money from the applications.

Some private colleges are running a disgusting business preying on kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They want the money from the applications.

Some private colleges are running a disgusting business preying on kids.

No, they are not.

The estimated total pay for a Admissions Officer at Columbia University is $71,149 per year

https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Columbia-University-Admissions-Officer-Salaries-E2748_D_KO20,38.htm

There are currently 28 of them.

https://undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/2022-12/Regional%20Assignments%20Counselor%20Newsletter%202022-2023%20PDF.pdf

In 2019 they took in in $3.14M in application fees

https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/ivy-league/application-fees-around-the-ivy-league/

So, that's $1,992,172 in salary for admissions officers alone. Using a normal rule of thumb of 50% salary for benefits, expenses and payroll taxes that's $2,988,258.

Now add in administrative, printing, common app costs (yes they pay), printing, mailing, fee waivers, events, travel....

If app fees are a business they are a terrible one.

I guess it's like the old joke: "We lose a little bit on every transaction, but we make it up in volume".

[Anonymous]

Just because they get a lot of applications doesn’t mean they’re getting the applications they want. Look at how some majors at VT have 80% acceptance rates and others have 56%. They can’t predict majors three years out. They need to market themselves overall to reach the students they need.

[Anonymous]

The real definition of affirmative action (not the false one people whine about) requires an entity to take action to obtain a diverse pool of applicants. So, to engage in appropriate affirmative action, one must make sure that diverse applicants know how to apply and do not have extra hurdles to applying. So advertising far and wide helps with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real definition of affirmative action (not the false one people whine about) requires an entity to take action to obtain a diverse pool of applicants. So, to engage in appropriate affirmative action, one must make sure that diverse applicants know how to apply and do not have extra hurdles to applying. So advertising far and wide helps with that.

College fairs at lower income high schools seem like a better way to do that.

[Anonymous]

Why are some elite schools hiding their acceptance rates in the last few years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are some elite schools hiding their acceptance rates in the last few years?

To drum up more apps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real definition of affirmative action (not the false one people whine about) requires an entity to take action to obtain a diverse pool of applicants. So, to engage in appropriate affirmative action, one must make sure that diverse applicants know how to apply and do not have extra hurdles to applying. So advertising far and wide helps with that.

College fairs at lower income high schools seem like a better way to do that.

Hmmmm.... 28 college reps (as above), college fairs all around the same 6 week period, 20,000 high schools, travel and lodging costs...

...vs mailers direct to the kids...

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Application fees aren't viewed as a source of profit for universities. More applications means the need for more admissions staff (and their salaries). And the recruiting, itself, is expensive (not so much the emails, but certainly on the printed brochures, the travel of admissions officers, the extra staff needed to field questions from kids who are trying to show demonstrated interest, etc).

I look at how much actual full-color, glossy paper my kid has received this year, and I bet it costs about as much as the application fees will be. I hate the mailings for the environmental impact, but it seems clear that the schools aren't making money by doing all of this to get more applications.

[Anonymous]

So the real question is, how do you explain to a child that they don't have a chance at a school that appears to be pursuing them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS is a hs freshman and must have signed up for some lists, because he's getting marketing material from schools he doesn't have a chance of being admitted to - but because they're advertising, he thinks he does. I know we're not ready for the college search yet, but it's pretty upsetting to me as well. Why do they do this?

It's University of Chicago, right? They're relentless and shameless.

He didn't sign up for anything. He probably took the PSATs, and maybe some AP tests, and indicated that he was open to receiving materials.

+1 My kid received a handful of beautiful brochures from U Chicago and many, many postcards. He had virtually 0% of being accepted. I think the combination of his indicating openness to receive materials and out zip code made him an easy target.

"Easy Target?" You mean a college knows a kid is preparing to go to college so they sent him a brochure educating him about the school? What could you possibly mean by "easy target"? Who are they supposed to send their brochures to?

U Chicago sends their marketing to anyone who checks the SAT/PSAT/ACT box "willing to get info". Ideally they should be targeting only those with at least 1400+. Sending info to a kid who got 1100 on the pSAT is not someone with any shot at UChicago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS is a hs freshman and must have signed up for some lists, because he's getting marketing material from schools he doesn't have a chance of being admitted to - but because they're advertising, he thinks he does. I know we're not ready for the college search yet, but it's pretty upsetting to me as well. Why do they do this?

It's University of Chicago, right? They're relentless and shameless.

He didn't sign up for anything. He probably took the PSATs, and maybe some AP tests, and indicated that he was open to receiving materials.

+1 My kid received a handful of beautiful brochures from U Chicago and many, many postcards. He had virtually 0% of being accepted. I think the combination of his indicating openness to receive materials and out zip code made him an easy target.

"Easy Target?" You mean a college knows a kid is preparing to go to college so they sent him a brochure educating him about the school? What could you possibly mean by "easy target"? Who are they supposed to send their brochures to?

U Chicago sends their marketing to anyone who checks the SAT/PSAT/ACT box "willing to get info". Ideally they should be targeting only those with at least 1400+. Sending info to a kid who got 1100 on the pSAT is not someone with any shot at UChicago.

I know it shouldn't, but this bothers me a lot.

I still remembering Connecticut College giving me the hard sell at a college fair in 1995. I wanted to go SO badly. Looking back...it was cruel to even imply to a sophomore that they had a shot at admissions there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the real question is, how do you explain to a child that they don't have a chance at a school that appears to be pursuing them?

You show them how to look up the common data set and compare their stats to the admitted students. And explain that colleges are running a business and recruiting a large pool is part of their marketing strategy. It isn't personal. Same as they might get advertising in social media for a car they can't afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the real question is, how do you explain to a child that they don't have a chance at a school that appears to be pursuing them?

You show them how to look up the common data set and compare their stats to the admitted students. And explain that colleges are running a business and recruiting a large pool is part of their marketing strategy. It isn't personal. Same as they might get advertising in social media for a car they can't afford.

This. The statistics are there. Part of the problem is also that parents don't understand the statistics, either. They think that applying to 10 schools with 10% acceptance rates means they're bound to be accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the real question is, how do you explain to a child that they don't have a chance at a school that appears to be pursuing them?

You show them how to look up the common data set and compare their stats to the admitted students. And explain that colleges are running a business and recruiting a large pool is part of their marketing strategy. It isn't personal. Same as they might get advertising in social media for a car they can't afford.

This. The statistics are there. Part of the problem is also that parents don't understand the statistics, either. They think that applying to 10 schools with 10% acceptance rates means they're bound to be accepted.

What? No one thinks that (not even me, and I almost failed graduate statistics).