<p>@rjpfl5 - Personally, I loved the schools that had a free online application. My parents could not have afforded 8 application fees, and without these free apps, I would have run out of my application fee waivers (I only had to use 2 because of free apps.) And no, I don’t think I could have applied to less schools to reduce the potential fees (if there were no free apps) because I had to cast a large net to ensure that I would get a decent financial aid package.</p>
<p>There should be a limit. It would be the most rational course of action for everyone, to be quite honest, because the low acceptance rates are driven by the actions of students applying to many schools because of the supposed high barriers of entry to the top universities (selectivity, barriers to entry, same deal ;)). The process becomes all the more arbitrary because, as in the case of Duke, the application review system is over-loaded and less time is given to actually adequately conduct a holistic review process. As such, imposing a limit would allow admissions officers to have more time to review each application submitted, would diminish the usage of ‘yield protection’ on extremely strong applicants, increase the yield of top universities, and would make top universities easier to get admitted to.</p>
<p>@m4dskillz07: That is incorrect.</p>
<p>Top universities would not miraculously become “easier to get into” if limits were set on the number of applications. The reasons why they have become increasingly difficult to be admitted to are that a) their market now is truly nationwide, and b) the population of potential students continues to grow. Before the College Board created the “Student Search” program whereby they sell the names of students scoring within a given range and/or a given geographic region and/or with other specific qualities to institutions looking for those students, college admissions was much easier across the board. If you were from a certain social class and/or part of the country you basically were guaranteed admission at College X or University Y. The deliberate marketing of these institutions that began in the early 1970’s following a predicted drop in the numbers of college-bound students due to a decline in the population in that age group, has simply continued. Now any student anywhere on the planet who can get internet access can apply to any college or university in the US. Not to mention of course, that increasingly, non-traditional age students are willing to apply to colleges other than their local public university.</p>
<p>Whether anyone likes it or not, the minimum standards have been raised as a result of the market going national. This effect is being felt at all levels of institutions, with the very lowest tier increasingly receiving better quality students who are “shut out” of places that would have accepted them just five or six years ago.</p>
<p>I wonder what would happen if we returned to paper apps. Infeasible, but a way to naturally limit the number of apps each student could realistically complete.</p>
<p>How is that incorrect? Obviously the students that were admitted and currently attend those schools are worthy of those spots. And if they got into a bunch of schools, they’re gonna turn them down for the one they want. If hundreds of students do this they’re going to the waitlist. Honestly the college admissions process doesn’t end until late July, and nowadays being put on the waitlist is almost like being admitted.</p>
<p>I just don’t see why we should be restricted in our applications. It’s stupid to think we should be.</p>
<p>Btw, as a current senior I applied to 7 schools. 5 of them were reaches that top 25/30 unis and two were safeties. I got into three of my reaches and both safeties obviously. currently have a list of 5 schools I would love to go to to pick from. I’m not making this argument because I applied to 30 schools myself, but because kids that apply to 30 schools like to have a broad range to pick from. They’re not hurtng other people with their applications.</p>
<p>It would be easier for kids to limit the number of applications if the criteria for admission to colleges were more transparent. On the advice of his guidance counselor, my son applied to six schools, one safety with excellent offerings in his likely major, and five with very low acceptance rates, but whose entering classes had stats similar to his. He got into his safety and one of the highly selective schools. There was no way for him to know in advance which school this was likely to be.</p>
<p>I’ve talked to some parents who encourage their kids to apply to a few safeties because then the crush of likely rejection is not so unmitigated, and at least they will have some choice come April. Many more need a bunch of options on the table because financial aid is pretty much impossible to figure out in advance.</p>
<p>In England, true, kids are only allowed to apply to five schools, but it’s much easier to figure out from the get-go where you’re likely to be accepted, and the financial differences from one school to another are relatively small.</p>
<p>Except for a few trophy hunters, I think students would apply to far fewer schools if they could predict with any sort of certainty where they would and wouldn’t be accepted. It’s idiotic that the process is so unpredictable and unknowable that there are students out there that feel compelled to apply to 18-20 colleges in order to find the one best school that will accept them. </p>
<p>No transparency to the schools’ processes = No limits on the students’ apps. Fair is fair.</p>
<p>Colleges love the application fees and the low admissions rates when people apply to many schools.</p>
<p>Just because some people apply to more schools means that the number of people who will be able to go into those schools will get smaller. There’s just a lot of people who will be waitlisted, which is a burden, but still more realistic than putting some arbitrary measure on how many colleges people can apply to.</p>
<p>^ Exactly. There’s no arguing that the people who get into and attend these schools are worthy. So why stop people from applying?</p>