Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Not all schools yield protect. If it does, it's not a safety.
THIS. Not sure why some here can't grasp that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Not all schools yield protect. If it does, it's not a safety.
THIS. Not sure why some here can't grasp that.
NP. Agree, schools that yield protect are not safeties. Food for thought: are there schools which now yield protect, but didn't appear to yield protect prior to test optional admissions?
Many colleges outsource yield management to enrollment management consultants for big bucks. Those consultants use algorithms. The algorithms in the past incorporated score data and test optional students were but a tiny slice of the big picture. That all changed, of course, and the portion of test optional applicants is now much bigger and more likely to enroll than a score-submitter.
It seemed that, in the past, some high-acceptance-rate colleges might accept several high stats applicants and anticipate that only a small fraction of those would choose to attend. Now, there is a sense that the algorithms cannot handle that, and so instead the high stats applicants are simply denied. Something is not right with the algorithms if high stats students are being denied from colleges with 80%+ acceptance rates.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Not all schools yield protect. If it does, it's not a safety.
THIS. Not sure why some here can't grasp that.
NP. Agree, schools that yield protect are not safeties. Food for thought: are there schools which now yield protect, but didn't appear to yield protect prior to test optional admissions?
Many colleges outsource yield management to enrollment management consultants for big bucks. Those consultants use algorithms. The algorithms in the past incorporated score data and test optional students were but a tiny slice of the big picture. That all changed, of course, and the portion of test optional applicants is now much bigger and more likely to enroll than a score-submitter.
It seemed that, in the past, some high-acceptance-rate colleges might accept several high stats applicants and anticipate that only a small fraction of those would choose to attend. Now, there is a sense that the algorithms cannot handle that, and so instead the high stats applicants are simply denied. Something is not right with the algorithms if high stats students are being denied from colleges with 80%+ acceptance rates.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Not all schools yield protect. If it does, it's not a safety.
THIS. Not sure why some here can't grasp that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Not all schools yield protect. If it does, it's not a safety.
Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.
8 years? Really? Post-Covid is nothing like pre-Covid. Nothing at all. I gave kids that applied before and after.
Test optional increased application numbers drastically. You now have 50k-90k applicants for an incoming class. Population is another issue. After 2026 the number of kids applying to college will drop off a cliff. It’s the wild Wild West right now.
+100
I can readily admit that I likely would not get into my alma mater if I were applying in 2022/23. And, it's doubtful my nephews that graduated from it in 2016/17 would get into it this year.
Not because you’re unqualified, but because they use a totally different criteria.
Anonymous wrote:When we parents were applying to college, few, if any kids did test prep and few, if any, kids selected extracurricular activities based on “what would look good on a college application.” It has become an arms race, with the new “normal” far exceeding what used to be stellar credentials. I feel sorry for kids today, especially those who were told that if they did X, Y, and Z they’d be competitive for colleges like A, B, and C.
I still believe kids and parents should focus on themselves and not on what others are doing. Do what’s best for your kid, and stop trying to keep up with the Joneses. Your child will find the right place. Also set the right expectations from the beginning.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
With high stats kids being yield protected from safeties, it doesn't seem like safeties exist anymore.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.
8 years? Really? Post-Covid is nothing like pre-Covid. Nothing at all. I gave kids that applied before and after.
Test optional increased application numbers drastically. You now have 50k-90k applicants for an incoming class. Population is another issue. After 2026 the number of kids applying to college will drop off a cliff. It’s the wild Wild West right now.
+100
I can readily admit that I likely would not get into my alma mater if I were applying in 2022/23. And, it's doubtful my nephews that graduated from it in 2016/17 would get into it this year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.
8 years? Really? Post-Covid is nothing like pre-Covid. Nothing at all. I gave kids that applied before and after.
Test optional increased application numbers drastically. You now have 50k-90k applicants for an incoming class. Population is another issue. After 2026 the number of kids applying to college will drop off a cliff. It’s the wild Wild West right now.
Anonymous wrote:When applying to colleges and universities, applying to at least 3 safeties is the most important. If a student accurately identifies & applies to 3 safeties, then the number of apps to other schools should not be a concern.
If up to me, I would limit students to 12 applications although 10 is also a reasonable limit.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.
The implication is that uncertainty increased (as it has, every year for the last several years). Making lists going forward, and categorizing reaches, matches, and safeties, is more challenging than it used to be, particularly for high stats students.
Anonymous wrote:The implication when DCUM parents post that this year was a “bloodbath” (newsflash, I’ve been on here for 8 years and every year is the “hardest year ever”)
is that someone undeserving is taking their deserving kid’s spot.