Stop the insanity

<p>Just read part of the NACAC's recently released "State of College Admissions." Some interesting factoids:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>The number of students applying to college has actually showed a slight decrease, not increase over the past few years. Yes, applications are up at many schools, but mainly because students are applying to more schools, not because more students are applying in the first place. And, they are mainly adding applications to the most selective schools, not building in a safety net of less selective - but still great quality - colleges.</p></li>
<li><p>The AVERAGE selectivity rate for ALL colleges in the U.S. is 71%. Only a small percentage of the 3000 plus 4 year schools in the US accept less than 50% of students. Those schools saw the largest increase in applications again this year.</p></li>
</ul>

<p>Direct quote: "The popular perception of college admissions in the U.S., fueled by the media, guidebooks, policy makers, and colleges themselves, is that of highly selective institutions similiar to the Ivy League. However,a closer look at selectivity data shows that the 4-year college landscape is much broader and more accessible than the popular vision."</p>

<p>What this says to me: the feeding frenzy of thinking that only those highly selective colleges are worth going to has got to stop. There are many terrific schools out there worth going to, and students and parents need to consider and apply to a full range of selectivity levels. There are too many stories on the boards this year about kids who did not get into any school or were waitlisted at every school or only got into one school. In every case, it is clear that these students ONLY applied to schools which admit less than 50%. How different these stories would be have been very different if people stopped the insanity of thinking that selectivity equals quality and started thinking about quality in terms of other measurements instead. </p>

<p>And that's my rant for the day. :)</p>

<p>Well said!</p>

<p>4 kids at our high achieving hs didn't get in to any school because the parents/students refused to consider safeties at all. They are obviously regretting that now. I feel so badly for them, but the gc did try to get them to change their minds....</p>

<p>Carolyn, I like your rant. "Only 34% of the 3,000 plus schools accept less than 50% of students". Carolyn, you are adding to the frenzy. :)Isn't the number closer to 3.4%?</p>

<p>I was just talking to friends about this a few days ago. My conclusion... the frenzy isn't going to stop anytime soon. People feel great when they get into places most people can't. This process is a lot more complicated than just getting a good education.</p>

<p>I'm puzzled about the whole process. I'm surprised people are willing to sacrifice so much financially to go to a school they may have visited for a couple of hours.</p>

<p>I guess I am just going to stay puzzled and surprised.</p>

<p>Thank you for that information. I asked about the actual number of students applying versus number of applications. The colleges seem to like to share the former stats and not so much of the latter ones.</p>

<p>You post confirms what I suspected but didn't get any information on.</p>

<p>Well said, Carolyn. It is a sort of insanity, especially when you consider how little an impact it has in the long run..</p>

<p>It is incredible that parents won't even look at less selective schools. I swear, it is that word "Safety" People think "safety" means "second class" but if you do your research, pay attention to what really matters in educational value, you can find a wide range of schools that are less selective but still excellent. Turning one's nose up at schools just because they are less selective lies at the bottom of nearly every story about kids not getting in any where.</p>

<p>I sincerely hope that next year's juniors and their parents can learn from this.</p>

<p>I see a vicious cycle. It would be absolutely wonderful if a student could apply to one odds on favorite, one 50-50 and one dream. Fewer applications fees, more time on each application. But now that we have "Tuft's syndrome" and crazy admit rates to a larger percentage of schools, kids are afraid to have less than five schools. I agree that there is a wealth of schools that do have higher admit rates. Unfortunately some of those schools are now inching their way down below 40% acceptance rates. :(</p>

<p>It's a little like wanting to date the quarterback or head cheerleader. It may be a perfect match, but then again...</p>

<p>I think another thing you have to consider with some kids is that they are <em>completely</em> clueless on areas of study, and you have cast a wider net from a selectivity and programs/departments basis. My son applied to 6 schools - which I considered low. In at his choice so turns out he was right, though.</p>

<p>It's funny though, I find that having been through it once, having a D who did get into two of those schools no one gets into, I am over decal fever for my S. I can now honestly and whole heartedly say that I will be overjoyed if he goes to any one of much larger number of schools than we considered for my D. My main sorrow when it looked as though she would not get in was that I had so wrongly set her expectations in my ignorance. And in my own desire for the status that comes from having a kid who gets in. Don't worry. I am not as awful a person as that implies. I'm working on it. I am spending time now with my S so he understands that HPYSMC are not the be-all and end-all. Last April I couldn't have done that.</p>

<p>Dstark, you are right. I corrected the passage to be a bit more general. If 34% of all schools have admissions numbers below 50%, we are all doomed. ;)</p>

<p>Ohio Mom - Yes, a lot of people (parents, guidance counselors, the kids themselves) don't dig deeper to see what's out there. Let's face it, the top guidebooks only cover 350 "BEST" colleges, US News makes a big deal about the "TOP TIER" colleges (and their rankings are weighted by selectivity). I could see how anyone would think those are the only schools out there worth going to. But, I've been simply amazed at how many great schools there are out there that aren't on many folk's radar or that people simply won't even consider because they are not "prestigious" enough. And, I think for many, "prestige" translates as "It is impossible to get into that school, therefore if I get in I will be better than everyone else."</p>

<p>Texas, the reason we have "tufts syndrome" is that so many people are still refusing to actually treat anything but the "top" schools with full respect. They are considering schools with acceptance rates of 30% to be "safety" schools when those are probably more likely to be match schools or even still reach schools. If you believe that the only "right" school for you is HYPS, then subconsciously or consciously you may very well not give the same attention and passion to your application when you apply to WASHU or Tufts. Result: you reinforce the school's fear that you really don't want to be there. </p>

<p>The example I would use of someone who I thought was VERY realistic was Berurah's son. Yes, he had top stats. But in addition to the most selective schools, he also had U of Miami and U of Kansas on his list. If all else had failed, he would have had two very solid choices to choose from. But how many kids with top stats would even DEEM to send an application to U of Kansas or U of Miami? How many parents would shudder at the thought of possibly sending their "little stars" to those two very respectible schools? Berurah's son did well in admissions because he treated each school with respect --- and that undoubtably came through even at the schools where he could have potentially been rejected for "tufts syndrome." Result: a wealth of happy decisions to make.</p>

<p>Carolyn, now let's look at the bright side. There are many great schools in the Midwest, Pacific Northwest, and the South that people aren't clamoring to get into---This leaves more spots open for those that know better. :)</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Excuse my ignorance but what is the difference?</p>

<p>Dstark, Yep. :)</p>

<p>One of my son's safeties come up on his horizon because a couple of the younger programs at my company went to school there. I asked what they would recommend - and they said their school, without question. So that put that college in a very positive light - made all the more so by our visit there.</p>

<p>Alum, you are certainly on the right path. I am also trying to be conservative with my daughter's chances as she picks out and looks at schools. I have no doubt that she will still get an excellent education.</p>

<p>even the top tier of USNew has some GREAT schools that have >50% acceptances.</p>

<p>of the LACs: Smith (#13, 52%) Grinnell (#16-63%), Bryn Mawr (#21, 51%), and Mount Holyoke (#24, 52%)</p>

<p>of the Major U's: UMich (#22, 53% - btw, becoming a safety for top cal BWRK's), UWisconsin (#32, 65%), Case Western (#35, 75% - I wish I could bold that #).....#98+ all have acceptance rates higher than 50%, most higher than 70%.</p>

<p>From first post on this thread:</p>

<p>Just read part of the NACAC's recently released "State of College Admissions." Some interesting factoids:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>The number of students applying to college has actually showed a slight decrease, not increase over the past few years. Yes, applications are up at many schools, but mainly because students are applying to more schools, not because more students are applying in the first place. And, they are mainly adding applications to the most selective schools, not building in a safety net of less selective - but still great quality - colleges.</p></li>
<li><p>The AVERAGE selectivity rate for ALL colleges in the U.S. is 71%. Only a small percentage of the 3000 plus 4 year schools in the US accept less than 50% of students. Those schools saw the largest increase in applications again this year"</p></li>
</ul>

<p>Here goes:</p>

<p>You have school A with 1000 applications, you have school B with 1000 applications. That does not necessarily mean 2000 students applying. It could be 1000, it could be 1500, it could be 2000. So the total applicant pool in general is smaller than the number of applications. </p>

<p>If you say we have 2000 applications for 500 spots at two schools, it could be 1000 students vying for those 500 spots or 2000 students vying. In one case its a 50% chance, in the other 25% chance. SO it is important to know the actual number of students in the general pool, not just the number of applications. It could be the same students are accepted at both school, and the rest are left out. That again would change the stats. But the way colleges report things does not give the whole picture, just the one they like that shows how exclusive they are.</p>

<p>And in general, most of the thousands of schools in the country are very generous in their admissions percentages.</p>