<p>The schools doing this must have huge staffs to be able to do the amount of documentation we're talking about here. </p>
<p>We save copies of emails if something important is discussed (why someone couldn't get into a top level course, for example), but we don't go much further than that. Making decisions based on the number of contacts or a rating assigned to them makes me extremely uncomfortable. Plenty of great kids "lay low" until they have decision letters. We see plenty of admitted seniors in April who are touring for the first time because they couldn't afford the expense or time it would have taken to visit every school to which they applied. If we rated contacts, those students would not have been deemed "interested".</p>
<p>I can't imagine that admissions offices want to encourage gratuitous daily phone calls from every HS student who thinks he/she might, perhaps, want to come. Or even be admitted for the brag factor.</p>
<p>The very most selective colleges may perhaps file communications from applicants, but they don't count "demonstrated interest." They know that many of their applicants are much too busy doing real achievements in the real world to lie around waiting for opportunities to trick admission officers.</p>
<p>I mean its a business effictive practice. Universities, at the end of the day, are businesses and need to uphold certain criteria such as acceptance rates (the more selective, the more prestigious the school), and % yield of accepted that enroll (the higher, the more prestigious the school).</p>
<p>well they received over 21,000 applications last year for the freshmen class.that's a crapload, and i'd say 43% of applicants admitted for a 13,000 undergraduate school is a lot</p>
<p>
[quote]
is baylor selective enough to use this method??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's what I was thinking. </p>
<p>Collegerules - where are you getting that info. The latest I can find is the CDS for 2005-06 which shows an acceptance rate of 65%. I find it a bit hard to believe that the school became so much more selective in one year.</p>
<p>i got it off collegeboard bud, check it out. they just updated it. thats why i said it has to be a record or something, truly amazing. they received like 21,500 apps this year for their freshman class. imagine if their school was smaller man they would be at like 25% admission rate</p>
<p>More applicants AND 9% fewer enrolled. Comparing 05 to 06, applications went up a lot but 1st-year enrollment went down as well. 3168 in '05; 2783 in '06. SAT midrange was basically unchanged. "Level of applicant interest" as an admission factor is listed as "considered". But then again, Baylor does not rank any nonacademic factors as important or very important.</p>
<p>It looks like Baylor is playing a numbers game. They are getting more applicants but the academic credentials of the incoming class are not improving, despite class rank, GPA, and SAT/ACT scores being the only admission factors listed as "very important". Other than lowering % accepted, they don't seem to be making much progress, but perhaps it will take more time. Their approach seems to lack subtlety, but I guess you can't blame them for trying.</p>
<p>I haven't read this whole thread, but I think an important point has been not really been emphasized, though some posts have alluded to it:</p>
<p>The vast majority of schools in this country are not collecting data in order to decide who to accept, but to find enough students to accept. I know at my institution, getting enough admitted students to enroll is a major concern every year. If Baylor is accepting such a high percentage of applicants, then it's a concern there, too.</p>
<p>Thus, there's nothing "depressing" about this article or the information in it, from an applicant point of view. This is marketing, not selective admissions--they're trying to find students who want to go there, not find out who not to accept.</p>
<p>I am not sure how much "word will get out." Not a lot of people read the Chronicle. The Baylor presentation I went to was at least five years ago. They've been doing this for awhile.</p>
<p>I'm still trying to understand why this practice is considered so bad by some of you. A school is looking for the intersection of good students and students who actually want to attend. If you have two students who are virtually equal in all of the quantitative and qualitative measures, but one is highly charged and excited about atttending the school and has made this known, what is wrong with taking this into account? In some respects, this is like giving preferences to legacies. They already know the school and they and their families are likely to be supportive of the school during the college years and afterwards. If academic strength is not being sacrificed, then what is the problem with giving the admissions nod to someone who is proclaiming (hopefuly truthfully) their desire to attend?</p>
<p>Looking further at the 05 & 06 baylor CDS (section D2), Baylor's transfer applications went way up as well: 1636 to 2727. They enrolled 494 transfer student in 06, up from 422 in 05. That helps the acceptance rates to go down as well. More transfers, fewer freshmen. I'm not faulting Baylor for this. For whatever reason people are more interested in Baylor. High school graduation demographics are also helping them, and other U's as well, but demographics don't come close to accounting for Baylor's numbers.</p>
<p>Wow! This is my third child to do this and I never heard of this practice. I guess this might be the explanation for her not getting into schools. It is rather sad that because she researched her schools and made her decisions based on their literature and websites that she might not get into the schools of her choice because she didn't know that she should be calling them daily to let them know of her interest. And it is too bad for the schools, because she is an excellent student and community member which is why she doesn't have the time. Having said this, I guaratee you that if I had another child they would be on the phone daily saying "this is my first choice" More and more I am beginning to believe that the whole college process is not about talent but about learning to play the game. It's very sad, because we see the carryover into the workplace where workers don't do their best because it is the right thing to do. Instead they just do what they have to to play the game.</p>
<p>if you had ever been to baylor's campus you would know why everyone applies there and wants to go there. simply gorgeous and huge. very old elegant castle like buildings, along with great athletics. it is the oldest and by far the largest baptist university in the WORLD.</p>
<p>
[quote]
is baylor selective enough to use this method??
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It is precisely the fact that Baylor isn't as selective as Harvard that allows them to use this method. Top schools simply don't not have enough variation in the dataset to make many significant decisions. Moreover, they dont' really have to. Its signficant enough at Baylor to reduce their number of admits signficantly. In schools with pretty high yields, there isn't going to be much of a gain for something somewhat costly.</p>
I think every aspect of life has always been a game through the centuries. But only those in the know, those born in the right circumstance, or those with a lot of experience knew the rules. With the advent of the internet and this "age of information", more and more people are understanding the "game" and the rules. You would hope that society and its members acted in a fair and rightous manner, but with limited resources (slots at Harvard, being the boss in a corporation, being a congressman, etc), this has never been the case. It has always been to some degree, the survival of the fittest. At least if you are resourceful now, there are ways to find out how the game is played. Fortunately for us, we have the American educational system. There are many opportunities and the sky is the limit if you apply yourself.</p>