<p>i applied to 22 myself. wanted to apply to quite a few more but common app has a limit…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A lot of schools try to guess “level of applicant’s interest” when making admissions decisions, so that they won’t admit “safety” applicants who are very unlikely to come. By just adding an essay when there was none before, BC screened out a lot of “safety” applicants who won’t bother to apply now that there is an essay, getting the same result without having to guess “level of applicant’s interest”.</p>
<p>^^^ Yes, I clearly get what they are trying to do. A 26% drop is pretty dramatic and it is getting incredible press in the Boston area. Maybe its just me but I wouldn’t want such a large declince in apps…its comes across like their could be more to it than merely an extra essay.</p>
<p>Other schools have started doing this as well… there was a similar article a while back about Ursinus. I completely agree - I think the push to increase apps is ridiculous and doesn’t create a better class. Schools lose their character, their niche, their DRAW when they all start to be cookies from the same cutter…</p>
<p>My oldest daughters school required an extra essay, but as it was the only private school she applied to, we didn’t realize that wasn’t common. ( she graduated 8 yrs ago)</p>
<p>Chicago has done the exact opposite and while it has dramatically increased the number of applicants, it was a real bummer for my son who genuinely loves the school but will probably be lost in the 35,000 deep pile of applications. I loved the uncommon app at Chicago and wish more schools would adopt similar applications.</p>
<p>My son applied only to the schools he would happily attend and that we could afford. That meant only one safety, 2 matches, 3 reaches. He was going to apply only to two reaches and 1 safety but with the current craziness decided to add a couple more.</p>
<p>USNWR and “selectivity” ratings make me want to throw up. What BS. Didn’t we all learn in high school that the quiet nerd eventually rules the world? I wish Chicago hadn’t spent so much time, money and effort into courting the “popular” crowd.</p>
<p>I’d argue that there’s quite a lot to be said for the UK system of applications. </p>
<p>One central admissions service, called UCAS, which is broadly equivalent to Common App. However, all universities use it and all applications must go through it. You can apply to a maximum of five universities in any given year, and part of your application is a 4000 character ‘personal statement’ on why you want to study that subject (degrees are rather different - you study your major, and probably only your major from day one). That personal statement is sent to all five universities. </p>
<p>And you know what? It works. People actually have to think about where they genuinely might like to go, there’s far less stress than what I see on CC, and everyone I know got at least one offer, almost all of them from their first or second choice university.</p>
<p>I can understand why BC is doing what it is doing - there comes a point where it’s simply not feasible to wade through that many applications. UK universities achieve the same thing by raising their grade requirements.</p>
<p>boomting,</p>
<p>I was not aware of that. Thanks so much for sharing.</p>
<p>Hmmm, but doesn’t the UK situation have the following characteristics?</p>
<ul>
<li><p>High school course work is standardized, so predicting admissions reach/match/safety before application is easier.</p></li>
<li><p>Cost and financial aid is more predictable, so applying widely into the financial aid and scholarship lottery may not be as necessary.</p></li>
<li><p>There are fewer total universities in the UK, and the most selective ones are not flooded with near-maximum academic credential applicants.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>^^</p>
<p>Except Oxbridge, UCL, LSE, KCL, ICL, which all reject lots of near-maximum students (a high percentage of rejects from those six schools got As on their actual A-levels)</p>
<p>Cambridge rejected 5,228 people with three As on A-levels (63% of all rejects) back in 2006 (and this percentage is only going to get higher) so it really is rejecting lots of near-maximum students.</p>
<p>"I can’t imagine behind closed doors BC can be truly happy with this no matter how they spin it in the Boston Globe. I mean 26% is pretty drastic "</p>
<p>This! I agree with Bigdoglover’s post #15. I think someone is going to be in t-r-o-u-b-l-e. BC, like many Catholic schools and LACs do have issues with getting enough guys to apply. That is a fact. I wonder how many of hte 26% drop were males. Male students hate them essays more than the females, something I have noticed without looking carefully in my years around college apps. I think this was a very bad move on part of BC. Maybe they should have just added the essay for those who wanted merit money, or something like that. They lost out on a lot of application fees as well as those stand byes from the Catholic boys’ schools that have made their rankings go up. </p>
<p>Yep, BC is a safety for ivies along with a bunch of very good schools that I’d love to see my kids attend. No problem there. But I think they’ve just made themselves a bigger safety than they had expected. I don’t believe they anticipated this not at all, and are saving face with their announcement. I wonder how many are going to have to be admitted from the wait list this year. With a 25% drop figuring out the yield is going to be a bear. Stats start doing funny things when you have that drastic of a change and predictability goes out the window.</p>
<p>*** High school course work is standardized, so predicting admissions reach/match/safety before application is easier.**
*** There are fewer total universities in the UK, and the most selective ones are not flooded with near-maximum academic credential applicants. **</p>
<p>HS work is indeed largely standardised (there are multiple syllabuses to choose from, but all are deemed equivalent) and universities publish their grade requirements in advance (for exams broadly equivalent to APs). However, even with those grades you are far from guaranteed to get in. We have all seen shock rejections from the top universities (Oxford and Cambridge are notorious for it) and some of them really are a bit flooded (we’re talking about the Oxford / Cambridge / Imperial / UCL / Edinburgh / Bristol / Durhams of this world). There are ~300 higher education insitutions in the UK for a population of ~70m, some more selective than others. </p>
<p>*** Cost and financial aid is more predictable, so applying widely into the financial aid and scholarship lottery may not be as necessary.**</p>
<p>True; the level of government support you get is means tested and guaranteed regardless of the university you go to, and bursaries (which are, frankly, non-essential in terms of whether or not you can go somewhere) are means tested and guaranteed but vary somewhat from university to university. It’s a truly needs-blind system, and it means that very often it’s cheaper to attend Oxford than Bolton (and you know that in advance of applying). </p>
<p>Now, this isn’t to say that the US could adopt the UCAS system in exactly its current format, but the idea of having only one applications system, limiting the number of applications (not necessarily to 5) to avoid BC’s problems, and only having to write one essay seems like it would have trans-atlantic appeal.</p>
<p>Surprised this became a discussion on how the UK system works better. In my opinion this is America…land of the free and BC and all universities should do as they please when it comes to determining how to apply…let the free market work. The results will tell them if they are achieving their intended goals. I contend that this kind of drop causes all kinds of issues which cptofthehouse pointed out quite well above.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If there were any reason to use a system derived from the UCAS, by the time the changes were added, it would have nothing to do with the original version. Simply stated, there is and should be ZERO appeal to an “americanized” version UCAS, and especially ZERO appeal to a “centralized” system of applications.</p>
<p>The Common Application in the US has worked for all intents and purposes --whatever those might be. Private and public school can decide to accept it or not, and schools are free to add supplements.</p>
<p>And most importantly, except for the ED/SCEA, there are no restrictions on the US applications systems. For instance, a limitation to apply to both Harvard and Princeton will not work too darn well, as a reference to the limitations imposed on Cambridge and Oxford (even with the loosening of the rule in 2013.) Fwiw, attempts by high schools to limit the number of supported applications to X has been met by a sea of discontent --and rightfully so. There is a difference between rights and common sense. If one wants to apply to 30 schools, that should be his or her right, although it would not make much sense, except in special cases such as medical school accelerated programs. In so many words, to each his or her own! And that IS the way it should be. And it should have nothing to do with a UCAS cannibalized system! </p>
<p>Standardizing the system of application is a solution that is merely seeking for a problem. Ensuring that most students are properly made aware of all available choices, and continuing to push for heightened transparency by the colleges are more important issues.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>cpt: do you have a source for that “fact”?</p>
<p>Don’t forget, that BC has a strong regional undergrad B school, which tends to attract plenty of guys. Yes, BC’s Nursing and Ed programs are strong in females, but they are also small. BC’s Arts & Sciences school maybe also be female app dominant, but I have never seen any numbers. Have you?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>However, that does not address the reasons why students in the US may want to apply to more schools – the relatively less predictable nature of both admissions and net cost / financial aid / merit scholarships and the larger number of possible schools means that students in the US (who want to go some place other than their local commuter university or community college) may want to apply more widely than students in the UK.</p>
<p>Bluebayou, high school counselors I know who track this sort of thing have told me. I saw the direct stats on this at one time as the data was given as to the number of males and females who applied in a given year, and the average test scores and accept rates for each gender. It’s not as severe as with some schools, but yes, there is bias in favor of the males in acceptance, in order to keep the ratio even. </p>
<p>I have no numbers and am just blowing smoke about my statement that the additional essay requirements is going to reduce the number of male applicants, but knowing boys, and I do know boys at that age, as I have 5 of them, see their friends and have had a number of them in all male schools over the last 12 years, and they hate to write as a rule, more so than girls. Oh, how they hate to write,</p>
<p>BC and UConn are pretty much the only schools in New England with a national athletic presence. Granted, BC’s football and basketball teams have been awful as of late, but their hockey team won the National Title last year and has contended every year for a while. I think their sports stature - and the lack of any real regional competition in that area - gives them more pull with boys, especially Catholic boys from New England, than your average “Catholic college.” BC is not an LAC and shouldn’t be compared to one for admissions or gender-selection purposes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The well-known Ivy League is an NCAA Division I conference, although it is in the Football Championship Subdivision (the “lower” subdivision; the “higher” one is the better known Football Bowl Subdivision). The Ivy League has presence in MA, CT, RI, and NH.</p>
<p>ucbalumnus, I live in New England and we probably hear more about Ivy League sports than the rest of the country does. Yes the Ivies are Division I, but they are not known as schools with big sports programs and don’t have a “national presence” in football or basketball (except sometimes they survive the first round of the NCAA tournament, a surprising achievement which merits great celebration locally). Boys in MA don’t walk around wearing Harvard or Dartmouth sweatshirts. They do walk around wearing BC and UConn. For another example, I’ve been to Harvard football games - and unless it’s the Yale game, the fan crowd is sparse. I still think BC’s “athletic” advantage is a help to them in attracting boys.</p>