Common App => Why not Common notification date?

Applying to College
1

<p>I am going through this college app process with my DS and the (apparent) posturing and gaming the colleges is quite stressful to the student to say the least and serves no real purpose.</p>

<p>For example, many colleges use the Common App and have largely the same submission deadline, but the notification dates are all over the map. I can understand colleges asking for supplementary materials/essays to further refine their selection process, but why don't they all adhere to the single deadline and save the anguish? The forums are rife with rumors and speculation about when a certain college is going to release their EA/ED/RD decisions. The kids are so worked up that they are speculating on when a college will tweet about the date they are going to announce a decision release date (I kid you not!). The colleges give vague guidelines such as "mid-december" and then keep mum about the process. This lack of transparency in the timeline is causing unnecessary stress and kids are making a deeper emotional investment into a college. If colleges cared about kids, rather than create hype they can be more forthcoming..I am looking at you UChicago. </p>

<p>Then, there is the method of notification that causes a lot of speculation and anxiety. In this day and age, there are colleges that insist that every part of the application be electronic, but send the notifications by postal mail! Just another source of anxiety, what with snowstorms and weather delays in various parts of the country in December. Why can't all colleges agree on a common method, say email or update on a portal?. We are not talking about Obamacare number of applications here, the highest any school gets is ~100K applications and todays systems (especially those at elite colleges) should have the capability to handle. </p>

<p>Will the folks at Common App consider taking the application process all the way to notification and have a national application day and notification day for EA/ED and RD? </p>

2

<p>I agree that UChicago is being too secretive. While most schools are already releasing decisions this week, Chicago applicants still don’t have a firm date as to when decisions will come out. Unnecessary drama.</p>

3

<p>To be honest transparency would do no good. I just moved a thread to a specific college forum pleading with people to let the poster know if the college would release results BEFORE the already published specific date. </p>

<p>No colleges will agree on everything (dates, method of notification, etc) because it is an open market. </p>

4

<p>I agree. Dec 15 falls on a Monday. One of the theoretical benefits of ED/EA applications is to let students know an answer early, so that they don’t have to apply to as many schools. But realistically it will be very difficult to put together applications (getting LOR’s, transcripts, school reports from the GC) between Dec. 16 and 19 when schools go on Winter Break. It makes so much sense to get the decisions out by Friday, Dec. 12 but most schools seem to be sticking to Dec 15 as the official notification date. Dec 12 would give kids the time to process the results (especially rejections or deferrals) before going back to school on Monday. </p>

5

<p>I’m sure application volume plays into it.
Take Cal-Tech for example. They get roughly 5000 applications per year to the school. UMich gets ~20,000 (IIRC).
You’re saying that schools who get 4 times as many apps should have to release the same day as a school with far less applications?
I get that the dates make people stressed, but I can’t see how making the date the same would help much. Most EA dates are by the end of December anyways. </p>

6

<p>

</p>

<p>In theory, students waiting for ED/EA results should have their other applications all ready to go, so that they can be submitted immediately if the ED/EA results require applying to more schools.</p>

7

<p>@ARandomGeek, no I am saying the opposite: that LAC’s that get a fraction of the apps of Stanford should be able to release on Friday. @ucbalumnus, we do have all our other apps ready to go, which means D has long ago ordered her score reports, LOR’s and transcripts and written her essays for her RD schools. So all that ED “saves” us is the application fee. That’s part of my point. We looked ahead at the calendar and realized that we didn’t want her to be doing all that during Tues-Fri of finals week. Yes, I’m just venting but also agreeing with the OP’s point that some schools are being deliberately vague about when they’ll release, now saying “mid December” for example. Some of them probably will release on Friday but won’t say so.</p>

8

<p>My suggestion is being construed differently in this thread than I intended. I am not saying that colleges should give the decisions earlier to help the ED students follow up on contingency plans. I am saying that a single notification date and method will eliminate a lot of drama and anguish. The lack of transparency by colleges is adding fuel to the fire here. Yes, the anguish is self-inflicted on the part of the students, but I think colleges are toying with the emotions of teenagers by doing this.</p>

<p>@Erin’s dad - yes, it is a free market. But colleges agreed to the common app so that they can boost their applications, notification should be part of that territory</p>

<p>@ARandomGeek - yes, all colleges should get the same amount of time to evaluate. If there are more apps, they can get more admissions officers. The typical number of apps/ad-com I have heard is about 1000:1, but a college may choose to hire more or less depending on how holistic they want to be. </p>

<p>The process is already taking so much time out of senior year that the actual “learning” is getting sidelined. Yes, introspection and self-evaluation does help, but not at the expense of actually studying for 4 years in high school. The prize is made out to be worth more than it really is.</p>

9

<p>“The prize is made out to be worth more than it really is.” Oh so true.</p>

<p>Do your best to keep your own kid sane, and lend a hand to anyone else in your larger community who is doing their best to keep all of the kids sane. Easier said than done, I know, but part of the kids learning how to deal with uncontrollable aspects of life.</p>

<p>Does your kid have one place that is flat-out affordable for your family, and where your kid is flat-out guaranteed admission, and where your kid could be happy? Have your kid file that application, and tell them that they can call it done. Anything else is gravy. </p>

10

<p>@calipapa‌: Fundamentally, why would any university constrain its autonomous decision-making authority involuntarily, to adhere to some generally utilized notification date? What advantage – however small – would this provide to the institution? These schools do not exist to make applicants’ or parents’ lives easier or less-stressful; rather, their focus is education and academic research. Elite universities already receive approximately an order of magnitude (10x) more “distinguished applications” than they can accept; therefore, the idea that they desperately require the Common Application system to have an adequate candidate pool simply has very little compelling merit.</p>

11

<p>@TopTier - I agree with you that the colleges would not constrain themselves on their own accord. Clearly, that is the present state. I am suggesting that CommonApp which has the leverage now should get this as part of the bargain for the benefit of the student. Conversely, colleges do not really “gain” much by using arbitrary notification dates/methods in terms of time & resource, what they might gain is the cachet at the expense of the student - cruel, methinks.</p>

12

<p>@calipapa‌ (re #10):</p>

<p>First, I entirely disagree that the Common Application folks have any leverage – even inconsiderable – especially with the elite National Reseatrch Universities and LACs. Fundamentally, the exact opposite is true. Specifically, do you think the Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Chicago, Duke, Northwestern, Cal Tech, UVa, Berkeley, Williams, Middlebury (and their peers) would lose ANYTHING of importance if they disallowed the Common Application? They wouldn’t, because they already receive MANY times the number of applications – from extraordinarily qualified candidates – they can accept. Therefore, if (for example) Duke did not permit the Common App and annual undergraduate applications declined from ~33K to ~25K (or even to ~20K), the class that matriculates in August would have NO – absolutely zero – meaningful or perceptible differences. On the other hand, were the elite schools to forbid the Common App (as Georgetown, for one, does), utilization and concomitant Common App revenue would plummet. In my opinion, that places “the leverage” solidly on the side of the universities. </p>

<p>Second, you indicate colleges have little to gain by having unique notification dates, methods, and so forth. Here, too, I strongly disagree. For a moment, let us presume that you’re the admissions director at University X and I’m the CFO. You want to see the changes you’ve advocated in this thread actualized, and you come to me asking for resources (e.g., additional highly compensated admissions professionals, better computer systems, possibly more admissions overhead, and so forth). I’d figurative “throw you out of my office,” asking:
a) What is the source of the required capital?
b) How may faculty improvements, facility enhancements, grants/scholarship, research opportunities, etc. do we forego to enable this scheme?
c) What, of substance or value, do we – University X, who not incidentally is the source of your salary – obtain if we implement this change?
d) I’d then suggest that you need to view this entire situation as an employee of X, not as a misguided – but goodhearted – individual. </p>

<p>Finally, I’m not remotely sure that the current system is even minimally “cruel” (to use your word) to students (or parents), but let’s briefly premise that it is. So what? If University X’s processes and policies are “too cruel” for student A and/or his parents, their remedy is simple: don’t apply, there are only another 2,500+ higher education alternatives that are readily available. Significantly, that’s the essence of the free marketplace, upon which American independence is founded. </p>

13

<p>@TopTier;
Let us break this down:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Even “elite” colleges are coveting more applications by all means possible. This includes sending marketing materials very broadly and moving to common app. There are plenty of articles citing how the common app has increased the number of applications at all colleges (including the ones elite colleges you mention) and how that in turn has lowered their acceptance rate and made them look even more selective. Yes, they do get more qualified candidates than they can admit, sticking to a uniform method of application and notification does not change that. Common app actually claims to reduce the marketing expenses of colleges because they are drawing a larger applicant pool. If a college wants to go it alone, it is their prerogative and Georgetown is a good example, and they receive considerably less applications for a college of that caliber and that is OK. They have made their choice and so can every applicant.</p></li>
<li><p>It is preposterous to state that sticking to a firm notification date of say [Dec 15, portal update] rather than saying [mid-december,postal mail] is going to change the expenses - capital or operational. If anything, it might reduce the costs and maybe their phone lines will be less busy answering the same questions again and again.</p></li>
<li><p>You and I may disagree on this philosophical point. I believe that there is no need to gain “value” by doing something good especially if that does not cost you. Colleges may be picking arbitrary dates out of historical reasons and maybe unaware of a teenagers perspective who has a big emotional investment, but that is just insensitive on their part. Colleges can get the best qualified candidates for their program but add more transparency and stick to firm notification date & method at the same or lower expense. Your character shows in your demonstrated behavior when you have the power, not when you are down and struggling.</p></li>
</ul>

14

<p>@TopTier;
Let us break this down:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Even “elite” colleges are coveting more applications by all means possible. This includes sending marketing materials very broadly and moving to common app. There are plenty of articles citing how the common app has increased the number of applications at all colleges (including the ones elite colleges you mention) and how that in turn has lowered their acceptance rate and made them look even more selective. Yes, they do get more qualified candidates than they can admit, sticking to a uniform method of application and notification does not change that. Common app actually claims to reduce the marketing expenses of colleges because they are drawing a larger applicant pool. If a college wants to go it alone, it is their prerogative and Georgetown is a good example, and they receive considerably less applications for a college of that caliber and that is OK. They have made their choice and so can every applicant.</p></li>
<li><p>It is preposterous to state that sticking to a firm notification date of say [Dec 15, portal update] rather than saying [mid-december,postal mail] is going to change the expenses - capital or operational. If anything, it might reduce the costs and maybe their phone lines will be less busy answering the same questions again and again.</p></li>
<li><p>You and I may disagree on this philosophical point. I believe that there is no need to gain “value” by doing something good especially if that does not cost you. Colleges may be picking arbitrary dates out of historical reasons and maybe unaware of a teenagers perspective who has a big emotional investment, but that is just insensitive on their part. Colleges can get the best qualified candidates for their program but add more transparency and stick to firm notification date & method at the same or lower expense. Your character shows in your demonstrated behavior when you have the power, not when you are down and struggling.</p></li>
</ul>

15

<p>@calipapa: </p>

<p>Your fundamental premise in the first bullet is incorrect (or, at a minimum, greatly overstated). Some “elite” universities (Chicago is a good example) “covet” additional applictions to enhance their “admissions statistics” – and their clearly evident marketing practices demonstrate this – while others (Duke is an example) do not. You make a sweeping, universal statement that simply is unjustified. In addition, at only an approximate $75 fee for each application, some elite institutions actually loose considerable money on “admissions” (increased volume alone cannot close this fiscal gap, because admissions is a classic high fixed cost, low variable cost, activity).</p>

<p>Your second bullet badly ignores reality. Whenever a major system (say, admissions’ administration and processing) changes – even if the alterations are alleged to provide eventual cost avoidances – the immediate result is the requirement for additional resources: retrain the staff (money required), hire or terminate/transfer employees (money required), adjust the facility including both “bricks and mortar” and IT/utilities (money required), enhance existing and/or develop new hardware/software programs (money required), create updated informational materials to reflect these new admission system realities (money required), this list is near-endless.</p>

<p>Finally, your third bullet neglects the very important concept of “opportunity cost.” You suggest that an enterprise need not “gain value” when it purses worthy changes. However, every dollar that is spent, every man-hour that is utilized, every leader whose attention is devoted to one area (e.g., your admissions initiative) simply cannot be allocated to any others. Basically, this results from “fixed” nature of short-term enterprise resource budgets (financial, personnel, and all others). Accordingly, a dollar or a man-hour allocated calipapa’s new-world admissions scheme is unavailable to other, more-important, and more-worthy enterprise enhancements (e.g., instead of expending money and labor to change current admissions procedures, let’s hire a few more institutional advancement officers, to raise appreciable endowment capital that will support many more need-based scholarships).</p>

<p>This ends my rebuttals to your proposal, one that appears to have serious shortcomings (see my last posts to this thread), and one that obviously will not be implemented in academia. </p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>MIT and Berkeley do not use the Common Application.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>If admissions has a high fixed cost but low variable cost, then additional applications whose application fees exceed the marginal cost of additional applications should be better for the school in a financial sense. Or at least neutral if the application fee is the same as the marginal cost of an additional application.</p>

18

<p>^ ^ ^ ^
Fine, thank you; my listing was intended only to denote a general category of most-selective institutions.</p>

19

<p>A statement of agreement to one of @TopTier 's points: some colleges are actively courting more apps (Chgo, WUSTL and Vandy come to mind). Others have recognized the lack of return and turmoil caused by endless and blunt marketing. MIT and Yale are examples who have DECREASED their outreach to reverse some of this.</p>

<p>This thread is interesting. Colleges who participate in ED/EA have generally chosen a mid-December notification deadline (there are exceptions). The reason is that this allows students who are deferred/rejected enough time to apply to fallback colleges. If a college can’t abide by this simple courtesy (Dec notification), then they should eliminate ED/EA, IMHO. I find it inexcusable and reprehensible otherwise. Here, I agree with the OP. </p>

<p>However, as long as it’s before Dec 20, the fact that colleges spread the announcements from Dec 1st to the 19th , is of no concern. A student/family who is wrecked because one EA/ED school announces on Dec 10 while another announces Dec 16 is in a self-made problem – and I have no sympathy for them. My own kid is getting her decisions from her first two choices today (12/12) at 5PM and on the 16th. For us, we’re anticipating but the spread to us is meaningless. </p>

20

<p>@T26E4 and @calipapa‌: Wow, fellows, you may badly misunderstand my viewpoint. I have NEVER have had a problem with universities VOLUNTARILY adopting a mid-December EA/ED notification schedule (as most have), for the precise and practical reasons T26E4 indicates (in fact, it makes a great deal of sense). However, my issues with calipapa’s proposal were:

  1. His thought (wholly unrealistic and inaccurate, in my opinion) that the Common Application folks could somehow compel this solution;
  2. His overall idea that decision-schedules should be imposed on independent institutions;
  3. His concept that the Common Application system should be the universal decision-notification vehicle (which would eliminate the more-sensitive “personal approach” that MANY colleges and universities try very hard to provide to both those accepted and those denied). </p>

<p>The free marketplace – which is crucial in our society and which I mentioned in an earlier post to this thread – certainly encourages parents and kids to assess the unquestionably important implications of ED/EA decision dates that fall after mid-December, and then to reject universities that have them (again, for the excellent and pragmatic reasons T26E4 provides). If sufficient “ED/EA customers” are bright enough to do so, those relatively few universities (with a later decision schedule) will alter their ED/EA policies voluntarily, because enough “customers” made free marketplace decisions to go elsewhere. </p>

<p>Crucially, that’s exactly way the systems should work, not through some draconian, top-down, Common App cabal.</p>