Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This person is just making things up. Ottawa University in Ottawa KS does not have a 14% acceptance rate. I didn’t look up the others.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/ottawa-university-1937
I just picked three random colleges from US News’ “Colleges with the lowest acceptance rates” list. Take up your issue with that publication, I guess, because that’s what Ottawa’s acceptance rate is listed as.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/lowest-acceptance-rate
Elsewhere it is listed as being 78%. Seems more accurate. The ACT range is 17-21.
Ok. I apologize for not double checking. Hope it didn’t cause too much distress.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Best does not necessarily = most selective.
And most selective does not necessarily = lowest acceptance rates.
wut? how come?
Many colleges entice large numbers of students to apply to boost their rankings and/or get application fees. Tulane is a great example of this. My daughter got AT LEAST 2 emails every week for a year from them plus many postcards in the mail. Indeed, their acceptance rate is only 12%. But that doesn't mean much because you don't know what their applicant pool is like. They are notorious for getting low stat/unrealistic applicants to apply just to reject them. Selectivity of the candidate pool is the first and most important factor. You can have a rock bottom acceptance rate but if it’s from a mediocre candidate pool, then your results will still be mediocre.
Limestone University, Ottawa University in Kansas, and Jarvis Christian College have lower acceptance rates (14%) than Tufts (15%), UVA (24%), and Notre Dame (16%). That doesn't mean they're better schools or more selective. Their applicant pool is probably just bad.
+1. Also in the case of state schools, many of the applicants are prescreened by the state high school counselors whose job it is to route the students to the state institutions best suited for that students. Hence a lot of students who are applying to public like UCLA know that they don't stand a chance of getting in and apply to UCIrvine, etc. That's why the percentage of acceptances is higher for state institutions. They get a better and more selective application pool. Usually, the exact stats required are made public. .The high school counselors (also state employees) have good Naviane track records and can show the students and their parents where to get the best bang for their application buck. Also, most state institutions don't play the marketing games mentioned above (doing everything possible to get as many applications as possible so as to reject as many as possible) simply because they are public institutions and don't have huge, fancy admissions offices and visiting teams.
Anonymous wrote:USC is a good school, but it’s not ranked in the 20’s. I’m not even sure that it’s ranked in the top 100
Anonymous wrote:UCLA is better school than USC. But it’s a public so. UCB is better school than UCLA if that matters.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This person is just making things up. Ottawa University in Ottawa KS does not have a 14% acceptance rate. I didn’t look up the others.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/ottawa-university-1937
I just picked three random colleges from US News’ “Colleges with the lowest acceptance rates” list. Take up your issue with that publication, I guess, because that’s what Ottawa’s acceptance rate is listed as.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/lowest-acceptance-rate
Elsewhere it is listed as being 78%. Seems more accurate. The ACT range is 17-21.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This person is just making things up. Ottawa University in Ottawa KS does not have a 14% acceptance rate. I didn’t look up the others.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/ottawa-university-1937
I just picked three random colleges from US News’ “Colleges with the lowest acceptance rates” list. Take up your issue with that publication, I guess, because that’s what Ottawa’s acceptance rate is listed as.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/lowest-acceptance-rate
Anonymous wrote:This person is just making things up. Ottawa University in Ottawa KS does not have a 14% acceptance rate. I didn’t look up the others.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Best does not necessarily = most selective.
And most selective does not necessarily = lowest acceptance rates.
wut? how come?
Many colleges entice large numbers of students to apply to boost their rankings and/or get application fees. Tulane is a great example of this. My daughter got AT LEAST 2 emails every week for a year from them plus many postcards in the mail. Indeed, their acceptance rate is only 12%. But that doesn't mean much because you don't know what their applicant pool is like. They are notorious for getting low stat/unrealistic applicants to apply just to reject them. Selectivity of the candidate pool is the first and most important factor. You can have a rock bottom acceptance rate but if it’s from a mediocre candidate pool, then your results will still be mediocre.
Limestone University, Ottawa University in Kansas, and Jarvis Christian College have lower acceptance rates (14%) than Tufts (15%), UVA (24%), and Notre Dame (16%). That doesn't mean they're better schools or more selective. Their applicant pool is probably just bad.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Best does not necessarily = most selective.
And most selective does not necessarily = lowest acceptance rates.
wut? how come?
Many colleges entice large numbers of students to apply to boost their rankings and/or get application fees. Tulane is a great example of this. My daughter got AT LEAST 2 emails every week for a year from them plus many postcards in the mail. Indeed, their acceptance rate is only 12%. But that doesn't mean much because you don't know what their applicant pool is like. They are notorious for getting low stat/unrealistic applicants to apply just to reject them. Selectivity of the candidate pool is the first and most important factor. You can have a rock bottom acceptance rate but if it’s from a mediocre candidate pool, then your results will still be mediocre.
Limestone University, Ottawa University in Kansas, and Jarvis Christian College have lower acceptance rates (14%) than Tufts (15%), UVA (24%), and Notre Dame (16%). That doesn't mean they're better schools or more selective. Their applicant pool is probably just bad.
+1. Also in the case of state schools, many of the applicants are prescreened by the state high school counselors whose job it is to route the students to the state institutions best suited for that students. Hence a lot of students who are applying to public like UCLA know that they don't stand a chance of getting in and apply to UCIrvine, etc. That's why the percentage of acceptances is higher for state institutions. They get a better and more selective application pool. Usually, the exact stats required are made public. .The high school counselors (also state employees) have good Naviane track records and can show the students and their parents where to get the best bang for their application buck. Also, most state institutions don't play the marketing games mentioned above (doing everything possible to get as many applications as possible so as to reject as many as possible) simply because they are public institutions and don't have huge, fancy admissions offices and visiting teams.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Best does not necessarily = most selective.
And most selective does not necessarily = lowest acceptance rates.
wut? how come?
Many colleges entice large numbers of students to apply to boost their rankings and/or get application fees. Tulane is a great example of this. My daughter got AT LEAST 2 emails every week for a year from them plus many postcards in the mail. Indeed, their acceptance rate is only 12%. But that doesn't mean much because you don't know what their applicant pool is like. They are notorious for getting low stat/unrealistic applicants to apply just to reject them. Selectivity of the candidate pool is the first and most important factor. You can have a rock bottom acceptance rate but if it’s from a mediocre candidate pool, then your results will still be mediocre.
Limestone University, Ottawa University in Kansas, and Jarvis Christian College have lower acceptance rates (14%) than Tufts (15%), UVA (24%), and Notre Dame (16%). That doesn't mean they're better schools or more selective. Their applicant pool is probably just bad.
Yeah but everybody plays that game.