GDS has raised the cap to 12. UCs count as one school because of the single application process--so technically, a GDS senior could be applying to a lot of schools, far more than 12, if the student wants to apply to all of the UCs. Exceptions in the number of applications can be made for students applying to highly competitive arts programs. (BTW, GDS generally has a very good track record of sending their serious arts students to excellent art colleges.) Get your facts straight before you rant. As a GDS parent, I have a lot of issues with GDS, but the number of college applications is not one of them. |
The part in bold above - not only is that ridiculous, that an outstanding student can "hoard" acceptances, but that explicitly preventing an outstanding student from getting acceptances for the benefit of a less qualified student - if that is not unfair by definition, I don't know what is. At least you admit it. I give you credit for that. |
| We encountered this with one of the schools my children attended it is outrageous and there are no legal grounds for them to do this unless explicitly in the private school contract |
You can pull your kid out of private school if you don't like the policy. |
There are no legal grounds for a lot of policies--requiring parental attendance at certain events, school dress codes, required summer reading, for example. But, go head, try to file a lawsuit...where do you think that will get you? |
|
"As a GDS parent, I have a lot of issues with GDS, but the number of college applications is not one of them."
Except you're point helps the "no limits" argument. The fact that GDS recognized the harm that a 10 app limit can create and therefore increased the baseline number to 10, and makes exceptions for legitimate situations like art school applications means that a hard line limit of 10 isn't a great idea. |
| I think it’s unfair for the richest kid with parents w world famous names who wanted to gather up all the acceptances. So unfair. They should sue |
+1 |
NP in this chain and I’ll attempt to answer your question directly such that you can hear it. The reason that the number of college applications should be the decision of the private school and not the individual families is because the school has an obligation to the entire community of the school to optimize college admission results for the entire graduating class. That is a primary reason why many families are enrolled. Limiting applications ends up with better overall results for reasons stated numerous times in this discussion. Have you ever heard of “The Tragedy of the Commons”? A limited resource without regulation on use can be destroyed by individuals trying to maximize their own benefit. I think the college application process is currently experiencing this, with the ever escalating cycle of more and more applications because of less and less certainty. The solution isn’t to have private schools increase their allowed applications, it is for more/all schools to implement limits. This used to be a “natural” limit when each application required serious effort (typing on the paper application you wrote to receive). But the Common App and colleges have no interest in limiting applications. It’s pure profit. $75 bucks a pop from applicants, but only paying a reader $21/hr? Even if they only process 4 applications per hour, that’s $250 profit. Who’s really benefiting by unlimited applications? It’s not the students. |
|
Correction:
Except you're point helps the "no limits" argument. The fact that GDS recognized the harm that a 10 app limit can create and therefore increased the baseline number to 12, and makes exceptions for legitimate situations like art school applications means that a hard line limit of 10 isn't a great idea. |
Increase to 12 is reasonable. You are advocating it seems for virtually unlimited applications. And the rare exception for the arts - or flight school- is not a good reason to lift the cap for everyone. Hard cases make for bad law. |
|
"Increase to 12 is reasonable. You are advocating it seems for virtually unlimited applications. And the rare exception for the arts - or flight school- is not a good reason to lift the cap for everyone. Hard cases make for bad law."
Common App already limits you to 20. Nobody is arguing for unlimited applications. Why apply a rule that should only pertain to a tiny share of students in each senior class (because these are the only people competing for coveted acceptances from the most elite schools) to the entire class? In a class with 500 students, only the top 50 (10%) are going to bother applying to the schools that you're worried will get oversubscribed by a few hoarders with high stats. You're making the other 450 live with the negative consequences of how the 10 application limit might impact on them even though nobody, including the valedictorian with the best shot at Harvard, cares where they apply. An alternative would be to limit seniors to only 10 applications to the top 25 ranked colleges. You could apply to as many schools that aren't HSYP, Duke, Cal, etc... as you like since nobody is worried about being squeezed out by your classmate at the other 250 most popular/sought after schools. |
| I'm the PP who used the pilot major example. I noticed that you failed to address the core question I raised, which is how exactly does denying the aspiring pilot the chance to apply to more than 10 schools impact positively on the rest of the students in their HS class? Can you name even one way in which any senior in that graduating class benefits by this student not applying to University of North Dakota? Conversely, how does this aspiring pilot's application to UND harm the chances of a Princeton acceptance for the top ranked student in the class? I don't see how the UND application is relevant in either direction. If that's the case, why subject the aspiring pilot to the limit? |
|
"Hard cases make bad law" pertains to situations where the law works appropriately for the vast majority even though there might be a few unusual situations where it doesn't and a bad outcome results.
Here, the law only benefits the very small share of top students who have a chance at admission at an extremely selective college that will only take 1-2 students from that high school. For the other 95% of the class, the law benefits them in no way whatsoever since they were never going to apply, much less get accepted, to Harvard. And not only does it not benefit them, it could hurt their prospects ("bad outcome") since some of these students might need multiple merit offers, or they might have low GPAs and test scores that make it hard to get admitted to the more affordable state schools that don't practice holistic admissions. By the "hard cases make bad law" logic, the rule should be flipped (no limit on applications) so that the overwhelming majority of HS students would benefit from it. |
|
Glad to hear GDS increased to 12 applications.
And to the PP who is asking others to explain limit, I agree with you. I still think it is important to be thoughtful in your list (and our child ended up at 12) though. I think a better policy is to strongly encourage a range (like 8-12) vs setting a limit. It allows parents/kids to hear the real message (of why no more than 12) and not get fixated on the limit. |