Private colleges set bar higher

Parents Corner
1

<p>Some lines in this really quite awful article in the Sac Bee caught my eye. After being told that colleges are limiting admissions to students with higher test scores, thereby making it tougher to get accepted, we are told:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Some of the trend is due to a rise in applications from students who never had much of a chance of admittance in the first place.</p>

<p>But a lot of it is due to higher standards that reflect more competitive applicants....</p>

<p>When a school gets more applicants, it can be choosier, admitting only the best and expecting more of them to show up. It's like an auction -- the more bids, the higher the price.

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/155631.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/155631.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I hope it isn't just me, but I really get annoyed when I read about the college admissions process as if it were a "buyer's market" or a "seller's market" and now, an auction.</p>

2

<p>This year more than ever the media is going to town and even painting it red when it comes to college admissions. Elite colleges are in cutthroat competition for the best and the brightest. Students and parents want to go Ivy or bust which fuels a market driven by more buyers than sellers. After reading numerous CC threads and posting on quite a few others advocating transparency and reform in the admission process, I can only wish that the media hype harping on concepts such as a seller's market, or an auction would be loudly booed by all. The notion of a seller's market or its inverse- a buyer's market (which, if you do buy into all of this, still holds for the majority of colleges and universities) - only holds in a one-size-fits all world where the concept of best match and fit is a fiction. As more and more colleges, including public flagship institutions move toward holistic admissions, the concept of fit and the fact that the choice of education must be tailored to each individual student's strengths, weaknesses, interests, and needs has to be squarely at the center of the college admissions process. Prestige is a one-size-fits all designer label - is this an auction?</p>

<p>Peter vanBuskirk calls it a three ring circus:</p>

<p>
[quote]
ever conscious of the pecking order, sellers persist with strategies to enhance selectivity, improve yield, bolster the test score profile and leverage their resources strategically. Such practices fuel the notion that they lure buyers in, not to become future students, but as applicants to be turned down....</p>

<p>It should be no surprise that at the end of a long courtship, the murky selection process resembles sleight of hand. Buyers may be left feeling betrayed and abused. As captives of an arbitrary process, buyers grow cynical as the agendas of the sellers become clearer. As one college-bound student from Philadelphia lamented, "The admission process seems to be all about the school, not the applicant."....

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.greentreegazette.com/ExploringAdmissions/ThreeRingCircus.aspx%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.greentreegazette.com/ExploringAdmissions/ThreeRingCircus.aspx&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

3

<p>Excellent article "Colleges adopt holistic admissions to gain diverse student populations" stresses that there is no best way or even one way for colleges to match-make because colleges are not one size fit all outfits - colleges and universities have different missions and their admissions policies reflect that diversity of mission. Because in college admissions it is not always clear who is being wooed and who is doing the wooing, as in any good match making service there has to be a clear communication of mission if it is going to create a working relationship. </p>

<p>
[quote]
"It's not just plugging in a number, but reading everything there in the application folder," said Gretchen W. Rigol, the former vice president of the College Board who now works on special projects related to diversity....</p>

<p>"They review the application in their particular context," said Rigol, who is also the author of "Admissions decision-making models: How U.S. institutions of higher education select undergraduate students."....</p>

<p>Holistic admissions is known by many different names. In the University of California system, it is referred to as comprehensive review, and the University of Michigan calls it individual review.

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://media.www.dailyillini.com/media/storage/paper736/news/2007/04/20/News/Colleges.Adopt.Holistic.Admissions.To.Gain.Diverse.Student.Populations-2870575.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://media.www.dailyillini.com/media/storage/paper736/news/2007/04/20/News/Colleges.Adopt.Holistic.Admissions.To.Gain.Diverse.Student.Populations-2870575.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

4

<p>"Holistic admissions is known by many different names. In the University of California system, it is referred to as comprehensive review, and the University of Michigan calls it individual review." </p>

<p>To some on CC there is ony one name for it - TREASON. LOL.</p>

5

<p>From Studio 54's wikipedia entry (Sorry Swarthmore)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Studio 54 was operated by the flamboyant, publicly visible Steve Rubell and retiring silent partner Ian Schrager. At the club's prime, Hedonistic Rubell became widely known for hand selecting guests from the always huge crowds outside, mixing beautiful "nobodies" with glamorous celebrities in the same venue.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hedonism aside, how close is the admissions scheme at EC's to the Studio 54 model?</p>

6

<p>There really is something wise about this....</p>

<p>As every great hostess knows, the best parties happen when you invite an interesting mix of guests and the best dinner parties take place when you don't sit couples next to each other.</p>

7

<p>Holistic admissions is simply a label for a process by which colleges seek to circumvent state constitutional provisions or judicial decisions that limit the colleges' abilities to consider race. Does anyone actually believe that the admissions officers at UC or U of M closely scrutinize the details of every file that comes across their desks? If so, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to sell that person.</p>

8

<p>I'll buy it. </p>

<p>Do I think race is considered? Sure. But I also am sure that I never would have gotten into the top-tier UCs that I did if I was being considered on GPA and SATs alone (my GPA was well below average). And I'm white.</p>

9

<p>I think there is more to holistic decisions than just race. We had geography in our corner. Not many kids leave South Texas. I think gender helped both of my sons as well since they were applying to LACs in non math/science fields. My husband and I both graduated from college, but neither of us has an advanced degree. I think all of this played into the decisions.</p>

<p>If colleges went entirely on SAT and grade/AP classes alone, then very few students from our area would ever get the chance to leave. In a school of over 4,000 they have about one merit or semi finalist every other year, and two to three commended each year. We simply do not have the same access to programming, study prep, etc..and the educational level of the population is low. 9% hold a BA or BA, and only 4% hold something higher.</p>

10

<p>If private LACs are raising the bar stats wise it may be a clever marketing ploy in the time of the 'baby boomer echo'. With Ivies and the Techs (MIT and Cal) being overwhelmed with talent there will be a larger number turned away particularly the asian and white female. Given this larger pool to draw from it is a chance for the LACS to increase the stats of their admitted students to create a track record for when the bulge decreases. "Ooh, look at the stats on the students going to that college. I'll apply there." There may be a group of colleges who are being a little less 'holistic" than they usually are.
In proposing this theory, I am not prejudiced by knowledge or experience.</p>

11

<p>The rules and hidden agendas of college admissions are hard to fathom but we keep trying anyway, year after year, echo baby bulge or not. On this score, holistic admissions models aren't much different from other admissions models, since class rank plans (like those in Texas, California, Florida) also affect the diversity, academic quality and yield of entering classes - and, at the same time, create the basis for an "objective", de facto triage system to decide who gets first shot at their first choice college and/or major. Of course each college has its own mission goals and admission criteria which is why we are so often reminded that it is a fool's errand to stress out about the rules of the game since instead of getting the big picture it is all too easy to lose it. These days, even the definition of "elite" is under discussion and debate. No wonder perfect analogies are increasingly harder to come by as well. Just because we are here, reading and posting on CC, we are interested in that bigger picture - and the smaller one too, as our kids set out to zero in on and narrow down their choices on the journey to decide where to send off those apps. So deep down there is nothing wrong if we do wish there were a perfect analogy out there and maybe even a magic formula to explain it all even though we know that what makes beautiful music at one place might just create a cacophony at another:</p>

<p>
[quote]
.... Each class is a symphony with its own distinct composition and sound; the final roster is an effort to create harmony...

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shaw30mar30,0,4718918.story?coll=la=news-comment-opinions%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shaw30mar30,0,4718918.story?coll=la=news-comment-opinions&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

12

<p>Thinking about "Why Selectivity Matters" there is certainly is more than meets the eye when it comes to being a wise and successful match-maker. Studio 54 meets internet dating: as one rejected candidate put it - "You cannot make a relationship by being arm candy".</p>

<p>
[quote]
"It's definitely hard to get through that rope, but once you're in, you're in and you're part of the party," Pellegrino said. "But you know there's going to be a lot of people outside waiting."

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2007-03-21-hot-enough-dating_N.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/internetlife/2007-03-21-hot-enough-dating_N.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

13

<p>Excellent college admissions article, "Applying for college admission shouldn't be a mass production", really hits the nail on the head with the image of a production line. No doubt a huge part of the "selectivity" problem these days is related to a media spurred frenzy of uncertainty so that even many guidance counselors advise students to increase the number of apps sent out. What also counts when it comes to "raising the bar" discussions based on rejection rates, are the number of "irresponsible" apps sent out to schools that are truly recognized to be long shots from time immemorial. Cast in the light of the "virtually "unreachable"" for most normal over-achieving mortals, what indeed is the allure for students clearly unqualified from the get go? If test scores and grades are out of ballpark range then this isn't even a question of tossing the dice but just playing tilt.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Harvard received nearly 23,000 applications this year and admitted about 2,000 students. While that is a sad statistic for the 6,000 "highly qualified" applicants who were respectfully denied, it's actually even sadder that the others who were denied -- the remaining 15,000 underqualified applicants -- even bothered to apply. They were simply tossing the dice when they applied. Harvard might want 15,000 superfluous applications to keep its selectivity rate high, but why would students with borderline grades and scores willingly put themselves in the position to be denied at colleges that deny thousands of students who are more qualified than they?

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2NSZmZ2JlbDdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5NzExOTE1MCZ5cmlyeTdmNzE3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTQ=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2NSZmZ2JlbDdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5NzExOTE1MCZ5cmlyeTdmNzE3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTQ=&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

14

<p>I take issue with some of the comments in that article:

[quote]
The acceptance rates at many Ivy League colleges are now in the single digits, so I think it's safe to say that they are now nearly unreachable even for top students.

[/quote]
We all know how difficult it is to get into an Ivy, but a 1 out of 10 or 1 out of 12 chance is not "unreachable" for a competitive process. It is just a tough competition. As a child my daughter attended auditions where there might be 40 kids showing up trying out for 3 parts; it is very common when teenagers and adults apply for jobs that they may be competing against dozens or even hundreds of applicants. That's just the nature of competition. Obviously there are some people who shouldn't bother to apply to the Ivy's because they aren't really "top" students -- but I think the rest just need to get over the idea that being "qualified" is the equivalent of an entitlement to admissions. It's a competition, some people win, some don't.
[quote]
Harvard received nearly 23,000 applications this year and admitted about 2,000 students. While that is a sad statistic for the 6,000 "highly qualified" applicants who were respectfully denied, it's actually even sadder that the others who were denied -- the remaining 15,000 underqualified applicants -- even bothered to apply.....why would students with borderline grades and scores willingly put themselves in the position to be denied at colleges that deny thousands of students who are more qualified than they?

[/quote]
This is the part that really annoys me - the suggestion that Harvard magically picked the only "qualified" applicants and the rest never had a chance. That totally misunderstands the admission process. In the first place, I don't know what she means by the 6,000 who were "respectfully" denied -- I don't believe that Harvard sends out two different types of rejection letters, 6000 respectful ones and 15,000 that say, "get lost" -- I'm pretty sure that Harvard doesn't have 6000 on their waitlist. So where are these numbers? My guess is that Harvard probably does get several thousand applications each year from totally unqualified applicants, but not 15,000. </p>

<p>Again, she misunderstands the nature of a competitive process. </p>

<p>Which brings me to the last point from the article:
[quote]
If your grades and scores are not in line with the admitted-student profile, but you have something unique to offer beyond what is reflected in your numbers, go for it.

[/quote]
This I agree with -- it certainly worked last year for my daughter -- but it totally contradicts everything else said. How is a student to know whether their "something unique to offer" is going to get them in if they don't try? And isn't it very likely that among those 15,000 denied Harvard applicants, quite a few believe that they had "something unique to offer"? </p>

<p>I agree that the process has gone kind of nuts, and certainly has become unpredictable -- but I don't think the solution is for everyone who is not a superstar to give up all attempts. Better advising, yes. But I really feel that it is likely that 70% of Harvard applicants have good reason to think they have a fighting chance of admission. They may be mistaken, but I'll bet they are strong, talented students who had every right to try.</p>

15

<p>Calmom,
great points to take issue with. I don't like the term 'unreachable" either and you hit the nail on the head because merely being "qualified" is not, and has never, ever been, by any means, shape, or form a guarantee for an admit ticket. Indeed, that is the message I got from the article. Despite the inflated numbers game, part of the whole admissions quagmire is related to what in heaven's name is "unreachable", "reachable", "qualified" and, yes, "under-qualified". Now, I am all for the "less than stellar" reaching for the gold ring - because I am not sure exactly what is the significant difference between "stellar" and "less than stellar" -and have posted to this effect. But simply because the elite college admissions process is just that, competitive and a process, it is often highly subjective given the vagaries of holistic models. It doesn't really matter that competition is part of life and often brings out the best in people - results are unpredictable and the unpredictability is unnerving to most people. The competition to gain entry into an Ivy or other LAC was tough in 2005, just as it was in 2001, and will be in 2008. I really don't think what people are griping about this year is entirely due to sour grapes - and this year I am hearing a different tune from many people who did not have a sense of entitlement at all but did have a basically unrealistic idea of what was "within their reach" and what was not - and that does include a few guidance counselors who were doing the advising. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sending in a well-worked app. to a college just because it is a long shot. I agree - go for it, knowing it is a long-shot. But,that, after all is not playing tilt. What I find interesting and significant is a common thread running through both the Sac Bee OP article and the New Jersey article in the reference to a category of apps deemed to be from those "who never had much of a chance of admittance in the first place". Whether they be aptly described as "mass-produced" apps. or not, there appears to be quite a large number of apps. made by students who really do not have the academic preparation nor the stats to justify applying to an elite, highly competitive HEI in the first place. Nobody wants to have an app summarily dumped into the reject pile, yet - quite possibly - there are quite a number that are.</p>

16

<p>calmom said:

[quote]
But I really feel that it is likely that 70% of Harvard applicants have good reason to think they have a fighting chance of admission.

[/quote]

It may be higher than 70%. I guess it would depend upon how you define "fighting chance". If the Harvard admissions process is seen as somewhat whimsical, for at least a portion of the students they admit, this would lead a good number of bright students to believe they have a chance. It may be a long shot for these applicants, but long shots pay off big.</p>

<p>Other CC threads have talked about the randomness of selection at elite CC's. I don't wish to discuss whether this is the case, or should be the case. But as long as there is the perception on the part of potential applicants that there is a degree of randomness in the admissions process, the applicant pool will be larger than if the process and its outcomes are clearly known.</p>

17

<p>and then there is always the "scatter-shot" approach:</p>

<p>
[quote]
These days, competition to get into a brand-name institution is so intense that desperate students apply to 10, 12 and even 20 schools....</p>

<p>The scattershot approach — coupled with the current wave of baby boomer children graduating from high school — contributed to a record number of applications at the nation's most selective colleges and universities this spring....</p>

<p>...Rice University, like many of its peers, received a record number of applications this year — 8,964, up 27 percent from five years ago.</p>

<p>The talent pool is so deep that the objective measures, such as grades and test scores, are virtually indistinguishable among the 2,219 admitted students and those on the waiting list, said Chris Muñoz, Rice's vice president for enrollment.</p>

<p>Muñoz said he is concerned that students are filling out applications for too many schools.</p>

<p>"How passionate can you really be about 12 universities?" he said. "If you're not passionate about 12 universities and find yourself without your preferred choice, now you're under the gun. It's like starting all over again. I think that would be very hard."....

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/4738405.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/4738405.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

18

<p>asteriskea,</p>

<p>Thanks for pointing out the chron article above. Elsewhere mentioned in it is: "Many students now are scrambling to figure out which backup school would be the best fit. Some won't know details of financial aid packages before decision day."</p>

<p>Ah, finances! The 27% increase in Rice's applications over the last five years is only part of what has been happening over the last 5-7 years at colleges. Costs have increased more than 27% and merit aid has also increased. Consequently, financial aid uncertainty may also be a part of the scattershot approach. My HS Jr is passionate about one school in particular at this point, but a lack of merit aid and/or a weak FA package may mute his enthusiasm. Hence, he has indicated he will be applying to a number of other schools, although no more than 7, (none of them reaches). With one exception, these are all schools that he has already visited.</p>