There Should be a New Admission system in Place

Applying to College
61

<p>

  1. SUNY and UC are public school systems which, by definition, are subject to different rules.
  2. Each campus is considered to be a “branch” of the single campus, so such communications is permissible. It would be a completely different situation if, rather than communicating amongst its various campuses, SUNY and UC had these systems with each other.
  3. The antitrust issues would arise if your system were implemented among private universities, or among a private and public universities.</p>

<p>If your consortium involved colleges in different states, or they accept applications from students in different states, the federal antitrust statutes kick in. (One could argue that the federal antitrust statutes do not apply to public, state-sponsored colleges due to the 11th Amendment.) Coming to an agreement about which college will accept a particular student and which one will not could easily be considered a restraint of trade, just as two competing stores “carving up” territory and agreeing to stay out of each others’ territory is a restraint of trade. </p>

<p>This of course is a very cursory look at a very cursory proposal - antitrust law is extremely complicated. And the devil is always in the details of any such consortium.</p>

62

<p>I wouldn’t like this. I want to have some choices in April, as well as reach and safety schools.</p>

<p>Also I want to have another option if I get screwed on financial aid.</p>

<p>Also, we have a lot more colleges than the UK.</p>

63

<p>One can have 8 schools which include all that
you don’t have to have 25
and the “we have more colleges” is a cheap excuse
you can’t possibly be attracted - GENUINELY attracted - to all of the schools you want to apply to (all 25 of them)..because I am 100% sure that those people who apply to 20 schools or more don’t do it for the reasons some CCers use as excuses…you can have a safety or two, a couple of matches and a couple of reaches, and voila: 10-13 schools which cover all these things people here are complaining about.
a 25 school list is a laundry list and it shows the candidate’s irresponsibility! Plus, it is RIDICULOUS for a person to be using the excuse - i need financial aid and it’s important to the school I pick, that’s why I have so many schools - but end up paying 70$ * 20, that is 1400$ on college applications! It’s pathetic!</p>

64

<p>Free country. Students should be able (as current) to apply to as many schools as they what. Given that they have little to no control over the decision process, and with acceptance rates at many top schools around 20% or less, they need to spread the net as wide as possible.</p>

65

<p>Given that they have little to no control over the decision process, and with acceptance rates at many top schools around 20% or less, they need to spread the net as wide as possible.</p>

<p>restriction on college numbers –> lesser no of apps —> higher admit rate.</p>

<p>Its that simple.</p>

66

<p>may the best player win. if they have the money to pay for apps, go for it..</p>

67

<p>I’m not reading the entire thread, because quite frankly it’s my freedom to not read it - the same freedom that allows for me to apply to 15 schools. However, I want to make this point to citymom: I did the work myself from start to finish, I paid for my applications, and I deserve to apply to the schools that I’ve chosen. Quite frankly, I, along with several other people I’m sure, are sick and tired of listening to your rants about “personal secretaries”. <em>If</em> a parent elects to assist their child with the paperwork (NOT the essays), then it is their freedom to do so. You chose not to do so. Many parents and students have a a different arrangement that suits them. Get over it.</p>

68

<p>I agree that there would be major antitrust issues with the proposed system. The most selective colleges already got into trouble for alleged antitrust violations a number of years back. They would be very hesitant, I think, to inaugurate any proposal that might be attacked.</p>

<p>I am personally convinced that small LACs DO limit the number of students they accept from one given high school. (With larger universities, it doesn’t matter.) When there are 250 kids in a class at a LAC, kids who apply to schools they really aren’t interested in DO hurt their classmates, and, to a lesser extent, others when they are from overpopulated areas.</p>

<p>The same NUMBER of kids will still end up at each college, but they may not be the same kids. </p>

<p>Years ago, believe it or not, a top LAC actually told the GC at my D’s school that if at least one of the 4 kids from one high school class responded to the LAC that they would NOT attend at least 72 hours before the May 1 deadline to respond, the college would take one of the two kids in the same class off the waiting list and admit them. In other words, the LAC admitted that the ONLY reason it had waitlisted the 2 others was that it felt that 4 kids from the same high school was enough. Why wouldn’t the LAC say which kid it would take off the wait list? Because the selection depended on WHICH kid turned it down. It was after all, trying to “build a class.” </p>

<p>It was willing to do this because it understood that once May 1 rolled around and the two wait-listed kids had agreed to attend other colleges and probably paid a hefty deposit, it was less likely that they would enroll at the LAC, even if they got in off the wait list. So, the college said, if the GC could get the accepted kids to make a decision before then, it would accept a wait listed kid before the kid had to pay a deposit to another school. </p>

<p>NO college, no matter how elite, simply numbers its wait list. Instead, the college will choose who gets off based on which kids turn it down. If 20% of the class is from New York and no New Yorker turns it down, it’s highly unlikely any NYers will get in off the wait list. If two kids who listed classics as their prospective major out of 10 who did so turned down a LAC, that classics major on the wait list is probably getting a phone call. </p>

<p>So, at least when it comes to LACs, don’t kid yourself that applying to some you really have very little interest in–perhaps because you want to be able to use the aid package to bargain with one further up the totem pole–is NOT going to hurt anyone. It does. It hurts your classmates who applied to the same LAC. And the closer to the deadline you wait to notify the LAC that you won’t be coming after all, the more you hurt your classmates.</p>

69

<p>may the best player win. if they have the money to pay for apps, go for it..</p>

<p>I have found that many many colleges do not charge - at least common app ones. The most expensive charge for the 16 colleges my s applied was $30.</p>

70

<p>Until recently, I wasn’t even aware of people applying to more than 4! My son applied to 4, and is a junior now. Made it in to his reach, but would have been very happy at all of the others. With our daughter, who is currently a senior, we were embarrassed asking for letters for 6, and explained to teachers that the “high” number of applications was because she is applying to 2 colleges and 4 conservatories. We are really out of it!</p>

<p>We are also embarrassed that our daughter did not visit one of her schools yet. She had surgery and ran out of time to visit, and we felt obliged to explain. It felt vaguely disrespectful to apply to a “safety” without a visit.</p>

<p>People from more ambitious schools and towns that I have talked with in the last few months, have told me their kids are applying to 13 or 15 schools. I was very surprised. I can’t imagine the stress involved in doing that, with essays/supplements, and with all those tax returns and financial aid forms going out!</p>

<p>I think the frenzy aspect of all this would decrease if everyone just applied to a few well-chosen schools. If disaster falls, and for some reason a reach, a match, and a safety plus one, aren’t enough, there is always a gap year, continuing ed classes, online and so on. Overall, only a small percentage of college students do the traditional 4 years at one time, on a campus, and the others do fine. Many applicants who take those routes, apply again and get in to the school they really want.</p>

71

<p>Chaos theory: D was denied to state school, tho she met the criteria stated on the website. Timing wise, made it during the priority deadline in early Nov. She was going into LAS, and not into the highly competitive biz school.</p>

<p>ad con said there were too many other better applicants this yr.</p>

<p>We gotta have some backup - thus 16 apps.</p>

<p>this state school was a direct match and not a reach. Maybe other people, for whom this state school was a safety, beat her out. They probably were using this state U as a back up.</p>

72

<p>As I suggested earlier, one of the colleges you apply to should be your safety school. If you think that you won’t get into your safety school, you should be concerned and not apply to as many reaches as planned on.</p>

<p>The point of a safety school is that, a safety. You really should be getting into it</p>

73

<p>

</p>

<p>Try this easy counterexample. There are about 3,000 colleges in the United States. There are more than 1 million applicants each year. If each applicant can make only two applications, and each applicant decides to send one application to a sure-bet safety across town and the second application to one of the eight Ivy League colleges, </p>

<p>[Ivy</a> League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League]Ivy”>Ivy League - Wikipedia) </p>

<p>then the admission rate at the Ivies could easily become MUCH lower than today. </p>

<p>Where admission rates are high and where admission rates are low is always mostly related to the perceived desirability of the college, weighed against the applicant’s sense of how desirable he or she looks to each college. Limiting the number of applications per student does nothing to keep some colleges from getting more applicants than they can admit, while other colleges get just enough applicants to fill a class.</p>

74

<p>how about requiring that applicants list all the schools they are applying to? It will show colleges how determined the applicant is in getting admitted into their institutions. If someone does apply for 20+ schools, it will show that the person is just rolling the dice and hoping to get into a prestigious school or to get a great financial package. I know many of you will say, “well, if he or she succeeds, good for them.” I fully agree, but with said disclosure system, colleges will be more hesitant in admitting over ambitious applicant. Knowing this, applicants will be more selective in where they want to send their application.
In all honesty, 20+ schools is WAY too much, and don’t give me the “i"m in love with all of them” story, because there is no way you can fall in love with all of them without visiting each one of them. Unless 15 of the twenty colleges are located within close range, no one will spend the money on travel and lodging costs to visit all of those colleges.<br>
And even when you do visit a school, you only get a small glimpse of what goes on, and that glimpse might be unrepresentative of the school’s character.<br>
If you are concerned with financial packages, I would think you would try to to implement your money in the most effective manner. Squandering money on over twenty college applications will not help your cause. Instead, spend some time researching the universities and colleges, and try to get a feel for what kind of offers could potentially be in your future.</p>

75

<p>Bad idea. The best way to limit the number of applications is for colleges to come clean on the objective basis for their decisions. For example the frequency with which non-recruited athletes, non-URMS, non-legacy and non development candidates are admitted with test scores below the median for school. If folks knew this data they would send out less applications voluntarily.</p>

76

<p>

Check the Common Data Sets. Section C7. Many colleges post detailed stats about GPA, test scores, and class rank. Brown and Penn are examples.</p>

<p>[Brown</a> Admission: Facts & Figures](<a href=“Undergraduate Admission | Brown University”>Undergraduate Admission | Brown University)</p>

<p>[Penn:</a> Undergraduate Admissions: Statistics for the Class of 2011](<a href=“http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/applying/profile.php]Penn:”>http://www.admissionsug.upenn.edu/applying/profile.php)

Many colleges have discussed this. See this thread as an example: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/407842-how-do-admissions-officers-do.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/407842-how-do-admissions-officers-do.html&lt;/a&gt;

Prices go up, but not by that much. Generally you can count less than a $500-$1000 increase from year to year. Almost all colleges post a detailed breakdown of the cost of attendance.

It’s not clear to the applicant what his values and preferences are?

That’s what financial aid calculators are for. Some schools, like Princeton, have their own calculators. Others post detailed information about their financial aid policies…check out Section H of the Common Data Set.</p>

<p>Take Chicago as an example: [Office</a> of College Aid](<a href=“http://collegeaid.uchicago.edu/prospective/average_aid.shtml]Office”>http://collegeaid.uchicago.edu/prospective/average_aid.shtml)

That’s why visits are important. </p>

<p>If you want a real lack of clarity, look at graduate school admissions. GPAs and GRE scores are almost never released, nor are applicant and admit numbers. Letters of recommendation are vitally important but impossible to quantify.</p>

77

<p>I agree, instead of applying to a school based on its name, this would allow people to actually do research about schools so that they could find a good PERSONAL fit.</p>

78

<p>Obviously somebody is threatened by rejection.
Look, I didn’t apply to 14 schools because I wanted to take up someone else’s spot. I honestly am scared that nobody will admit me, but I applied to my dream school so that I won’t regret it later, and I needed a few matches as well as a couple of safeties (which I’m not even sure are safeties)
If one person gets accepted into all 20 schools, he’ll just pick one and someone else from the waitinglist will take his spot.</p>

79

<p>I don’t like to see student’s choices restricted, it’s not their fault and why should they be penalized for the lack of admissions transparency. It’s the colleges fault that people feel the need for sending in so many applications. This is especially true for excellent students who are unhooked. If one had a reasonable way to forecast admissions success and merit scholarship success, one could devise a strategy to apply to the optimal number of schools and for most it would be a reasonable number. However, I suspect that the admissions rate for the unhooked at each of HYP this year will be less than 5%. That’s less than a 1 in 20 chance for even stellar students. Thirty years ago, that might have been be 1 in 6 or 1 in 7. It is not an unreasonable strategy for top students to send in a lot of applications to top schools just to ensure that they end up in classes with their intellectual peers. Furthermore, because they feel that they must send in many applications, it is not possible to visit all of the schools that they will apply to, and because they don’t “show the lovin” for some of those schools, it further reduces their chance of acceptance causing them to send even more applications, etc. Hence the instability. How many people who end up at their safety or with no place to go wonder what would have happened if they had only filled out one more application to X university or Y college. </p>

<p>Even giving out their own formulas for Academic Index and EC Index and providing previous year’s probability of getting in from each grouping (Some schools actually do this) would allow a reasonable person to make educated guesses on admissions probabilities that would allow someone to calculate the probability that they would actually go to a specific college. At some point, that probability is low enough so that it is not worth even filling out the application. For example if you apply to 20 schools, unless you have no preference and all 20 are equally likely, for at least one of those schools the probability of you actually going there is less than 5%. Most likely, the last few have negligible probability that you would attend. </p>

<p>Almost everybody has better things to do with their time than applying to colleges where they have less than a 2% chance of actually going. Without more information, it makes sense to be conservative in one’s estimate of admissions chances. I suspect that the 2% mark could be reached with many fewer applications if people had more accurate information.</p>

<p>Colleges could do a lot more to cure the problem and if they all did, I doubt the rankings would even change much.</p>

80

<p>

</p>

<p>On the Harvard Forum is a prediction that this year’s BASE acceptance rate at Harvard will be only 6 percent, so what you suspect is conservative. </p>

<p>After edit: why students should be free to apply as they wish is that they are dealing with CONDITIONAL probabilities. They will attend somewhere where they are admitted. (A few years ago, there were parents who reported that their children got in NOWHERE among all the places where they applied. I hope these days families on CC are smarter about safety colleges </p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvard-university/357223-what-your-favorite-safety-college.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvard-university/357223-what-your-favorite-safety-college.html&lt;/a&gt; </p>

<p>and know well enough to line up the safety college first, before making up the rest of the application list.) Any college is a likeable college if it lets in my child. No college is a possible choice for where to enroll unless it admits my child first. </p>

<p>That’s all. People only apply, I am convinced, to places that they have some reasonable contingent probability of attending. Colleges only admit, to the best of their knowledge and belief, students who have submitted applications and who are at or above the level of the students who most recently enrolled. No one is hurting anyone else by applying to one sure-bet safety and some set of desirable “reach” colleges that may or may not admit a particular applicant.</p>