Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 10:47     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My dd is getting emails and mailers from Fordham almost daily. They've become the butt of many jokes in our house.


Fordham is working hard to get a more national profile, and the Bronx is a hard sell. Yeah, the emails are annoying.

We get daily emails from University of Chicago, where my son is just not a contender. And from my Ivy alma mater, where he is also not a contender. Pisses me off.

... and from Wofford, which we couldn't place on a map.


Wofford is lovely! I heard of it just recently myself, but DC visited and it changed her mind about LACs. She loved it and it's on her list now.

An acquaintance has two kids at Liberty and based off her numerous Facebook posts and check ins there, you'd think it's Harvard. She's extremely proud and excited about every opportunity to be there and tell you her kids both attend. Is it Harvard for Evangelicals?
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 09:56     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My dd is getting emails and mailers from Fordham almost daily. They've become the butt of many jokes in our house.


rensselaer is doing this to my DS, but it is really cruel, as my DS would really love to go there. No chance he is getting in, though. I don't see how they can justify being so cruel to themselves.


You can tell them to stop soliciting you. Just unsubscribe. It works.
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 09:46     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
UChicago bombarded DC1 and we weren't surprised (DC1 ended up at a top Ivy). When they started bombarded DC2, who didn't have a chance, we knew something was funny.

We used to call it the weekly UChicago mailing. One week they were touting their STEM classes, and the next week the card or letter was all about how artsy kids do well at UChicago.
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 09:44     Subject: Re:Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My neighbor's kid is doing Liberty University online and the mom has told me more than once that Liberty "has a 20% acceptance rate". I believe this is technically correct, at least for on-campus, but it has nothing to do with academic selectiveness.


Liberty is very popular among kids at our church, and they all tout it's low acceptance rate, but I don't know anyone who has ever been rejected.


I just looked up the common data set for Liberty on college data. It lists a 28% acceptance rate, but under entrance difficulty, it says this...

Minimally Difficult: Most freshmen were not in the top 50% of their high school class and scored somewhat below 1010 on the SAT I or below 19 on the ACT; up to 95% of all applicants accepted.

How do they reconcile this with the 28% acceptance rate listed?



Some seriously poor students apply?

That is what the math suggests. My kid didn't apply to Liberty, despite being more than qualified.

PP who brought up the topic of Liberty. I would also guess that the ecclesiastical interview/ requirements have a lot to do with it, but I don’t know for sure. They’d be within their rights to reject a student who refuses to follow the dress code or honor code.


If the average SAT is 1010, it's not particularly selective, at least by typical academic measures.

I've actually known people who have mentioned interest in Liberty. They were older, non-traditional students, who were often born-again later in life and are mostly from working/lower-middle class backgrounds. I assume Liberty appealed to them for a combination of religion, and the fact that it heavily promotes its online courses -- which is good for non-traditional students. More traditional state schools are more difficult to be admitted to and community colleges tend to have scheduling and resource challenges. They see Liberty as a better choice than outright for-profit schools.


I'm guessing that Liberty's applicant pool isn't scoring 1500 on the SATs. Not that religious people aren't smart, but because kids who score 1500s have tons of options are will probably try for more traditional selective schools--it's perfectly possible to be super-religious at an Ivy or SLAC. Liberty may not even take the kids with SAT=1500, knowing they will probably go elsewhere (yield protection).

But at the end of the day, if Liberty gets 20,000 applicants with SATs of around 1010 and take 28% of them to build a class of 560, that 28% still means its selective. (I'm making these numbers up, I have no idea what the class size is.)
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 09:20     Subject: Re:Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My neighbor's kid is doing Liberty University online and the mom has told me more than once that Liberty "has a 20% acceptance rate". I believe this is technically correct, at least for on-campus, but it has nothing to do with academic selectiveness.


Liberty is very popular among kids at our church, and they all tout it's low acceptance rate, but I don't know anyone who has ever been rejected.


I just looked up the common data set for Liberty on college data. It lists a 28% acceptance rate, but under entrance difficulty, it says this...

Minimally Difficult: Most freshmen were not in the top 50% of their high school class and scored somewhat below 1010 on the SAT I or below 19 on the ACT; up to 95% of all applicants accepted.

How do they reconcile this with the 28% acceptance rate listed?



Some seriously poor students apply?

That is what the math suggests. My kid didn't apply to Liberty, despite being more than qualified.

PP who brought up the topic of Liberty. I would also guess that the ecclesiastical interview/ requirements have a lot to do with it, but I don’t know for sure. They’d be within their rights to reject a student who refuses to follow the dress code or honor code.


If the average SAT is 1010, it's not particularly selective, at least by typical academic measures.

I've actually known people who have mentioned interest in Liberty. They were older, non-traditional students, who were often born-again later in life and are mostly from working/lower-middle class backgrounds. I assume Liberty appealed to them for a combination of religion, and the fact that it heavily promotes its online courses -- which is good for non-traditional students. More traditional state schools are more difficult to be admitted to and community colleges tend to have scheduling and resource challenges. They see Liberty as a better choice than outright for-profit schools.
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 09:04     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:My dd is getting emails and mailers from Fordham almost daily. They've become the butt of many jokes in our house.


rensselaer is doing this to my DS, but it is really cruel, as my DS would really love to go there. No chance he is getting in, though. I don't see how they can justify being so cruel to themselves.
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 08:29     Subject: Re:Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My neighbor's kid is doing Liberty University online and the mom has told me more than once that Liberty "has a 20% acceptance rate". I believe this is technically correct, at least for on-campus, but it has nothing to do with academic selectiveness.


Liberty is very popular among kids at our church, and they all tout it's low acceptance rate, but I don't know anyone who has ever been rejected.


I just looked up the common data set for Liberty on college data. It lists a 28% acceptance rate, but under entrance difficulty, it says this...

Minimally Difficult: Most freshmen were not in the top 50% of their high school class and scored somewhat below 1010 on the SAT I or below 19 on the ACT; up to 95% of all applicants accepted.

How do they reconcile this with the 28% acceptance rate listed?



Some seriously poor students apply?

That is what the math suggests. My kid didn't apply to Liberty, despite being more than qualified.

PP who brought up the topic of Liberty. I would also guess that the ecclesiastical interview/ requirements have a lot to do with it, but I don’t know for sure. They’d be within their rights to reject a student who refuses to follow the dress code or honor code.
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 07:43     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The only objective measure is incoming SAT scores. It is the defining rating mechanism.


SAT scores are objective but some schools place disproportionate emphasis on SAT at the expense of other things. Vanderbilt is an example that instantly comes to mind. if you got a ultra high SAT score and not much else you are practically a shoo in. There are many top schools which could have much higher SAT averages if they chose to, but they choose to focus on other things as well.


It's the only rating that isn't an opinion. all other measures are manipulated based on what schools the rating administrators favor. The best measure SATs and ACTs.


lol schools could fill their entire classes with high SAT scores if they wanted to but they don't for good reason

These days any upper middle class kid is going to be prepped to death for the SATs this goes double for asian students

The best schools look for people that break the drone mode. These are the people who will actually be successful and most importantly contribute the most back to the school. End of the day thats what schools actually care about
Anonymous
Post 11/05/2017 07:35     Subject: Acceptance rate is not a great measure of selectivity
Anonymous wrote:My dd is getting emails and mailers from Fordham almost daily. They've become the butt of many jokes in our house.


Fordham is working hard to get a more national profile, and the Bronx is a hard sell. Yeah, the emails are annoying.

We get daily emails from University of Chicago, where my son is just not a contender. And from my Ivy alma mater, where he is also not a contender. Pisses me off.

... and from Wofford, which we couldn't place on a map.