<p>To believe that admission to selective schools is becomming more cometitive you would have to believe either that there is a growing pool of highly qualified students or a shrinking pool of avaiable slots. I don't think that either assumption can be supported by the available facts. There has been only modest growth in the echo baby boom and it has been accompanied by modest growth in slots at highly selective schools and number of schools considered highly selective and desirable.</p>
<p>So why are admit rates going down at so many schools? The obvious answer is because the available pool of high calibre students is applying to more schools and/or the ease of applying and the relentless marketing by the schools has encouraged a lot of kids to apply who really don't have a chance of admission.</p>
<p>The 8 Ivy's Stanford, MIT and Duke will admit roughly 30,000 applicants. They will recieve something north of 180,000 application between them. But there are only 28,000 kids who scored over 1450 on the SATs and a surprising number of those 28,000, especially out in the vaste wasteland west of the Appalachians will not even apply to one of those 11 schools preferring for various reasons personal, intellectual, and financial reasons to go elsewhere.</p>
<p>I don't think the modest growth in slots at the very top has been equal to the growth in the number of applicants over the past 10 years. </p>
<p>One indication of that is that the score parameters of the top schools have inched up over that period. I think thats a good indicator that the competition has gone from extremely tough to incredibly tough.</p>
<p>One point, though. If the original post is accurate, then it means that all the "lottery ticket" analogy is not correct. There is a type of candidate they want , and many of the schools think alike, albeit to varying degrees.</p>
<p>The multiple apps and marketing also have an impact, as applications have grown faster than the applying population has. There has also been a slow but steady trend to apply to schools further away from home. (This has happened for decades now, but its very slow.)</p>
<p>The real issue here is not that the schools reject the kids they would have rejected ten years ago and that there are more of them applying today. The salient point is they are rejecting (some of) the kids who would have been admitted back then, and the class SAT parameters are rising to prove it.</p>
<p>I was rejected from Yale myself, many years ago. I went to my third-choice school (the only one that accepted me the first round), and transferred after two years to a different school, where I roomed with a guy who had transferred away from Yale.</p>
<p>My main reaction the day I received letters from all three schools is relief that I didn't go 0 for 3. When I got a phone call later that day from a girl I really liked and learned we were headed for the same school I was, my mood picked up further. We ended up dating for four years.</p>
<p>From the vantage point of thirty years later, I can tell you that I wouldn't trade my own college memories for anything that might have happened at Yale.</p>
<p>Another variable is the industry that has grown to support higher end applicants. A dean of students at a "public" HS in Long Island told me parents spend about $45,000 to help their children prepare for Ivy applications. this includes AP tutors, application consultants, SAT tutors (at $120 per hour), and multiple visits to targeted schools. The school and parents begin the freshman year with a plan for the targeted schools. If the college values leadership, they have the student start a club, if it is research, the student is provided with a research position at local research hospital, etc. The plan is executed over the three critical years and evaluated continuously. Finally a team is assembled to provide feedback on the essays. Some take months with over 10 versions generated before the final one is produced. Letters are crafted to contain the key words the targeted schools want to hear, etc. Their placement rate is extraordinary. This is being replicated to some extant all over the country. As this continues the competition will only get worse.</p>
<p>"A dean of students at a "public" HS in Long Island told me parents spend about $45,000 to help their children prepare for Ivy applications." </p>
<p>Hmmmmm if this is a reality; are college aware about these practices! I have spend only 100-200 dollars on AP Books and SAT Books. I will add another $100 for two SAT II and one SAT 1 fees. His school is paying for AP exams. How many people can afford more than $45,000 on these preparations when you can do by yourself for $500? I wish I have that kind of money, I will pay for a bigger house.</p>
<p>I promised not use the name of a particular school, but I do know that it is happening in schools throughout the country, not just Long Island. In our area, many top students now have full-time tutoring, and there is widespread use of admissions consultants. Further, summer college-preparation programs begin in middle school and are not cheap. If one uses a number that was used in one of the forums that 28,000 kids scored 1450 or higher on the SAT, it would not surprise me if there are at least 28,000 families that could afford the $45,000 (I'm not saying that the kids who scored that high did have that help, mine did, and he didn't!). My only point is that it is contributing to the competition and the rise in overall scores.</p>
<p>An interesting anecdote, my wife was talking to a women whose son is at Harvard. She suggested that we get a tutor for our son, but then let it slip that there was a downside. Her son had called in a panic, he felt lost, he didn't know how to organize himself to study without his tutor!!</p>
<p>A few years ago a Newsweek (I believe) article said that the average spent on "extra academic programs" for kids was about $12,000. It appears that in some areas this number has been greatly accelerated.</p>
<p>But I would be willing to venture that many of those expensively packaged applicants are the ones whose parents cry about their children being "massacred" in the admissions process, while other applicants who are the inexpensive real deal get in just fine. I'm not worried about the admissions arms race: in the end, the kid has to do the work in college to make the college experience worthwhile.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A few years ago a Newsweek (I believe) article said that the average spent on "extra academic programs" for kids was about $12,000. It appears that in some areas this number has been greatly accelerated.>></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>But there are different extra-academic programs and they are attended for very different purposes. I doubt that Carolyn's S wanting to take Greek or my S wanting to take math in the summer, or SoozieVT's D going to drama camp has anything to do with college prep. On the other hand, PR and Kaplan SAT prep courses and hiring tutors from Ivysuccess have everything to do with it.</p>
<p>So, okay.<br>
3 summers of academic camps: at 2,5k-3k each: approx. $9k maximum
3 years of extra math program at $1k each: $3k
1 copy 10RealSATS: $30.
Two years worth of being addicted to CC (mine): free
Total: $12,030, of which only $30 plus CC were geared specifically toward college.<br>
Somehow, the thought of $45k boggles the mind.</p>
<p>I believe those type of summer programs are very helpful preparation for college, my S. did those as well, and they are somewhat reasonable. But..</p>
<p>A private tutor for EACH AP class at $120 per hour, a different tutor for each section of the SAT at $120 per hour for a period of months, an admissions consultant at a similar rate, tuition and travel to special on-campus summer programs can cost $8,000, and etc. It all begins to add up.</p>
<p>The reason that the expensive packaging is growing is that is does work. I would like to see a field on the application that said, please describe the help you have had outside of school (worded better of course) with a little extra consideration for those who don't go to extreme measures. I think that would either end it, or at least people would be forced to knowingly lie and risk rejection if caught doing so.</p>
<p>My mind still boggles at the idea of having a tutor for even one AP class, but I can see how it could add up.
I've been thinking that students could help one another if they formed study groups. They would be free, and they would get a lot of out the study groups. College profs urge students to do so all the time. But I suppose wealthy families would rather pay someone $120 an hour to help one kid at a time then to make the effort to organize the study groups that could help more students from a more wider variety of backgrounds.</p>
<p>I'm with you. I pushed the study group idea with my kid, but with the different scheduled activities it was just not possible to find a time the kids could all meet on a regular basis. I wish the schools would do more to encourage this.</p>
<p>dadx, "The salient point is they are rejecting (some of) the kids who would have been admitted back then, and the class SAT parameters are rising to prove it."</p>
<p>Yes, that is exactly what Harvard wrote to my son in his waitlist letter this year, something like "you are the caliber of student who in previous years would have been admitted." </p>
<p>Either it is true or it's just a more polite way (than a rejection letter) of saying we don't want you. Since he's not a legacy, well-connected, etc... and there is no extenuating reason to be polite to him, we're choosing to believe it.</p>
<p>As for the $120 hour AP study tutors, wow, that blows me away. How would the kid who has depended on such help even make it at a top university? If my S had needed a tutor for AP classes, that would have been my first sign that applying to Top 25 schools was not very practical at all.</p>
<p>Momof2inca: Exactly my thought. Neither of my kids did any tutoring or prep class of any kind. We figured they were either cut out for these schools or not, no sense inflating scores to something that wasn't who they really were.</p>