In pursuit of ever more applicants...

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/education/edlife/07HOOVER-t.html?ref=admissions%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/education/edlife/07HOOVER-t.html?ref=admissions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>My goodness. What has happened to higher education? Schools become attractive because they reject so much. The more they reject, the higher their standing. Something is wrong. Something is very wrong. </p>

<p>I went to Georgia Tech. They had (and still do) a very high acceptance rate (50%). However, academic demands are rigorous and only the hardest and most talented graduate. I had a hard time, but I learned how to thing and how to solve complicated problems. To me, that is what college is for. </p>

<p>Prestige? Isn’t that an ideal for the old world?</p>

<p>While I agree on the macro level, I do think some schools (Like UW to an extent) that may not be as well known by those farther away do benefit from increased marketing and awareness raising efforts which will result in more and possibly better applicants. Also great geographic diversity can help insulate the school from local economic variations. So I don’t think Harvard getting another 5,000 applications is of much benefit to anyone, but UW getting more applicants from the coasts and overseas may be a good thing.</p>

<p>I agree with both of you. This article may resonate more with the general CC community where acceptance rates are bandied about like indicators of prestige. Clearly there’s a game being played here.</p>