<p>Seriously, how hard is college admission today than it was four years ago. What type of stats may have gotten you into M.I.T, UChicago (or any other top school) four years again and what type of stats do you need now.</p>
<p>Also, are college admissions going to get even harder in the upcoming years.</p>
<p>I'd say college admissions is getting more competitive compared to say 10-20 years ago; not sure if there would be a significant difference compared to 4 years ago.</p>
<p>A lot of it is probably due to more people deciding to enter university after high school, as opposed to going straight into the workforce, as well as just an increase in population.</p>
<p>This year will be the hardest to get into on record, Harvard reporting 27 or 28 thousand apps, and they take a little less than 2,000. You do the math. So many elite schools have increases in applications it's not even funny. Getting into Harvard this year will probably take an act of God for many people.</p>
<p>I wouldn't say college admission is getting more competitive necessarily; instead, it's just increasing and increasing more and more every with "top" colleges. Rankings (i.e. US News) as well as certain prestigious organizations essentially concentrate on those specific schools and as time goes on, the population grows therefore, more people to compete with. </p>
<p>However, I honestly don't think some universities are that competitive. If you could get into Arizona State now, you could get into Arizona State 20 years ago. It still and probably always will have a very high acceptance rate. </p>
<p>Personally, I think a lot of those "better" colleges should start preparing more space for more students in order to quell the level of academic competitiveness among top schools. If this keeps up, 1% of students applying will get into Harvard- and the university will surely regret not be able to take more.</p>
<p>
[quote]
</p>
<p>Personally, I think a lot of those "better" colleges should start preparing more space for more students in order to quell the level of academic competitiveness among top schools. If this keeps up, 1% of students applying will get into Harvard- and the university will surely regret not be able to take more.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>agreed.....</p>
<p>Yeah its pretty ridiculous, read in an article that an Amherst dean of admissions says he hates how they have to reject "some stellar students". If this keeps up, its seems like you will have to have a rec letter from God to get in to Harvard, Yale, etc.</p>
<p>a good article to consider.</p>
<p>Notoriously</a> selective Stanford considers accepting more students</p>
<p>
[quote]
Stanford University is considering increasing, for the first time in decades, the number of students it enrolls each year.</p>
<p>The idea comes after Stanford, one of the most selective schools in the country, admitted just 10 percent of applicants this year, the smallest percentage ever. ...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, it's getting kind of pathetic- there needs to be better public institutions so people can be satisfied with in their own homestate. In Canada, it's much different- people in Vancouver would be happy to attend the University of British Columbia instead of McGill because even though McGill has more notoriety, BC's still decent. </p>
<p>Conversely, I could never attend Arizona State out of the fact that it is a) crappy b) CROWDED c) full of bacchanalian parties and d) is essentially high school all over again... except with alcohol. Sure, I'd get a hefty scholarship, but too much of the student population doesn't have the drive to learn anything, which especially shows in the high school records (people with no AP classes and 2.3 GPA's getting in? Crazy.)</p>
<p>The number of good private institutions far outnumbers good public schools. Here are the only good public universities that can really compete with Ivies among others: </p>
<p>UMich, U Berkeley, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, and William and Mary. That's 6. The Ivy League itself has 8 and gives better financial aid if you're OOS too. I'm not surprised so many people apply to Ivies, MIT/Caltech, Stanford, etc.</p>
<p>For the top 15, much harder than 20 years ago, much harder than even 4 years ago. It gets harder and harder every year. For other schools, probably a slight increase in difficulty because overall Americans are placing more emphasis on education, hard as that is to believe.</p>
<p>how hard is a diamond? that's how hard it is nowadays</p>
<p>
[quote]
For other schools, probably a slight increase in difficulty because overall Americans are placing more emphasis on education, hard as that is to believe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes. And no. Most don't care about the "quality" of their education- they're just in college as a means to get it over with and not work at McDonald's. I don't know many people who are upset with the education standards as much as I am (My school offers up to four years of Spanish: I swear that 90% of the time, we spoke English in Spanish III. I had a problem with it, but nobody seemed to care. )</p>
<p>^ Yes, what I meant is that it is more routine for kids to go off to college now, and that coupled with the increased population means more competition for spots at college. That probably only slightly correlates with actual interest in academics from the average American.</p>
<p>^ Kind of sad. There are so many jobs that shouldn't even require college degrees. D:</p>
<p>Three things are changing to make college admissions tougher:</p>
<ol>
<li> Changing demographics and general increase in population (Tidal Wave II - children of the baby boomer generation).</li>
<li> Not many new universities are being built (When Baby Boomers were going to school, California for example, expanded the UC and CSU systems...for this generation, California has only added one UC campus - UC Merced).</li>
<li> As economy changes, more people will require new skills...this places additional demand for college education.</li>
</ol>
<p>It's all about supply and demand. Unfortunately, access to the top schools will become ever more difficult in the years ahead.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UMich, U Berkeley, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, and William and Mary. That's 6. The Ivy League itself has 8 and gives better financial aid if you're OOS too. I'm not surprised so many people apply to Ivies, MIT/Caltech, Stanford, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is false. There far more schools that offer an equal or better quality of education (in terms of challenge, not perks), than the Ivy League.</p>
<p>You won't find a significant difference between UCSD and Brown in terms of students and teachers.</p>
<p>Prestige = teh awsome damendersings</p>
<p>Ivy Appealers ftw! </p>
<p>And for the record CC, it's the Ivy League that has the HIGHEST grade inflation of any higher educational organization/club/cronies/etc..</p>
<p>
[quote]
You won't find a significant difference between UCSD and Brown in terms of students and teachers.
[/quote]
[quote]
UCSD
SAT CR: 540 - 660 72%
SAT Math: 600 - 700 72%
SAT Writing:560 - 670 72%
ACT Composite: 23 - 29 28%</p>
<p>Brown
SAT CR:670 - 760 96%
SAT Math:680 - 770 96%
SAT Writing:660 - 760 96%
ACT Composite:27 - 33 20%
[/quote]
significant enough for ya?</p>
<p>btw im not saying that the ivy league is the be all end all, just that ucsd doesn't compare in undergraduate quality.to brown at least.</p>
<p>There's no reason for your continued disparaging of Ivies, overrated. No need to be jealous of the people who get in.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Personally, I think a lot of those "better" colleges should start preparing more space for more students in order to quell the level of academic competitiveness among top schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree, but don't many top-tier schools have little room to expand? (ie. Columbia, Harvard, etc)</p>
<p>HSisOverrated is correct. As Nicole Kidman said in Margot at the Wedding, "Stupid people get into Harvard all the time."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I agree, but don't many top-tier schools have little room to expand? (ie. Columbia, Harvard, etc)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True, especially true of Columbia. Otherwise, we could always make more top-tier schools. <em>shrug</em> We really need to make some schools. </p>
<p>
[quote]
This is false. There far more schools that offer an equal or better quality of education (in terms of challenge, not perks), than the Ivy League
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Of course, I could believe that, but there's lots of power in prestige, especially at the Ivies and at the public schools I just named. However, it's definitely not true in Arizona, where there are only THREE REAL UNIVERSITIES, all of which are known for excessive partying, which is not the ideal student population. If the student body is known for partying, you're known for partying, and the school's reputation goes down. If I were an employer, I would totally prefer a man graduating from Harvard than the man graduating from the University of Arizona, even if the programs are identical.</p>