<p>In certain circles, it’s been competitve for 40 years. Read Philip Roth or other chroniclers of the middle class and you’ll find plenty of anxiety to get into top schools by ambitious young east coast suburbanites. </p>
<p>And let’s not forget that outside of CC circles – i.e. in the vast, vast majority of high schoolers & their parents – college applications/admissions isn’t terribly anxiety provoking: kids apply and get into their #1 choice school, which is the state U or its near equivalent.</p>
<p>For some of us, the state U admission experience has gotten way more insane. 30 years ago, my public high school was one of the largest feeder schools to UCLA. It was a safety school that was also a #1 choice for the kids who were on the honors track, a great choice for kids whose family finances were limited because they could live at home and commute by bus or bike to Westwood. Cal was a little bit tougher to get into, but a B+ kid with an AP course or two could generally feel pretty confident about getting into any other UC campus. Cal States were even easier to get into. </p>
<p>– I’ll amend that, SlitheyTove – you’re right getting into the state U or its near equivalent isn’t harder/more anxious, with the exception of California and other uber-state schools such as Virginia, North Carolina, Michigan & Wisconsin. </p>
<p>(But that still leaves 45 other states where admission to the state school isn’t THAT terribly difficult.)</p>
<p>I’ve attended 4 colleges and universities ranging from a community college to a top private and never applied to more than one at a time. It never dawned on me to make multiple applications. My HS graduating class of about 405 students had about 25 go on to college. About 15 of us graduated. We were vaguely aware that there was something about college football and college, but never rally made the connection that we would ever go to one of them. Beyond the state flagship and a nearby-state flagship we never heard of most any other college and definitely had no sense of prestige, except for Harvard, which we thought was reserved for a few rich folks. We knew about that because John Kennedy went there even though he was Catholic. We were surprised to learn that there were smaller in-state regional universities (which many of us did not learn about until we were in Jr. College). I remember being very very proud to be attending Jr. College. So, I would not say there was much college pressure.</p>
<p>I applied to colleges over 35 years ago, there were college guides then too, complete with detailed statistics, and kids cared about where they went to college then too. </p>
<p>The big differences were: there were fewer kids- though still a bunch, due to “baby boom”- and applications had to be typed individually, there was no “common app” or electronic submittal. so people applied to fewer schools. Admissions % from that era: Yale 17%, Harvard 18%, Stanford 21%.</p>
<p>Oh, idad, come sit next to me, then, on the unendowed Palin porch swing! Can’t see Russia from here, but the view of the unmowed lawn is okay (now that the sun has set!).</p>
<p>I moved back to my home town and from the perspective of both a former student and now a parent the biggest difference I see is that a higher percentage of kids go onto college than in the early 70s. In our town about the same percentage of college bound go on to Ivies (mostly legacies) and out of state to college. The majority today, as did thirty years ago attend the state schools and the regional LACs. Both, which fortunately, are in abundance in the midwest and cost effective. So, for a small midwestern town…not huge changes. An interesting anecdote is a good friend of mine had a child at one of the very well known east prep schools and only applied to 5 or 6 schools last application cycle so this 10, 12, 15 applications is in my mind a very, very small percentage of students and not necessarily indicative of prep school mentality. I do believe that “ratings” have caused most of the ferver for particular schools. Back in the olden days you only knew about schools because you found a catalog, or your parents went there or your neighbors went there or your older friends went there or you went away to school in a different geographic zone so you found out about different schools or if you were a girl, you saw the pictures of co-eds and their bios in the August womens magazines. Finally, transportation was a “bigger” concern in the 70s. There was no Southwest, Jet Blue, etc. and flying somewhere or even driving 1,000 miles was a big deal, there weren’t many of the “chain hotels with free breakfast every 30 miles” and going “abroad” was an even bigger deal. So globalization, access to information on the internet and inexpensive travel have also contributed to more willingness and awareness among the middle class to reach across geographic distances probably even more so than ratings. Since you are a student I would say to you that in some cases the “parent frenzy” could be rooted in the parents desire to give their child something they didn’t have or weren’t aware of when they were your age or it’s alittle “fear” on the part of the parent that perhaps their child won’t achieve some form of “greatness” if they can’t send the child off to a name brand school. All parents want great things for their kids. All parents. An easy parent merit badge is the “name” of the school their child goes to. Finally financial aid is an entirely acceptable concept now so more families feel that they “can” apply to private schools and expensive schools than in the 70s.</p>
<p>Agree with other posters.<br>
I had only school-related EC’s, minor leadership positions (secretary of clubs, that type of thing) and an after school job in retail. Applied to and got into Penn (Wharton), Northwestern, Georgetown, and Wash U as my safety. Didn’t sweat it at all. </p>
<p>In those days, you took the SAT or the ACT only once – taking it twice was looked down upon as what the stupid kids did, who couldn’t get good scores the first time out. I only took 3 AP classes, all as a senior – that’s all the school offered. </p>
<p>And here’s the kicker. I was applying to Penn and actually forgot to fill out one of the essays. Not only did I get into Wharton, I got into an honors program which was a combined BA/MBA :-).</p>
<p>It was SO much different back then! A smart kid with a straight A average and good test scores (and 1400 on SAT’s was plenty good) and enough extracurriculars to show that he or she could hold a conversation could be assured of getting into a good school. Maybe not HYP, but a good school.</p>
<p>I believe that the “college craze” started with the US News & World Report college rankings. When did those start? In the 80’s?</p>
<p>The rankings led to the perception, which still grows every year, that there are only a few colleges where one can get a superior education. They foster the assumption that the more applicants a college turns away, the better it must be. And of course, they play right into our impluses to be competitive and snobbish (“I must be better than you because I got into a higher-ranked college.”)</p>
<p>I think part of the change has occurred in the lower ranges of academic achievement.</p>
<p>Today, there is an assumption that practically every kid should go to some sort of college. People are shocked if they hear that some high school graduates are not ready for college work and have to take remedial classes before they can take regular classes at the local community college or branch of the state university system.</p>
<p>Thirty-five years ago, this was not the case. There were students who intended to go to college and those who did not. Nobody expected every high school student to be prepared for college, and nobody thought that it was shocking if a kid didn’t go to college.</p>
<p>Early 70s here- dinosaurs roamed the earth. The only college advice I remember being given was from my father. He did not allow me to apply to Dartmouth. It was the first year or two of going coed, and there was a lot of resentment against the women. My parents read my essay and made a few suggestions. Hauled out the typewriter (and the white out stuff) and that was it.</p>
<p>One thing that has changed since that time is the disappearance of decently-paying blue collar jobs. People can’t get a factory job at all, never mind one that supports a family. Without college, you are really out of luck these days.</p>
<p>I don’t think people’s goals have changed, but the flood of information has made it possible for us quantify quality and prestige in a way that wasn’t possible before (or at least, think we are quantifing these things).</p>
<p>My stats were good, but not great. I WAS valedictorian at a competitive HS, but my SAT score was only 1370 (690 math, 680 reading). I had NO problem getting into engineering honors at Texas. They actively recruited me. I don’t think there’s any way I would have gotten into the program now! I guess kids are brighter these days! It’s confusing, because you read all the stories about horrible the US educational system is.</p>
<p>Hey Pizzagirl - I, too, submitted a very incomplete application to what was known (37 years ago - ugh) as a very good school. My ap was mailed (yes, by mistake) with just the basic facts - name, address, etc. Accepted. Maybe that’s still all any college really needs.</p>
<p>Remember the SATs were re-centered since we graduated from HS (for me 1981) and that you needed to add points to your score to compare to your kids scores. A 1370 becomes a 1400 which is more impressive! </p>
<p>Everything else in the world has changed in the 35 years, so of course selecting a college has changed too. When I graduated High School we had the unaffordable Ivys, a few good state flagship schools, and everything else, Today you still have thousands of “everything else schools”, more good state flagship schools, and many other choices for ever brighter students.
No one I knew would consider applying to Harvard or any of the top schools because they were also the most expensive schools, but with EFC and many of the Ivys offering Scholarships or Grants instead of Loans these same schools can now be a better deal financially than many if not most lesser known schools.
Another big change is how some colleges have reinvented themselves into institutions that require students to be involved not only in classes and studying, but also require internships, mentoring, research and overseas study. Look at some of the “Colleges That Change Lives” and you will find some great colleges that look at education differently and attract many of the brightest students. I believe some of these colleges and universities are providing a better undergraduate education than many of the obsessed over Ivys.
Many of the best LAC’s of 35 years ago are still great schools because they have remained true to the mission of providing a solid foundation in classical education. When I graduated High School, Liberal Arts Schools were thought of as kind of a dead end. ( What are you going to do with that degree? )… In today’s knowledge based society everything can change very quickly, and we understand that we all need to be lifelong learners. A degree from a good LAC says that students know how to learn and can put solid knowledge to use from day one.
Everything changes. Have fun and don’t forget that your perceived pressures to choose are greater only because students today have more and better choices, and that having more good opportunities mean that your chances of having a great outcome are better than ever, whatever you choose.</p>