<p>Here's the thing. If it's your first kid experiencing the college admissions process, and the only thing you have to go on is 20+ years ago when you yourself did it and other people's experiences whom you've never met, it's pretty hard to gauge these thing. It is a different world than it was in the "Bronze Age," as my kids call it, when I applied to college. I submitted one application and was accepted. There were no other (known) opportunities.</p>
<p>Sure, I agree that there are those who just randomly goes down a list of "name" schools and applies to each Ivy (or equivalent) school there is just because of the prestige involved or that their extended family members insist that they only apply to these schools, regardless of fit. Sadly, this is probably what is skewing application/acceptance numbers.</p>
<p>My D applied to 6 schools....one was a "given" since it was a state school that she was guaranteed admission at and her school is high-pressure to apply to the state U's.....we had done fairly exhaustive research on schools that both offered the major she was contemplating and were feasible geographically. Since her proposed major is fairly limited, our list of schools was so as well. But if she had proposed a major that was fairly standard, she would have probably applied to more than 6 schools.</p>
<p>As it was, she was only accepted to 4. She actually was originally only going to apply to four, but that didn't seem like enough for her. Every family is going to be different. Sure, 24 schools seems waaaay overboard, and most of our teachers/recommenders would have had a problem with writing that many recommendations. After all, how can that many schools be equally ideal for your kid??</p>
<p>But, who knows???? I'm sure my D could have applied to more, but how exhausting is this??? And for some people who are unable to visit and have a more "generic" major, I don't see it as a problem that they have multiple applications. I guess the only problem I have is when people just apply to every Ivy/Stanford/Duke/MIT, etc. just because of the name.</p>
<p>My S applied to 9 schools. He was accepted at 5, waitlisted at 1, and denied at 3 (his reaches). 3 of the five acceptances had viable financial aid offers, one was a State school, and one was an OOS State school (too high OOS tuition, with a small FA award). Of the three that had viable financial aid offers, two were his top choices after visits. He ended up going with the one of those two that gave him not only the best FA offer, but admitted him into Honors program as well. So all in all, no I don't think that 9 ended up being too many, since out of those 9 came one very good offer at his best fit school.</p>
<p>Art: Interesting. When my son told his schools guidance counselor what schools he was looking at, she said, "Those have nothing in common! Are you just picking randomly???" She was basing her comments on their size and demographics, while he was interested in strong connections to particular fields, or a feeling that he liked at the schools. His three final choices now are very similar to what you describe: large state u. in a college town, mid-sized urban graduate-heavy private university, and a very small liberal arts college. The thing is, his decisive factors weren't location or demographic, and as I said, over and over he's been accused of being random in his choices.</p>
<p>Agree that "holistic" admissions and finsncial aidn vagueries contribute to the many applications. The schools apparently like it that way because it makes them appear more selective. If they didn't want all the applications it would be easy enough to make the application itself more difficult and hence more self selecting. Not sure hwere it will all end.</p>
<p>Here's a quote from Notre Dame's admissions office that is relevant to this discussion:
[quote]
"We're only one of 10 schools in the United States that admit less than 50 percent of the applicants and yield more than 50 percent of them,"
<p>Seems as if most kids are being "greedy" with applications if only 10 schools fit that category. Admissions often seems so random, I can understand applying to a good number.</p>
<p>epiphany- If I remember correctly, bethievt's kid didn't apply to schools with an EA option, but only ED options. They were all small, highly regarded (read, competitive) LACs in various parts of the country, each of which had something special that intrigued him.<br>
I think Bethievt's son was successful because he chose so well and carefully - sort of the opposite from the random-reaches with a smattering of ivy schools- approach that many kids fall into. Most of his schools were neither uber-reaches nor slam dunks, but very likely match/reaches. I think a little luck and a lot of research paid off in his case.</p>
<p>Here's the problem that students seeking need-based aid face:</p>
<p>The colleges most likely to be generous with need based aid, with minimal loans, also are the most elite & most selective. So that leaves the need-based financial aid applicant knowing that if she can get into an Ivy, she will likely pay less than if she gets into a college where admission is more likely. </p>
<p>I think the top colleges could do a lot more to eliminate the frenzy by giving more transparent information about their financial aid policies, especially in explaining how they treat various types of income, assets and expenses. </p>
<p>I honestly would like to see colleges accept the FAFSA EFC, and refrain from claiming to meet 100% of need unless they meet that figure. I would also like to see them explain their loan & work study policies clearly, in advance. I am sure that most students would not apply to a college that they knew beforehand was unaffordable. </p>
<p>I don't think this will happen, however, because it is not in the college's interest to cut down the number of applicants or to disclose that information -- they would rather pretend to meet "full need" of their applicants while reserving the ability to leverage their aid and give preferential packages to some applicants, while burdening others with loans or huge gaps between the college's idea of "need" and the FAFSA EFC.</p>
<p>Prior to this time last year, I had no idea that the EFC could vary so much from school to school. So I now understand why it makes a kind of perverse sense to cast a wide net, even without consideration of possible merit aid!</p>
<p>I think in a way the Common App can make it a little tempting for people to apply to more schools. At some point, if you've written one extra essay, some of the supplements are also pretty easy. I think people can get carried away thinking "what the heck?" Some people have legitimate situations, described above, but I think this may be some of what leads to the strange "school x vs school y" discussions. It doesn't even necessarily have to be the Common App, some of the individual applications have such open ended questions that it's easy enough if you already have an essay done. </p>
<p>Being in Va, I had a bit of a different situation than some. While UVA and W&M can hardly be characterized as safeties, they were very strong matches for me. So while my parents encouraged me at some points to apply to more schools if I wanted, my line of thinking was that it would take an HYP acceptance to really justify picking another school over UVA, tutition being what it is. So I applied to a couple reaches that I truly wanted to go to (denied though, LOL), and then some state schools. I did get into all the state schools. I might not have applied to two of them except one had a good option athletically I wanted to keep open, unfortunately due to Title IX problems they announced this year that program was cut. I still liked some aspects of the school. The other was geographically close to home and made sense for a variety of reasons that might dictate a need for geographical proximity in a college. </p>
<p>I think maybe if the application process was later in the year you would see less schools on people's lists. It seems so far off and people want to have "options". I know it isn't realistic at all to make it later for a variety of reasons and so has to stay this way, I just think that makes a difference. If in some magical land we applied to colleges right now and heard back in two weeks, things might turn out differently.</p>
<p>SpringfieldMom - since you send "Private messages" but are not willing to receive them, I am answering you "in Public" - You missed all of my points totally and I am sorry that you misunderstood the focus of my posting. In no way did I say that your daughter's choices and the schools that accepted her were not good schools. My point in particular was that too many kids are submitting too many applications particularly to the ivies, very selective liberal arts colleges and the like to the point that other very qualified students who otherwise might have had a chance are being rejected or waitlisted. Getting on a waiting list is almost as painful as rejection, if not more so. Not many students are comfortable keeping their hopes up until those with a multitude of acceptances sort out their likes and dislikes. The Common Application has made the submission of an excessive number of appolications so much easier. Read the New York Times article of April 2 which confirms my point, as well as the article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal.</p>
<p>Trin, at least your son was using SOME rational criteria that, while not immediately obvious on the surface to others, nonetheless allowed him to select a group of schools with a common theme. So I definitely wouldn't consider that a haphazard approach. I should have probably added another generic sentence to my example to make it more stereotypical: "I either wanna be premed major and attend medical school at Harvard or study business and become a CEO, I'm not sure." ;-)</p>
<p>Op , what's your beef? No one stole a spot from your kid. Schools carefully overadmit based on yield (sometimes with "yield consultants"). They are more than aware. It's part of their game. Some of us just played their game well. D applied to 11. 10 acceptances one waitlist. Need based aid varied by $14-16k a year. Merit from $15K to $38K a year. A $23K a year difference. $92K plus increases. Easily $100K difference over 4 years. </p>
<p>D was very successful and would have been happy to attend 10 of her schools (the 11th was an in-state auto-admit that she could have been happy at if nothing else materialized. The "PanicSafety". ).</p>
<p>If you are in the position to pay full freight , then you have no idea what the majority of us are dealing with in the admissions game. It would behoove you to speak only of things you understand. </p>
<p>Trophy hunting full freight kids (as opposed to those full freight kids afraid of "vague" admissions)? Carp away. I have no doubt they deserve it. I just don't think there are very many of them.</p>
<p>I completely agree with calmom's post #27, and have been aggravated by this for a long time. (Sorry to anyone who may have viewed my comments as critical of those needing aid; being one who needs that ourselves, I am the last to criticize wide searches for the sake of f.a. alone.)</p>
<p>I find the lack of transparency in fin. aid disclosure truly irresponsible & deceptive. On the "bittersweet" thread one poster quoted from a disclosing website that I myself visited, I think - or ones like it. ("To receive this award, you must ____"; or "those awarded this scholarship consist of those with the following qualifications only, and [on one website] we awarded 30% of those who applied for this particular award last yr.")</p>
<p>I heartily agree that such forthcoming info would seriously reduce the app. frenzy. Knowing myself how intricate some of these forms & requirements can be, I doubt that families are applying to large numbers just for the "fun" of it. </p>
<p>So often you have to make 15 phone calls regarding one institution or scholarship, before you found out some hidden or "secret" info not publicized, even if published <em>somewhere</em>.:(</p>
<p>My son had two safeties, if he'd visited earlier he could probably have eliminated one of them. Of the 6 other schools, he was accepted at two, and waitlisted at one. I think he applied to just about the right number.</p>
<p>But I think we should all keep in mind that only 4% of the schools out there accept less than 50% of the applicants. (I think I am remembering that right.)</p>
<p>What calmom said. We knew we needed full aid, 100% of need, and the schools that offer that are more elite schools. Interestingly, the LAC safeties my son applied to both gapped him.</p>
<p>In retrospect I'm pretty sure my counselor was crazy (if I told you the "match" schools he offered and some of his comments you would agree), but he pretty much told me out of 6 schools (2 safties, 2 match, 2 reach) I would be cool. I'm always stunned to see the amount of applications people send out, but there has to be a reason counselors recommend a certain amount. They can't all be crazy.</p>
<p>And of course the question of applying to many colleges becomes even more important if you're international, then the number of aid offering, need blind places shrinks immensely and is essentially composed of schools that are very hard to get into, so applying to many schools in order to create the reasonable chance that you'll get into some of them, becomes a must.</p>
<p>goblue:As I said I think a kid needs to be able to justify why he/she is applying to each school. We played an elimination game with S which is why Stanford and MIT but no Ivy schools for him. He was choosing for field first, some other specific programs needs second, and merit opportunities. All but two schools had these ,but based on other info regarding financial aid along with some potential outside money, all were doable. Although the schools on the list look different there is real logic to it. As I said, in retrospect, maybe 1-2 should not have been on. At the time there was a good story.
As has been pointed out, the common app has made applying to many schools rather painless. Given this and the constant "it's a crap shoot" messages that are everywhere, it is understandable that kids will apply to most of the Ivy schools. Some schools are choosing to make their applications more unique.</p>
<p>The safety schools were 3 pencils in the Fiske guide. Though I think they were very good schools, my son did not want to spend another 4 years at a place where very few people had any idea what he was talking about.</p>
<p>One of my son's safeties was an OOS state school (UVM) that courted him heavily and supplied a free EA VIP application. He probably wouldn't have considered it without that encouragement, but once he looked into it he liked the location (Burlington, VT) and the programs. He was admitted there EA, accepted into their Honors Program, and given their Presidential Scholarship, highest award they give to OOS students - which unfortunately was only $3k. With a high OOS tuition, it just wasn't viable. His fault and mine was not checking on the OOS merit limits. If they had given a higher award, or given the OOS Honors students (of which there were only 150) in-state tuition, he might have seriously considered going there, since the Honors program looked really good.</p>
<p>Schools do send out a lot of these free VIP applications (S got several from midwest schools he had never heard of, and from schools like RPI, probably because he got a 36 on the science section of his ACT), and I guess they are hoping that if they lure strong students into applying, they might end up going there, since they may not have chosen the school on their own.</p>
<p>Seton Hall courted my S relentlessly, even tho he had zero interest in going there and did not apply. There were emails, postcards, letters, brochures, etc.</p>