@VickiSoCal, yes it does doesn’t it… Since it is Stanford, if he was limited to 10 apps then the result would have likely been the same.
“merit alone” is not an absolute thing. That’s the bottom line. What a boring world it would be where we line up the applications in descending order of SAT/ACT score and admit the top N. That’s a world where test prep companies make a bundle and kids who can’t afford test prep lose out.
I believe that allowing a fewer number of apps would help with the deferring/waitlist nonsense going on right now.
The universities would know the kid is seriously considering attending their school because he/she can apply to so many.
Right now, a university has no idea if a kid has applied to 5 or 50 schools. So they defer everyone EA and then waitlist too many RD applicants. ED is the only way right now to show the kid is truly interested.
I’m not a big fan of people applying to 20 schools in the “quest” for lowest cost. They apply hoping their kid is one of the special kids chosen for the limited " super duper merit" package . So they all end up applying to the same schools and it creates a backlog at the top.
Some students/parents feel that they would only “fit” at a school that has sufficiently high prestige.
@donnaleighg We are talking limiting the number of applications so the application pool,becomes smaller, this improves access to both a place and merit aid, if you cant afford test prep it gives you a better chance actually. You are addressing how colleges choose from the applications it receives, totally different thing.
I do think the number of applications should be limited to 10. Do your research up front, figure out the FA. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post on CC where someone who filed 20 apps was happy with that decision in the end. Too many applications to manage, disappointed and hurt when there are 10 rejections even if there are acceptances (it sucks to be rejected), endless requests for more documents, need to show interest at 20 (!) colleges. That applicant is taking more than his share of time from the guidance counselor. Apply to an EA or a rolling admissions school that you WILL attend as a safety, and then pick your favorites for the next 9.
Instead of limiting the number of applications, what if students had to rank their applications? This might have the effect of reducing the number of “trophy” applications as a school might look differently at a No. 1-3 choice versus a No. 10+ choice.
I would like to see how schools ranked number 11 through 20 deal with the application.
The SAT and ACT should simply make the school score submission data available to the admissions offices.
The colleges then can see that the student has submitted scores to all the Ivies, etc.
The schools can then make more appropriate choices and the students will be more judicious in their applications.
The FAFSA used to allow schools to see what other schools were on the list. People played games and submitted to one school, deleted it and added a new school, deleted it and added a new school, etc. Many cries of unfairness that JHU knew you also applied to Rice and USC and all the Texas schools and 12 in New England.
Some high school limit the number of admissions they process, and it doesn’t seem to hurt their students. Most of us were limited by the cost of applications and test score submissions, but many people get waivers.
Limit the common app to 10 choices, you can submit more than 1 form, but they will be marked form 1 , 2 etc. let the colleges figure it out how the deal with it. It is an easy problem to solve but sadly one were I don’t think there is enough of a will. 1% admit rate here we come.
I still don’t see how limiting the number of apps will help much. I think someone mentioned it earlier - a student can only take 1 spot so by limiting the number of apps - overall yields will go up so that means less offers are made. It’s not going to effect the elites much and at most will lower the waitlist numbers at other schools.
With a finite number of spots to fill, how does fewer applications lead to fewer offers being made? What will happen is the students and universities will be a lot more discerning of where they apply and to whom offers are made. Yes wait lists and wait list decisions will be lower, this is a good thing, improving yield means kids and universities are being matched.
@elquapo1 I was referring to @preppedparent (post 19) who just wants “straight merit” admissions with no preferences for, well the usual suspects. Sorry I wasn’t more clear.
I mean if we just use straight merit, how will Villanova fill their men’s basketball roster, or UConn their women’s roster? 
I, too, have found myself thinking about the idea of kids ranking their lists and then getting matched, a bit like Questbridge or medical school, but for all undergrad applicants. It might not decrease the number of applications, though, since more apps could still improve the chance of a match. But, like MommyCoqui said, how would schools ranked low on the list react?
Certainly more kids would feel content with their college outcome if the extremes (agonizing between 10+ acceptances and getting no acceptances) were removed.
It feels like perhaps the increasing number of ED acceptances at certain schools is indicative of both students and colleges craving this kind of mutual commitment (?)
Wouldn’t those high schools be the ones with better counseling resources, so that students could have more realistic application lists with limited numbers of colleges?
In a match process, the lower ranked schools would only match if they were the highest ranked remaining choice that admitted the student.
But finances can make doing a match system more difficult. Questbridge matching means full ride or nearly so, so that finances do not have a major effect. Medical residency pay does not vary as much as college net price, so prospective medical residents probably are not choosing based on residency pay levels. A college match system would need to either have colleges make pre-offers of FA for applicants to see before making their match lists, or applicants to name their maximum net prices, before running the match process.
For high-stats unhooked students, there are only safeties and lotteries. Given that truth, you are foolish not to buy more tickets.
@donnaleighg well if not merit alone something closer to that. The pendulum has swung now too far in the other direction
Perhaps there should be a lottery before admissions begins. Colleges would indicate the minimum statistics required to succeed at their school. Kids with those minimums would pay a small amount ($10?) to enter a lottery in order to enter. The lottery positions would be capped at a reasonable number, say 20,000 applications for a class of 2,000. Only those kids that won the lottery would be allowed to apply. This would allow schools to more holistically review those 20,000 applications.
In addition, to even the playing field, require colleges to match the best financial package the student receives among all of their acceptances.
Limiting the number of applications gives the colleges more power because it reduces their need to compete for students.