"Getting into college has always been a numbers game. This year the math is trickier.
With early admissions largely decided, high school seniors face a grim reality: The Covid pandemic is making it harder to get into college at the nation’s most elite schools.
For example, Harvard University’s early action acceptance rate sank to 7.4% from 13.9%, while the number of total applicants hit a record high.
In fact, Harvard notched a 57% increase in applications from last year, making it the most competitive early admissions season in the school’s history.
On top of that, roughly 350 students originally in the Class of 2024 deferred enrollment to the Class of 2025." …
What’s interesting isn’t the headline, but it is what happened, expectedly and unfortunately, to the rest:
[quote]"While the country’s most elite institutions are turning students away, the vast majority of schools is desperate to fill seats.
Already, universities have furloughed thousands of employees and announced revenue losses in the hundreds of millions due to the sudden decline in enrollment. Some have even cut academic programs that were once central to a liberal arts education, in order to stay afloat."[/quote]
At most universities the revenue loss is in housing and dining services. Students studying remotely are not paying room and board. Housing and dining are profit centers for colleges.
COVID is accelerating a trend that has been going on for a decade and discussed often here on CC. Colleges that are not attractive to students, colleges that are located in areas with shrinking populations that rely on local students are failing and will continue to fail.
It is the same as in brick and mortar retail. The closings are just accelerated.
Is it really more competitive or did more kids throw their hat in the ring because of many elite school went test optional this admissions cycle? How many of those additional applications were legitimately in the running?
I agree that the bigger more unfortunate story is the drop in applications for many schools which are struggling financially.
From an economic standpoint, TO was a great revenue generating strategy for colleges. The 23% increase in applications at Penn netted them an additional 113k. Those are funds that can be used to improve student life.
@mountainsoul But isn’t 113k just a rounding error for an institution like Penn? After all, it’s less than a sticker price for TWO admitted students in an institution taking in ~2,700 each year. And I imagine going through these additional applications requires additional staff hours, which are not free.
I’m very curious to see the wider picture once more statistics become available. However, a couple of simple explanations of Harvard numbers come to mind, beyond TO-generated hopes.
While “paying top dollars for glorified Zoom instructions” generally sucks, it sucks a little less if, in the end, the diploma is from a well-regarded institution.
Financial aid will be diminished everywhere, except for these extremely rich institutions so even more reasons for the moonshots.
It’s not a one-for-one rise in costs. They’re going through borderline, ho-hum, off-point, or unrealistic dreamer apps more determinedly, eliminating them, rather than passing for a 2nd (or further) review. They can get down to roughly the same number of apps past First Cut as in prior years.
I agree with @vpa2019 that not all the excess are truly “in the running.”
But the lesson, as ever, is to mind your own app package.
Housing and dining are not necessarily profit centers, but having empty housing and dining definitely makes them loss centers (or larger loss centers than they were when occupied), since buildings etc. still accrue various costs even when empty.
If you look at college financial statements, especially private colleges, you will see that “ancillary services” revenue exceeds expenses, often by a significant amount. That assumes that the college is able to fill its residence halls.
I don’t know that this headline is true. More like “Test-optional policy encourages students with low test scores to take a gamble on a T20 school”.
Look at all the threads from students asking, “Should I send this score?” The fact is, in a normal year, those students wouldn’t have applied, because their low test score would have torpedoed their application. So in some ways, for some students, Covid has made it EASIER for them to get into a top college. And it’s opened up the floodgates for marginal applicants, who think, “Well, my GPA and class rank put me in the running. So why not toss in an application? Maybe I’ll get lucky.” This is surely what was behind the 58% increase in early action applications to Harvard this year, and I suspect that it will also be what’s behind the tsunami of applications that I bet we’re going to see to T20 schools this year.
It makes it easier for them to apply
Does not make it easier to get the admit.
As it is, too many bright, high performing kids don’t understand what makes a great app pkg. I’m baffled at how often CC forgets holistic and how this is different at a tippy top than in your one high school.
The kids who don’t ‘get it’ are not your true competition.
But sure, a kid who understands more, what those colleges are looking for, but goes TO, might be.
Now they, along with kids who can make a great app pkg with good test scores, have to compete with kids who can make a great app pkg with the exception of good test scores who they didn’t have to compete before.
Yup, plus according to the article, on the Common App “international applicant volume rose 11%.” And some of those international applicants can also make a great app pkg.