<p>Just thought many of you would be interested in reading this article, written by Jaques Steinberg, author of The Gatekeepers.</p>
<p>Introducing</a> The Choice - The Choice Blog - NYTimes.com</p>
<p>Thanks, LImom. I'm always interested in what Jacques Steinberg has to say about college admissions. Kind of late in the cycle to be launching a blog, though. I wonder why the Times didn't wait until after May 1 to begin.</p>
<p>How'd he manage to write an article in the future? ;)</p>
<p>Oops! :) </p>
<p>My bad.</p>
<p>One of the articles in the series about how the top schools have gotten more (and sometimes substantially more) applications for the Class of 2013--leading to what will be sure to be record low acceptance rates and many rejections come Tuesday.</p>
<p>odd, that he would have no comment on Wesleyan (applications shot up 22% this year.) Maybe, he thinks it's a fluke.</p>
<p>Steinberg was on the Today show this morning. He really didn't have much new to say--mostly pushing his blog/book. There was also a student blogger on the show (she was patched in via Skype) and there were technical problems--it didn't work well. Overall, I wasn't impressed with the segment. Steinberg pointed out the obvious.</p>
<p>"One of the articles in the series about how the top schools have gotten more (and sometimes substantially more) applications for the Class of 2013--leading to what will be sure to be record low acceptance rates and many rejections come Tuesday."</p>
<p>Williams had a 20% drop in applications.</p>
<p>^Williams, Middlebury, Amherest, Grinnell, Pomona all had fewer applications, some quite significantly fewer, like Williams. Concern by applicants that the financial aid packages won't cut the mustard?</p>
<p>What strikes me is that the LACs listed are disproportionately known by the well-to-do and are below the radar for most of the public. Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf's have taken much bigger hits to sales than Macys and Target in this economy. With strong need based financial aid, I'm guessing the drop off in applications are largely from folks who believe they will be full payers and are worried about their economic futures.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm guessing the drop off in applications are largely from folks who believe they will be full payers and are worried about their economic futures.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, they will be full payers somewhere else, then. I don't see that as the explanation.</p>
<p>Other schools with a tradition of attracting the well-off, such as Vanderbilt Univ., have had a large increase in applications this year. (In VU's case, it has resulted in a big drop in the acceptance rate--just under 20% this year, I believe.) VU announced a no-loan policy starting this year, and I suspect that resulted in increased interest from those are not expecting to be full-pay.</p>
<p>midmo, not necessarily. The kiddo from an affluent home who is worried about being a full paying student at top flight school like Williams can certainly drop down a tier or two and be offered merit aid, or they could go to their instate flagship (hope for honors college there too). This student has many more options than the middle class or lower lower income B student with a 1500-1700 SAT score.</p>
<p>^^^Yes, you could be right. </p>
<p>The really well-to-do have always had more options, but in my experience they haven't exercised them, much. I suppose the situation may have really changed.</p>
<p>Midmo, I do think you are right about many not looking at other options. Perhaps the student with parents in the upper middle class or the very comfortable, but not very wealthy camps, will branch out a bit more.</p>
<p>re post #6: The OP apparently lurks the CC forum; Wesleyan was added as an addendum:</p>
<p>Another thread has reported that Harvard will have a 7% acceptance rate this year. Expecting other schools to report similar single digit figures.</p>