Steps to fix the race to 3% admission rate

[Anonymous]

Kids at private schools need FA. This idea is really outdated. Top high schools in NYC have better FA than most colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are really concerned about at most 5% of US schools. Why would the public and colleges in general care about low admit schools? Also, the current system works for highly selective schools.

I don't care about the schools at all. I care about the kids.

But higher education is a business so it doesn’t matter that you care about the kids. They system works for the vast majority of colleges, especially top colleges. Why would they change their model of the majority of consumers don’t care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are really concerned about at most 5% of US schools. Why would the public and colleges in general care about low admit schools? Also, the current system works for highly selective schools.

I'm not OP, but I don't think your 5% is true at all. Many schools that were once "safeties" are now getting difficult to get into. Schools like UMD, JMU, U South Carolina, Auburn are all schools I've seen posted about here, or experienced with my own kids'/their friends.

UMD is part of the top 5% of schools. If you live in MD or VA, there are many choices that many in-state students could attend. Why should UMD or JMU or the state governments care that the admit rates have gone down? There are enough overall seats in both states to serve in-state students at the network of 4-year public institutions. Also, the other safeties you mention are public schools that meant to serve their in-state students first. U of SC, Auburn, Clemson, etc. have no incentive to change their admission policies to cater to out-of-state students.

UMD is in the top 5%? That surprises me (I'm not trying to be snarky.) And I'm not saying that the state government should "care" about anything--I'm just saying that this "race to 3% admission rates" (which this whole thread is about) involves many more schools than just the top 5%.

And your surprise regarding UMD shows your myopic view of the college landscape. The schools you listed are in the top % within the approximately 4000, 4-yr colleges.

[Anonymous]

Has anyone tried InitialView? It started as a way to prove English proficiency for international students but can be used by domestic students too. One feature is that you can only give two "stars" when submitting to schools so any college that accepts it will know if you are one of your top two schools.
https://initialview.com/home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One idea:

I think we need to place a soft limit on apps. Here's how.

All schools have to be on the common app.

Students can apply to 9 schools free of charge

Pro 1: while not an ED situation, schools know this applicant is serious enough about their school to put it on this pretty tidy list. Safeties go back to being safeties.

Pro 2: Schools may not want to encourage 100k+ apps.. Will start to cost them too much to process. Marketing may become more targeted.

After the 9 school limit, students can apply to additional schools but the common app will have a box that auto-fills how many schools each applicant has applied to. This gets filled in for every applicant applying to more than 9 schools, and says exactly how many apps this kid is applying to this cycle. Would update all schools as you apply (ie so that app you send in in November will have how many apps would apply to then, but that box updates throughout the cycle).

Pro: This gives schools key data that's lacking now. For some kids who clearly need a lot of FA, schools may think this applicant is responsibly chasing merit. Other schools may get used to saying in presentations, "we think 12 schools is reasonable". And "Of course, we take a second look at those applicants who have done their research and have us on their short list". Most schools won't take the kids applying bazooka-style, improves yield.

Also, every app after the 9 is $50 and that goes into a fund for community colleges. I think this could be something like 20-50mm a year min.

Artificially limiting competition seems like a great way to get the DoJ to investigate

This limits nothing. Kids can still apply to 100 schools -- but colleges will know you've applied to 100 schools.

Also there is a reason the top private high schools limit college apps: it works out better for students as a pool and as individuals.

Any action made with the intent of limiting competition is going to get scrutiny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids at private schools need FA. This idea is really outdated. Top high schools in NYC have better FA than most colleges.

Correct. You realize that all top privates (from Andover to Dalton and down to Sidwell) all have significant percentages of their kids who are on aid?
At the top boarding schools this percentage is quite high: 45% receive aid and the average yearly grant is about $50K.

I know it's easier to vilify all private school kids as "rich" but the reality is quite different in 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One idea:

I think we need to place a soft limit on apps. Here's how.

All schools have to be on the common app.

Students can apply to 9 schools free of charge

Pro 1: while not an ED situation, schools know this applicant is serious enough about their school to put it on this pretty tidy list. Safeties go back to being safeties.

Pro 2: Schools may not want to encourage 100k+ apps.. Will start to cost them too much to process. Marketing may become more targeted.

After the 9 school limit, students can apply to additional schools but the common app will have a box that auto-fills how many schools each applicant has applied to. This gets filled in for every applicant applying to more than 9 schools, and says exactly how many apps this kid is applying to this cycle. Would update all schools as you apply (ie so that app you send in in November will have how many apps would apply to then, but that box updates throughout the cycle).

Pro: This gives schools key data that's lacking now. For some kids who clearly need a lot of FA, schools may think this applicant is responsibly chasing merit. Other schools may get used to saying in presentations, "we think 12 schools is reasonable". And "Of course, we take a second look at those applicants who have done their research and have us on their short list". Most schools won't take the kids applying bazooka-style, improves yield.

Also, every app after the 9 is $50 and that goes into a fund for community colleges. I think this could be something like 20-50mm a year min.

Artificially limiting competition seems like a great way to get the DoJ to investigate

This limits nothing. Kids can still apply to 100 schools -- but colleges will know you've applied to 100 schools.

Also there is a reason the top private high schools limit college apps: it works out better for students as a pool and as individuals.

Any action made with the intent of limiting competition is going to get scrutiny.

+1 The industry already had policies that reduced competition and they got knocked down by the courts -- attempting to recruit committed students after May 1, offering incentives for ED. I don't know how many school are actually doing that yet but there are no longer rules to ban it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are really concerned about at most 5% of US schools. Why would the public and colleges in general care about low admit schools? Also, the current system works for highly selective schools.

I'm not OP, but I don't think your 5% is true at all. Many schools that were once "safeties" are now getting difficult to get into. Schools like UMD, JMU, U South Carolina, Auburn are all schools I've seen posted about here, or experienced with my own kids'/their friends.

UMD is part of the top 5% of schools. If you live in MD or VA, there are many choices that many in-state students could attend. Why should UMD or JMU or the state governments care that the admit rates have gone down? There are enough overall seats in both states to serve in-state students at the network of 4-year public institutions. Also, the other safeties you mention are public schools that meant to serve their in-state students first. U of SC, Auburn, Clemson, etc. have no incentive to change their admission policies to cater to out-of-state students.

UMD is in the top 5%? That surprises me (I'm not trying to be snarky.) And I'm not saying that the state government should "care" about anything--I'm just saying that this "race to 3% admission rates" (which this whole thread is about) involves many more schools than just the top 5%.

And your surprise regarding UMD shows your myopic view of the college landscape. The schools you listed are in the top % within the approximately 4000, 4-yr colleges.

I agree with the point you're making, but I believe it's only around 2600 4-year colleges. If you include community colleges, it's around 4000.

[Anonymous]

Tell the media to stop celebrating kids who get accepted to every ivy or all 50 schools they applied to. It just encourages that type of behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who wants to submit a score is still welcome too. The panic over test optional is very telling, as is the mindset that private universities could somehow be forced to consider standardized testing in their admissions criteria

What exactly does it "tell?"

NP well there’s a common misperception that high test scores are an indicator of intelligence or college readiness, for one thing. When in fact it’s been demonstrated not to be anything more than an artificial barrier to entry that discriminates against POC. Test bias is a real thing.

Just certain POCs. Asian POCs do extraordinarily well versus whites. I guess the test must be soaked in Asian cultural references

The ones that go to cram schools their whole lives to prepare for the testing do, anyway. So no, not soaked in Asian cultural references — they just have a lot of practice.

[Anonymous]

It's the Common App that's behind this. Severely curb or eliminate the common app, and you're back to students applying to 6-8 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's the Common App that's behind this. Severely curb or eliminate the common app, and you're back to students applying to 6-8 schools.

Again:

Colleges don't want this.

Kids don't want this.

It doesn't magically create more seats where people want to go - it just increases the odds they ill get shut out and limits their options.

Worst. Idea. Ever.

[Anonymous]

Lol it’s only a problem for you.

It’s not a bug for the schools. They love these super low acceptance rates. And most Americans don’t care either because it doesn’t effect them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Limiting the number of schools is a hard fail for many students and what if they don't get into any of those?

It is what it is. Have you kids apply to a variety of schools. Many schools have always been hard to get into.

+1000

In reality, only the T50 schools are "hard" to get into. If those kids would build a balanced list of schools (at least 3-4 targets and 3-4 true safeties), they will get into a good school. Keep applying to 10-12 reaches and only 1-2 other schools and you will be disappointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One idea:

I think we need to place a soft limit on apps. Here's how.

All schools have to be on the common app.

Students can apply to 9 schools free of charge

Pro 1: while not an ED situation, schools know this applicant is serious enough about their school to put it on this pretty tidy list. Safeties go back to being safeties.

Pro 2: Schools may not want to encourage 100k+ apps.. Will start to cost them too much to process. Marketing may become more targeted.

After the 9 school limit, students can apply to additional schools but the common app will have a box that auto-fills how many schools each applicant has applied to. This gets filled in for every applicant applying to more than 9 schools, and says exactly how many apps this kid is applying to this cycle. Would update all schools as you apply (ie so that app you send in in November will have how many apps would apply to then, but that box updates throughout the cycle).

Pro: This gives schools key data that's lacking now. For some kids who clearly need a lot of FA, schools may think this applicant is responsibly chasing merit. Other schools may get used to saying in presentations, "we think 12 schools is reasonable". And "Of course, we take a second look at those applicants who have done their research and have us on their short list". Most schools won't take the kids applying bazooka-style, improves yield.

Also, every app after the 9 is $50 and that goes into a fund for community colleges. I think this could be something like 20-50mm a year min.

Wont work because schools like getting 100K applications. It makes them appear to be highly ranked and desirable. They are still getting an excellent group of freshman so they don't care if they need to reject 95%. Can't control what private schools do really

Yeah, schools think system is working, but there have been times the Govt came in. NPC is a government thing, for example. We could mandate something

Cannot mandate at private schools. Only states can mandate at their state schools, so nothing would be accomplished.