Ivy League Conspiracy?

<p>I've often heard rumors of Ivy League admissions officers getting together when deciding on decisions.</p>

<p>I'm now under the impression that in order to maintain their low acceptance rates and prestige, the colleges collectively decide on the borderline students.</p>

<p>For instance, Yale might take one (and the others reject that one) and Cornell might take another (who might be rejected from all the others).</p>

<p>This seems like a ways to guarantee that the quality of attending students is high, while safe-guarding prestige through low-admission rates.</p>

<p>Do you guys think that this theory has any merit?</p>

<p>Do you think that the schools give a flip about depressing admit rates? What would motivate the so-called "top-tier" schools? All eight generally guess correctly their yield rates anyways.</p>

<p>Your assumption that the Ivies' prestige is based upon low admit rates is rather rather flimsy. I honestly believe that if each of them COULD physically accommodate another 15% without diminishing the quality of education, every one of them would -- they BELIEVE in their ability to educate and want to do more of it to as many as possible. </p>

<p>Finally, can you imagine the amount of work that would be required to do what you're suggesting? And for what? So a infitessimally important number that the nervous public considers can be lowered? The schools' self assurance isn't based on public perception. Their self image of excellence rides on getting great students -- not manipulating numbers. Besides it's patently immoral and unethical.</p>

<p>Perhaps you're referring to the previous financial aid collusion of the Ivies + MIT that was deemed unfair and ended.</p>

<p>Ivy adcoms are already drowning in piles of more than qualified applications. Do you think they have time for a nice little get-together to look through piles more?</p>

<p>Yeah, say that to a guy at my school last year who got into HYPSM, all of them.</p>

<p>The point is that the piles of one school likely correlates with the piles of another. Each would be able to admit less from their pile if they could collude with other schools. </p>

<p>In response to T26E4, admit rates indicate selectivity. But that's not the primary point. There's also the fact that there ARE so many qualified students that it's physically impossible to admit all of them. </p>

<p>Thus, if they got together, they could make sure that more students got the opportunity to receive an Ivy education.</p>

<p>In response to yalie2012, I was referring to those borderline students that are good, but not awe-inspiring great (or have advantages like first-generation, etc.). The example you cited was probably an individual that fell into the latter category</p>

<p>All of the Ivies fill up their classes every year...they may take a few people from the waiting list. There is really no reason to do what you suggest, other than to keep the yield number up, and it wouldn't be worth the trouble.</p>

<p>"Thus, if they got together, they could make sure that more students got the opportunity to receive an Ivy education."</p>

<p>Ketty: I'm not sure -- how collusion would influence this? It's not as if at the end of the day, there are any vacancies. Kids who are accepted at multiple schools matriculate at one, end up rejecting the others and opening up more slots. The good but marginal student -- if he/she gets on the WL, and slots open up, he/she gets an offer. That's all. Are you suggesting that they collude to boost more kids on the wait lists? Again, what advantage is there to the schools in this venture?</p>

<p>Regarding "selectivity": my point is that this is an outside judgment. I'm positing that the Ivies don't care how "selective" they are viewed by the general public so therefore, they won't devote resources to this ethereal notion of "selectivity". They know they'll always have more applicants than spots and they aren't trying consciously to jostle in the USNWR-type rankings. Again, this is how I see it.</p>

<p>Actually, I believe that they used to do something like this, but it was determined to be an antitrust violation.</p>

<p>They don't do anything of the sort now.</p>

<p>Chedva: You're referring to the Ivy+MIT conferring about FA awards. This was originated to avoid schools competing against one another based on FA awards. It was deemed antitrust so the schools ended this practice. They have to determine FA packages irrespective of what other schools do -- "may the best man (or FA award) win" as it were.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm now under the impression that in order to maintain their low acceptance rates and prestige, the colleges collectively decide on the borderline students.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not so. Besides, who is a "borderline" student is different at each Ivy League college. </p>

<p>For more on past practices that no longer exist, see the pages about history on the 568 Presidents site. </p>

<p>History</a> of the 568 Presidents' Group</p>

<p>Oh, yes, for more perspective see </p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/413821-sat-score-frequencies-freshman-class-sizes.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/413821-sat-score-frequencies-freshman-class-sizes.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks for the clarification, T26E4. I knew there was something, but the details escaped me!</p>