<p>Question - do you think it is fair to encourage your children to apply to a ridiculous number of schools and possibly take admission opportunities as well as possibly scholarship opportunities away from other qualified students ? I see listings on the list of admissions thread of some students with ten or more acceptances !! That is inconsiderate and irresponsible in my eyes. It should not be a goal to accumulate admission and scholarship offers if there is little interest in actually attending the majority of the schools. I can't imagine any student being remotely interested in that many schools and you certainly don't need to apply to a multitude of "safeties".</p>
<p>I think students, parents, and counselors need to be more self-selective. It would make many things easier and faster. But it won't happen because everyone thinks they're special, and that they might slip through the cracks.</p>
<p>Tragedy of the commons. Because of the fear of scarcity (i.e. admission to one good college with, if needed, the required amount of discount, and the hoped for amount of prestige), people attempt to hoard by taking from the commons and appropriating for their own private interest. Result is that scarcity is created where none, in fact, might have actually existed.</p>
<p>Personally, I agree. I doubt that in most cases the applicants were really excited about 15+ schools enough to warrent their many applications. I mean, I do think that if you are shooting for super selective schools, then you really do have to have a longer list to cover yourself, but not insanely long. I applied to 9 schools (I realize now that it probably could have been 8), which I think was right for me, because it included an appropriate array of reaches (of which I got no acceptances :(), matches, and a safety. Still, even with my Ivy strikeout, I am choosing between 4 schools (3 schools seriously), and I can't imagine how people with 10+ acceptances are possibly choosing, unless they are just going on prestige (which I suspect many are). Of course, I really liked pretty much every school on my list, so those who were less choosy with the schools that they applied to might be able to easily eliminate some, which begs the question--why apply there anyway?</p>
<p>My son was one of the ones who got 10 acceptances out of 10 apps. We had no idea this would happen. I might have encouraged him to omit his 2 "safeties" if I hadn't seen the andison story where the school I thought might be my son's safety had been a terminal waitlist for andison, who had similar stats to my son. The other 8 he thought he had to include because he had no idea where he would be admitted and did want a choice. We had no idea he'd have 10 choices. No idea. My son was excited about all 10, has narrowed down to 6. If he'd felt there was safety with fewer schools, he might have done it differently, but how do you know?</p>
<p>Continuing Bethie's post; my D applied to 9 schools because she needed Financial Aid had we no idea where her best financial aid deal would be coming from. Yes, she also was accepted everywhere she applied; in hindsight, perhaps she should have omitted one or two schools. However, when you absolutely cannot pay full price (perhaps you will NEVER KNOW WHAT THIS IS LIKE) you do everything you can to make sure your child is getting the best deal possible. Many of our children deserve every acceptance they received; many did not receive many acceptances at all. My D and Bethie's S were very lucky.</p>
<p>Perhaps, goblue, you don't know how the game is played. Most of us have done our homework; extensive, exhausting research so that our children get the very best education possible using the limited resources available to them. I suggest that you do the same.</p>
<p>Yeah, mini, I see that fear of scarcity kick in at the Shop Rite before a snowstorm when everyone hoards bread & milk. But don't the demographics show that there really IS an upswing in kids approaching college age, and they are now more likely than ever to apply?</p>
<p>I will say, though, I felt embarrassed after the first several acceptances and I think my son has kept it rather quiet. It does feel excessive, but we had no reliable clue where to stop.</p>
<p>I don't agree about this being a "tragedy of the commons." All schools over-accept; you're not "taking spots away" from others, because you can only go to one school. And the schools know this--there are not a lot of unused slots on the shelf going to waste because someone is "hoarding" them.</p>
<p>Every school fills the spaces they have, or if they don't, it's because they have enrollment issues, not because someone is walking around with a sack of acceptances.</p>
<p>I'm with bethievt on this - we simply had no idea of the outcome and I think many are in the same position. I found this site during the "andison" story and was flabbergasted at his outcome. My son applied to 8 and it turned out to be far too many - but it could have gone the other way. We had no naviance scattergrams or knowledgeable GC's to point the way so we did the best we could but I think it really has to be an individual call. My son didn't even visit his two reaches beforehand because he never thought he'd get in - and now he can't go to accepted students days because he has prior commitments! As far as safeties go -well, it's sometimes hard to figure out what a real safety is these days. I think most approach the process thoughtfully - I honestly haven't met too many students who get a kick out of spending more weekends than necessary filling out applications.</p>
<p>Upon further reflection, I want to make a caveat: even when people apply to many, many schools, I try not to assume that they are merely prestige hunting. I may suspect it, but there are many other reasons--finaid, very unstable admissions, those going for very selective, highly specialized programs (BA/MD, music, theatre), etc.--why a student might apply to many schools. Like SpringfieldMom's D, I know a kid (the Co-Valedictorian of my school, in fact) who needed a very good finaid package and applied and was admitted to 8 of his 9 schools (waitlisted at WashU--surprise, surprise). He will be enrolling in a good, but not very prestigious school that is offering him a free ride and the right programs for his interests. He did not apply to 9 schools to hoard acceptances--he needed the money.</p>
<p>"I don't agree about this being a "tragedy of the commons." All schools over-accept; you're not "taking spots away" from others, because you can only go to one school. And the schools know this--there are not a lot of unused slots on the shelf going to waste because someone is "hoarding" them."</p>
<p>It means the chances of the student finding the best fit, being offered admission and the right amount of aid, and actually deciding to go, declines. You aren't taking away places; you are contributing to declining selectivity, even as more students are rejected. (And I can't see how, short of EDs, you could do it any other way - certainly we aren't planning to.) It's basically the equivalent of an arms race, in which all end up more threatened than when they began. No one is "hoarding acceptances" (well, some folks are ;)); they are increasing their individual chances, with the result being that chances are reduced for everyone.</p>
<p>"But don't the demographics show that there really IS an upswing in kids approaching college age, and they are now more likely than ever to apply?"</p>
<p>Not anywhere close to the increase in applications "at some places". The reality is that 70% of students get into the first-choice school, and there are schools, sometimes even pretty decent ones, that are begging for warm bodies who can pay.</p>
<p>I find myself with unusual bedfellows on this argument. But I think it is wrong to blame the students for the explosion in the number of applications per student. I place the blame with those defenders of "holistic" read "unpredicatable" admissions. Who can blame the students when the colleges intentionally refuse to give reasonable guidelines for fear that applications and therefore "selectivity" will decline.</p>
<p>I always said no more than 5-6. D did one. S added to hers averages to 5. He had to justify everyone and at the time there were many uncertainties-including economic ones. Also, he has broad interests. He said in retrospect he probably should have done 6-7.Intially he was going to do 12. Actually turned down a couple EA and rolling ones before the end of the year. Did not realize the extent of acceptances or merit that would come his way. We were more doubting than his counselor/teachers.</p>
<p>SpringfieldMom - I didn't really think of getting my child a college education as a "game". We were fortunate to find a good college counselor (private, not at our large public school) who gave us the advice we needed to make smart decisions and my children did not have to submit an exhaustive number of applications. I'm truly sorry you cannot afford to pay full tuition and it is very understandable seeing that price of a college education is exhorbitant. I won't go into my own financial situation but fortunately we have been able to put my son through his first choice college and now my daughter will have the same opportunity because of early and smart investing and planning. My comments, however, were not really directed at your situation as the schools that your daughter applied to and was accepted at are not necessarily the institutions that are turning droves of highly qualified applicants. The majority of schools appear to have had a fairly consistent number of applicants and are maintaining the usual 70% admit rate. I was speaking of the Ivies, very selective liberal arts colleges and the like, the type of schools that were also the subject of the NYT article this week.</p>
<p>bethie, I'm not judging you, but I am curious. Your S did not receive any EA acceptances that he could live with? (My D initially had 12 on her list, then 10, but with one EA in hand, she felt she could dramatically reduce that list size.) Naturally if that EA is the least-liked safety, it might not be motivating. But to receive an EA acceptance from even one match school (setting aside the important fin. aid contingency just mentioned), would I think eliminate the need for <em>several</em> other matches, for example, if some of those are quite similar to the EA school.</p>
<p>It's because of the uncertainty. At our hs, we had a kid rejected from state U but accepted at Notre Dame; another rejected at state U and accepted at Dartmouth. Many others.... It's unpredictable. Students are at a loss as to what their chances really are anymore so they apply to a dozen schools, a dozen scholarships, hoping something hits. This will be over, IMO, when the boomer bubble passes. (egads, what'll it be like when these kids hit the labor market?!!!)</p>
<p>Well, I think you can see part of the problem from perusing some of the ubiquitous "School X vs. Y vs. Z" on the College Search forum over the last week. All too often, X is a large state university in a college town, Y is a small, rural LAC, and Z is a mid-sized urban university (or something along these lines, the point being that the schools have little in common). Kids are using a haphazard application approach, "throwing spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks," if you will. Little thought or planning going into the process, with students instead doing their research after acceptances come in. With more effort up front in selecting a group of application targets with desirable characteristics, you can usually end up with a tighter, more narrowly defined application list.</p>
<p>As others have said, it's uncertainty, especially wrt financial aid. We are EFC 0, and cannot afford any gap at all. Son applied to 3 absolute safeties, 1 reach, 2 matches he <em>loved</em>, and 3 matches he liked a great deal. The large number of matches was to make sure we had some strong financial aid matches. He ended up being accepted at his safeties and "love" schools and waitlisted at the "like" schools. But more importantly, the range of financial aid at the accepting schools has been from full ride without loans down to 10K gap with 6K loans. Even for his two "love" schools, one did a full ride, and the other is being very difficult about his not having a noncustodial parent statement and will probably gap him to "punish" him for that. </p>
<p>So, end result, we applied to 9 schools to end up with two strong options, financial aid wise.</p>
<p>My son ended up applying to 11 schools -- they included one state school with automatic acceptance to the school, but not to the program he wanted (electrical engineering). He applied SCEA to Stanford and was rejected. If he had been accepted he would have chosen not to send out 1/2 of his applications. In the end he wound up being accepted to 8 schools, with 4 offering him some merit aid (differing amounts).</p>
<p>He would have applied to less schools if there was more certainty in the process. To give you an example of the capriciousness of this process, a kid from his school got accepted to Stanford SCEA, yet rejected from Rice. (Rice is very hard to get into from Houston.) My son got rejected from Stanford, and accepted at Rice, and they offered him 2 scholarships -- a 1/2 tuition scholarship and a research scholarship guaranteeing him a research mentorship for his first 2 years and an additional $8,000/yr for those 2 years! We never would have predicted that in a million years!</p>