<p>I was just checking the Colgate website and noticed some curious stats, which indicate that in this year where there have been so many articles about students applying to more and more schools, Colgate's apps and some statistics of admitted students seem to have dropped a bit.</p>
<p>Average GPA 2010: 3.71 2009: 3.69
Class Rank 2010:83% 95% in top 20% 2009: 80% 93% in top 20%
(% in top 10%) </p>
<p>Also 2% more from private school than last year. Any thoughts? I know that last year was a record breaker for Colgate in largest applicant pool, but is there more to this than a 1 year blip?</p>
<p>It's not really by much. So I don't think they're too concerned. Especially that one of the dorms has finally been moved out of its "forced triple" status!</p>
<p>It's not so much the number of apps (down slightly under 2%) or the number of acceptances (up 1%) nor even the slightly lower scores of some of those accepted, as that this is coming in during the year when people are talking about the "perfect storm" of college application growth.</p>
<p>I think it's a little concerning. Not so much that apps are down 2% (because last year was such an extreme record breaker) and apps are still up 20% over the last two years. It's more of a concern that they had to accept more (despite less applicants) and test scores were down a little. There also may be a lag effect here. While students could check the most recent figures on individual college websites(sometimes more hidden than others), anyone comparing colleges using Princeton Review guidebook type of reference data would still see SAT and admit % info from the class of 2008 stats when they were applying; so the vastly improved class of 2009 info may not be fully absorbed into the applicant consciousness until next year's class applies. But it is a little concerning with regard to the "perfect storm of admissions" comment.</p>
<p>Has anyone thought that one reason for the little slip in grades is because that they are taking more scholarship athletes then ever; and they are trying to balance the numbers with more students.</p>
<p>{{The year when people are talking about the "perfect storm" of college application growth.}}</p>
<p>The trickle down effect will be coming to an end in future (i.e not many) years. Its no secret many who are attending Midd (I dont want to offend anyone here) were denied at Dartmouth, Williams, and Amherst etc. In a few short years as the number of apps decrease, more and more students will be admitted to their 1st 2nd 3rd choice schools and the colleges down the pecking order will no longer have the benefit of having the top kids somewhat be forced to matriculate b/c it was the best ( ranking wise, kids and parents care) college they were admitted to. </p>
<p>This is one reason colleges are feverishly attempting to increase their ranking now b/c the higher up the rankings a college becomes, the more apps and the greater yield the college experiences. </p>
<p>e.g. Colby is a backup to Midd, Bowdoin, et al at the present time (yeah I know, Colby is many students 1st choice. Forget about that for demonstration purposes) But should Colby become ranked # 9, all of a sudden its no longer considered a back-up school but becomes a 1st choice top ten college ( the prestige whore syndrome)---and yield and apps increase.</p>
<p>Colgate is having an issue b/c their aid is notoriously horrible. Not the amount met to those who receive aid, but the actual number who are accepted and are given financial help. Only 30% of those attending Colgate receive any form of financial help--the lowest of any college I know of. Think about it, if you were a student who knew that you could only afford Colgate if a substantial amount of your costs were subsidized by the college, but only 3 out of 10 students are offered aid (which means Colgate uses ability to pay as an admission criterion) your incentive for applying to Colgate certainly wouldnt be as great as alternative colleges (and higher in the rankings) that offer aid to 50-70% of their admits.</p>
<p>{{I think it's a little concerning. Not so much that apps are down 2% }}</p>
<p>I don't know of another top LAC that had a decrease in apps. This year had the largest app pool of any year to date.</p>
<p>Colgate admissions views this year's dip as statistically insignificant - 136 less applications. Instead they view it as a good thing that applications are still up at the level of last year's significant 22% increase in applications from the year before.</p>
<p>Colgate admissions views this year's dip as statistically insignificant - 136 less applications. }}</p>
<p>I agree. The issue will be in the years ahead and if colleges down the ranking pecking order can maintain the same level of matriculating students. I go back to my previous comment; if a student gets accepted to Midd, and Amherst , Williams or Dartmouth (Midds greatest percentage of college cross admits) the student who today may have to go to Midd, will tomorrow possibly be accepted, due to far fewer apps, at the aforementioned colleges and matriculate to one of the competitive schools. The same holds true for every college. Williams will lose students to the Ivies that otherwise would have enrolled at Williams in todays environment</p>
<p>An admission officer at a top LAC informed me an interesting false stat scam some colleges are doing is counting students who submit the initial app online (but never follow up with their transcript etc) in the number of applications who <em>applied</em>--never mind they changed their mind and looked elsewhere. </p>
<p>My own kid did just that at a few colleges. After more consideration, she decided a few particular colleges werent for her and wouldnt attend even if accepted, so she never had anything sent from the h/s, or her essay etc. Wes was one, curiously. Of course I was out 50 bucks :( per college if they didnt have a free app policy, as Colgate does now</p>
<p>I don't know how many additional scholarship athletes they're taking to assess what effect it may have on admissions. I think the target class size is remaining constant at ~ 730, so you are right to think that it may be a contributing factor. The new SAT shouldn't have any bearing because, except for the new writing section, I don't think the rest of the test or the scoring has changed at all.</p>
<p>There's two different issues being discussed here: the minor drop in apps and the also minor drop in grades.</p>
<p>If the drop in grades/SAT/ACT is intentional to recruit and attract athletes, that's okay. Other schools in the Patriot League have been doing that for a while and it's had results not only in their sports teams but in the corresponding rise in name recognition and consequent standing of those schools. If Colgate is wants to take on some athletes whose grades are marginally less, but wind up increasing name recognition and recapturing some of their prestige that way, well and good. Certainly lots of other schools do that. OTOH, the drop may also be attributable to the drop in apps, and the resulting necessity of accepting a class from that pool, which pool had lower grades. </p>
<p>But the drop in apps is a different story and not explainable by the desire to recruit. (except I guess you might say, as other schools reputations have increased, Colgate has lost applicants to them).</p>
<p>Then again I may well have sparked much ado about nothing. It's only one year and a small drop. I'm surprised no one has yet told me to chill out and wait for more data. So I'll say it myself.</p>
<p>the number of athletes accepted went down with scholarships, and supposedly they are smarter.</p>
<br>
[QUOTE=""]
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Colgate is having an issue b/c their aid is notoriously horrible. Not the amount met to those who receive aid, but the actual number who are accepted and are given financial help. Only 30% of those attending Colgate receive any form of financial help--the lowest of any college I know of. Think about it, if you were a student who knew that you could only afford Colgate if a substantial amount of your costs were subsidized by the college, but only 3 out of 10 students are offered aid (which means Colgate uses ability to pay as an admission criterion) your incentive for applying to Colgate certainly wouldnt be as great as alternative colleges (and higher in the rankings) that offer aid to 50-70% of their admits.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>get the facts straight. according to usnews 44% of colgate students get financial aid. check out middlebury and williams for a lower percentage of 42%. for a really poor school, how about washington and lee at 31%.</p>
<p>I actually did the initial send in but no followed materials for swarthmore, vassar and a few other schools. It's kinda funny if they counted me as a student who wasn't admitted.
Roadlesstravelled, it's funny how your D ended up doing that with wes.</p>
<p>As far as finaid goes, i'm not sure what % of students they give it to, but colgate's finaid award was one of the two most generous ones i received, sadly i won't be going there anyway. Man, debt sucks, but what canya do.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>i would venture it has to do with the increase in minorities enrolling.<<</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>apps went down this year because of minorities enrolling??? As in, this year's potential applicants, seeing that minority enrollment went up last year, decided not to apply?????</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>the grades of *this * year's applicants went down because minorities enrolled? No one has enrolled yet, and certainly no one (except possibly EDs) had even accepted admission when these stats came out. So how could minority enrollment affect this year's stats?</p>
<p>Unless I'm greatly misunderstanding your post (and I hope that is the case) this comment seems to reflect an agenda more than a reasoned conclusion.</p>
<p>you've spewed this inaccuracy elsewhere, and i've corrected it there. colgate is 44% on aid]]</p>
<p>Do the math. You're wrong. fwiw- The fact Colgate is horroble on aid doesn't change the fact it's a great college..albiet a cheap one. You can't do eveything ;)</p>
<p>Colgate--Full-time freshman enrollment: 729
Number who applied for need-based aid: 272
Number who were judged to have need: 219
Number who were offered aid: 219
Number who had full need met: 219</p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>I think it's a little concerning. Not so much that apps are down 2% (because last year was such an extreme record breaker) and apps are still up 20% over the last two years. It's more of a concern that they had to accept more (despite less applicants) and test scores were down a little.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>the final sentence is the key. the need to accept more and accept with lower test scores is because of the increasing enrollment of minorities. the percentage of colgate students that are minorities is increasing. generally speaking, they will be harder to enroll so you have to take more of them and they statistically do not score as well on standardized tests.</p>
<p>if colgate wanted to remain as white as 10 or 20 years ago, the accept rate could go down and the scores could go up.</p>
<p>Colgate--Full-time freshman enrollment: 729
Number who applied for need-based aid: 272
Number who were judged to have need: 219
Number who were offered aid: 219
Number who had full need met: 219</p>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Where does US News publish aid stats? They don't. </p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>apparently you haven't looked hard enough. from usnews's tuition and financial aid section. look under "percent of 2004 graduating class who have borrowed". i'm quoting the entire student body.</p>
<p>washington and lee is really suspect because unlike most schools where the difference between freshman and total is either the same or increases, theirs drops by 6%. can you say bait and switch?</p>
<p>Admitted students with demonstrated need met in full 100%
Percent of class receiving financial aid 35.6%</p>
<p>That's just for admitted students... I believe a lower proportion of the student body will be represented by that. I love how your link just proved you wrong, thanks for making our job easier :-)</p>
<p>Btw, freshman are representative of every class since in most classes the distribution is about the same. A large sample size means that there aren't going to be huge fluctuations from year to year, and Colgate attracts a similar (albeit slightly homologous) student body each year.
Athletic Scholarships don't count, they're not need based awards.
Need based scholarships are in place to make college affordable for applicants whereas Athletic scholarships are to make the school look good...</p>
<p>I'm not complaining, the finaid package from colgate was the 2nd best i got and they're giving me around 5k more in grants than wesleyan is, even though colgate is 2k less per year. Go figure, Wesleyan seems to be more of a pennypincher :-(</p>