Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really someone here who is defending University of Chicago’s transparently sleazy marketing practices?

What is "transparently sleazy" about their "marketing practices"?

Sending weekly mailers to kids who they know they’d never admit in an effort to boost the number of applications they get is clearly sleazy. Come on.

How do they know they would not admit ANY of the kids that get their mailers?

They send the mailers based on demographics and scores. They have a very good idea of who is receiving the mailers and who they might admit.

You don’t seem to understand how sophisticated targeted marketing is.

My kid with a 1100 SAT got tons of UChicago marketing. Not buying that they were a valid candidate...I'm smart enough to know that, but some parents might encourage their kid to apply and waste time and money

And hope.

Yup---I just wish they would at least market to kids that have a chance.....like only if the SAT is over 1400 or something like that. Because even though my 1100 SAT kid is 'terrible at test taking" they also only had one AP course, and did really bad in that one semester---they struggled enough freshman year at a decent college, they would have flunked out at a T20 school had they somehow gotten in (not that they would).

How are they supposed to know?

They don't get individual scores.

They don't know if you will submit them if they are test optional.

They don't know if you will take it again.

They don't know the rest of your application or your transcript.

They do not know.

So they shouldn't market. Or at least admit they're being cruel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More apps = lower acceptance rate = more selective

Seems unethical to get kids' hopes up in order to lower your admissions rate.

Yes, but they don't care. The job of the people mailing you that stuff is to get your kid to apply so the institution can turn them down = a higher selective institution number that can be reported to the USNWR.

You people need to read and learn before you post your tinfoil hat theories.

USNWR has not used acceptance rate in their calculation for years.

But acceptance rate is always the first (and usually only) data point people cite when they talk about “selective/prestigious” schools.

You’re delusional if you don’t think the schools know that and encourage applications for that reason (among others).

Did you read the sentence "so the institution can turn them down = a higher selective institution number that can be reported to the USNWR"?

Do you know that was what I was responding to?

Why are you moving the goalposts?

I’m a DP. You’re wrong. The number is reported to/by USNWR, even if it doesn’t include it as part of their ranking formula.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/lowest-acceptance-rate

In any case, you (I assume the person arguing this point in multiple posts is all you) keep arguing that the colleges don’t care about/have no incentive to lower their acceptance rates. Whether it’s USNWR or somewhere else in the internet college admission industrial complex where this data gets reported, it very clearly matters very much for a great many people as an independent data point, and, therefore, the schools themselves, whether or not it impacts their overall USNWR ranking. It’s silly to suggest otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really someone here who is defending University of Chicago’s transparently sleazy marketing practices?

What is "transparently sleazy" about their "marketing practices"?

Sending weekly mailers to kids who they know they’d never admit in an effort to boost the number of applications they get is clearly sleazy. Come on.

How do they know they would not admit ANY of the kids that get their mailers?

They send the mailers based on demographics and scores. They have a very good idea of who is receiving the mailers and who they might admit.

You don’t seem to understand how sophisticated targeted marketing is.

My kid with a 1100 SAT got tons of UChicago marketing. Not buying that they were a valid candidate...I'm smart enough to know that, but some parents might encourage their kid to apply and waste time and money

And hope.

Yup---I just wish they would at least market to kids that have a chance.....like only if the SAT is over 1400 or something like that. Because even though my 1100 SAT kid is 'terrible at test taking" they also only had one AP course, and did really bad in that one semester---they struggled enough freshman year at a decent college, they would have flunked out at a T20 school had they somehow gotten in (not that they would).

How are they supposed to know?

They don't get individual scores.

They don't know if you will submit them if they are test optional.

They don't know if you will take it again.

They don't know the rest of your application or your transcript.

They do not know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really someone here who is defending University of Chicago’s transparently sleazy marketing practices?

What is "transparently sleazy" about their "marketing practices"?

Sending weekly mailers to kids who they know they’d never admit in an effort to boost the number of applications they get is clearly sleazy. Come on.

How do they know they would not admit ANY of the kids that get their mailers?

They send the mailers based on demographics and scores. They have a very good idea of who is receiving the mailers and who they might admit.

You don’t seem to understand how sophisticated targeted marketing is.

My kid with a 1100 SAT got tons of UChicago marketing. Not buying that they were a valid candidate...I'm smart enough to know that, but some parents might encourage their kid to apply and waste time and money

And hope.

Yup---I just wish they would at least market to kids that have a chance.....like only if the SAT is over 1400 or something like that. Because even though my 1100 SAT kid is 'terrible at test taking" they also only had one AP course, and did really bad in that one semester---they struggled enough freshman year at a decent college, they would have flunked out at a T20 school had they somehow gotten in (not that they would).

Anonymous wrote:You can dismiss USNWR all you want, but you can’t deny that there are tons of people (many in this forum) who think it’s an authority. They will seriously believe that #15 is a better school than #20.

Who dismissed USNWR? All that was said was they they don't use acceptance rate int heir calculations. Someone said other rankings do and it was asked which ones. No response to that yet.

You can dismiss USNWR all you want, but you can’t deny that there are tons of people (many in this forum) who think it’s an authority. They will seriously believe that #15 is a better school than #20.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are trying to get as many people to apply as they possibly can--prep school, inner city, and everything in between. The only thing that matters (thanks U.S. News!) is acceptance rate. Admissions Officers get hot for a one point decrease in acceptance rate. They LOVED the drop from test optional during Covid. It's incredibly cynical, dumb, and bad for higher ed and kids.

Once again, USNWR has not used Acceptance Rate in their ranking calculation for years now.

But it's all over the internet.

Most schools started doing this when USNWR cared a lot about acceptance rate and haven't stopped. You also have to remember that USNWR is no longer the only game in town ranking wise. Having a low acceptance rate and high yield rate still makes a school look sought after too. It has worked well for Chicago and Northeastern over time! Even the Big 3 kids flock to Chicago ED2

What ranking systems use admissions rate in their calculations?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are trying to get as many people to apply as they possibly can--prep school, inner city, and everything in between. The only thing that matters (thanks U.S. News!) is acceptance rate. Admissions Officers get hot for a one point decrease in acceptance rate. They LOVED the drop from test optional during Covid. It's incredibly cynical, dumb, and bad for higher ed and kids.

Once again, USNWR has not used Acceptance Rate in their ranking calculation for years now.

But it's all over the internet.

Most schools started doing this when USNWR cared a lot about acceptance rate and haven't stopped. You also have to remember that USNWR is no longer the only game in town ranking wise. Having a low acceptance rate and high yield rate still makes a school look sought after too. It has worked well for Chicago and Northeastern over time! Even the Big 3 kids flock to Chicago ED2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are trying to get as many people to apply as they possibly can--prep school, inner city, and everything in between. The only thing that matters (thanks U.S. News!) is acceptance rate. Admissions Officers get hot for a one point decrease in acceptance rate. They LOVED the drop from test optional during Covid. It's incredibly cynical, dumb, and bad for higher ed and kids.

Once again, USNWR has not used Acceptance Rate in their ranking calculation for years now.

But it's all over the internet.

Pro tip - tell you kid to opt out of any marketing when they take the PSAT, AP tests, SAT, ACT.

All the biggest consumer product companies, even elite ones like Apple, invest heavily in marketing. Plenty of luxury car makers also market broadly and have ads seen mostly by people who probably can't afford their products.

Anonymous wrote:They are trying to get as many people to apply as they possibly can--prep school, inner city, and everything in between. The only thing that matters (thanks U.S. News!) is acceptance rate. Admissions Officers get hot for a one point decrease in acceptance rate. They LOVED the drop from test optional during Covid. It's incredibly cynical, dumb, and bad for higher ed and kids.

Once again, USNWR has not used Acceptance Rate in their ranking calculation for years now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really someone here who is defending University of Chicago’s transparently sleazy marketing practices?

What is "transparently sleazy" about their "marketing practices"?

Sending weekly mailers to kids who they know they’d never admit in an effort to boost the number of applications they get is clearly sleazy. Come on.

How do they know they would not admit ANY of the kids that get their mailers?

They send the mailers based on demographics and scores. They have a very good idea of who is receiving the mailers and who they might admit.

You don’t seem to understand how sophisticated targeted marketing is.

My kid with a 1100 SAT got tons of UChicago marketing. Not buying that they were a valid candidate...I'm smart enough to know that, but some parents might encourage their kid to apply and waste time and money

And hope.

They are trying to get as many people to apply as they possibly can--prep school, inner city, and everything in between. The only thing that matters (thanks U.S. News!) is acceptance rate. Admissions Officers get hot for a one point decrease in acceptance rate. They LOVED the drop from test optional during Covid. It's incredibly cynical, dumb, and bad for higher ed and kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really someone here who is defending University of Chicago’s transparently sleazy marketing practices?

What is "transparently sleazy" about their "marketing practices"?

Sending weekly mailers to kids who they know they’d never admit in an effort to boost the number of applications they get is clearly sleazy. Come on.

How do they know they would not admit ANY of the kids that get their mailers?

They send the mailers based on demographics and scores. They have a very good idea of who is receiving the mailers and who they might admit.

You don’t seem to understand how sophisticated targeted marketing is.

My kid with a 1100 SAT got tons of UChicago marketing. Not buying that they were a valid candidate...I'm smart enough to know that, but some parents might encourage their kid to apply and waste time and money