<p>Some colleges already ask in their supplement which other schools one is applying to, but many students don't list all on purpose (e.g. leave away the reach schools so that the safety school does not look that much like a safety)</p>
<p>I think I have the solution to the insanity. </p>
<p>Anyone who wants a sane and easy process can just apply to a single safety school. If they are really ambitious they could also include a reach school. Then if they don't make it into the reach school, they can blame the system and the other kids who apply to too many schools. That way they would not need to look at their own limitations. I am not sure what to say about those who apply to a half dozen or so schools and still try to fault the system. At a certain point, it is not the system but the individual who is responsible for less than desired results.</p>
<p>I can honestly say I didn't think of colleges at all until this year, and I still managed to get into the Ivy League. Dunno. The main issue for me right now is trying to find money to go -- bar that, it seems like many roads are empty for me.</p>
<p>I don't think it's something worth fretting about for your entire life.</p>
<p>The key is in personal attitudes, really. Waves of applications and eliminating the Common App and other such methods will only go so far when applicants are so desperate to circumvent the system to maximize their chances. </p>
<p>I applied ED to one school, had 3 safeties that were thoroughly realistic, and 3 other schools that were pretty much matches/matchy-reaches. So if I hadn't gotten in ED, only 7 of my applications would have been processed, with 3 of them being somewhat regional universities/colleges. </p>
<p>I almost sent off applications to Cornell and Brown. But when I got to the essay question, "Why Cornell?" I found myself staring at the paper nary an idea. Why Cornell, indeed. There was no reason. I didn't want to go to that school. Sure, it was sort of selective and prestigious and an Ivy. But nothing else recommended it to me. It dawned on me that I would much rather go to one of my matches, or even one of my safeties, than go to Cornell. And if I got in, I'd be taking that spot from someone who really did want to go. </p>
<p>So how do we stop the admissions frenzy? We could start by taking a good hard look at where we're applying. I see a lot of lists on this board that could be copied verbatim from the top 10 universities and LACs on the US-News, which is very unfortunate, because there is great diversity among those schools. I get the feeling that people aren't really investigating those campuses, their cultures, their vibes. The school they go to is determined solely by prestige-o-meter. But why apply to a school you know nothing about, save for its US-News ranking? Why send in that application if you can't sing the praises of the institution's social environment, activities, campus, and people? Why take that opportunity away from someone who really loves the place?</p>
<p>At the top of the selectivity charts, one person admitted is another 2 or 3 or 6 people rejected. If people really recognized this fact, recognized it at an instinctual level, there would be more hesistation about sending in those 20, meaningless applications.</p>
<p>The one sure thing that will lessen the number of applications is an early acceptance, whether it's EA or a rolling school. (ED precludes any further applications.) It's the uncertainty of not knowing that increases the application frenzy in RD. An improved system will need to acknowledge this and emphasize the early rounds.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I mean, CC has a huge impact on the college admission process, but can it change the system of admissions?<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>That is, the lawyers would say, a question based on a fact not entered into evidence.</p>
<p>CC is what? Six years old maybe? The current admissions process was already pretty much in place well before CC came along. CC doesn't drive or define the admissions process so much as it reflects it. CC can certainly be a huge resource for individuals who use it, but if CC had never been invented I don't think that the current state of college admissions in general would be much different. There would still be same frenzy to get into top schools. There would still be the angst over grades, test scores, ECs, hooks, and essays.</p>
<p>Here's an idea:</p>
<p>How about a common app with lots of room to fully describe yourself.
On it you list your preferred colleges.</p>
<p>They all go into a database, and any college can access it and offer
you a spot. Offers have to be completed by a set date after which
colleges with full classes and students who are happy with their offers
are out. Round 2 commences...</p>
<p>At least this way, we would get rid of the "selectivity" bs which leads
to disingenuous marketing. Also more of the burden of sorting things
out would fall onto the colleges, who IMO have created this mess.</p>
<p>I can't think of a way to game this system (probably due to my lack of
imagination, though).</p>
<p>Some high schools impose a limit number of recommendation letters, thus limits the number of private schools that a student can apply. However, one can apply to any number of UCs because no letter of recommendations are required for them.</p>
<p>Rankings should definitely be eliminated.</p>
<p>How about abolishing CC? Or setting a limit for how many hours a kid can browse the site, thunderstruck at everyone's insanity.</p>
<p>Because CC definitely exacerbates the anxiety.</p>
<p>Lol?</p>