<p>This article may be of interest, especial to those still waiting . . . </p>
<p>I must admit, I'm a little surprised.</p>
<p>I'm not surprised at all. Yes kids are sending out more applications. But they aren't necessarily getting into any more schools, since the schools themselves are denying higher numbers of applicants (I'm not saying "getting more selective" since then Mini will jump down my throat.) I think it's the rare kid who gets into all of their reach/match schools. And more kids may be going to their safety if they didn't get into any place else.</p>
<p>Thanks for the link to a really interesting article. Since it's yet another piece hyping how competitive college admission has gotten, here's a small andidote, esp. for students and parents in the class of 2008:</p>
<p>Even at schools where applications increase and yields hold up, it may not be much harder to gain admission. Admit rates say little, both because of increasing apps, and the ways that college increasingly court apps from students who are inadmissible. Raw admit rates also don't show how those "extra" applications this year were distributed: a fair number probably came from students at the low end academically, internationals whose chances of admission are small, etc. If you need reassurance that things are not totally out of control, it's good to watch how slowly and unevenly things like median SAT scores changes. They tend to move at a glacial pace. This is not to say that things aren't getting more competitive--maybe just not one the level that the frenzy of reporting around competition in college admissions would have you believe.</p>
<p>Next year, I think yields will be a little more volatile at the very competitive schools: there will be multiple apps from kids who would've done EA at Harvard/Princeton/UVA still in the RD pools.</p>
<p>I didn't think that with all the supplements the Common App made an appreciable difference in easiness. My son didn't fill out any extra applications because it was easy.</p>
<p>Another detail to keep in mind: don't put much stock in yield figures that colleges are tossing around now. They won't include the "summer melt," students who wind up not attending because they come off other school's waitlists, change plans, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you need reassurance that things are not totally out of control, it's good to watch how slowly and unevenly things like median SAT scores changes. They tend to move at a glacial pace. This is not to say that things aren't getting more competitive--maybe just not one the level that the frenzy of reporting around competition in college admissions would have you believe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hate to disagree on this precise issue, but the median SAT is irrelevant in the debate of "things getting out of control" in admissions. Case in point: before the recentering of the SAT, the scores had been falling. Now, compare the admission rates at the Ivies and at the top 10 LAC since 1990. </p>
<p>No matter how anyone slices it, it is undeniable that it HAS become a lot tougher to gain admission at highly selective schools. As an example, the rate of admission at Claremont McKenna has been halved in five years from 31% to 16%. Such low admission rate is especially surprising in the LAC environment where a sub 20% admission rate was considered an absolute threshhold just a few years ago.</p>
<p>When it comes to admission, the average rates don't tell the entire story. There is a huge chasm between admission in the world that comprise the few dozen highly selective or highly competitive colleges and the thousands of school ranked lower. As we know from the often repeated NACAC survey, the overwhleming majority of students do get accepted at their first choice. </p>
<p>However, this does not provide much of a soothing balm to the 90-95% of students who get rejected at the most selective schools during the RD rounds.</p>
<p>Claremont McKenna is a good example because it's a school that has become much more selective quickly. This kind of drop in admit rates is truly extraordinary.</p>
<p>A student or parent who's unsuspecting, seeing those 31% to 16% admit numbers might be tempted to think: "Wow! You'd now have to be in the top half of the group they were accepting just a few years ago to have a chance." </p>
<p>But if you go back 7 years (as far back as CM's on-line fact sheets go), the median SAT score hasn't moved; it's bounced up and down between 1400 seven years ago, some 1390s in between, and back at 1400 now. In other words, the enrolled class, and therefore it's probably safe to assume, the admitted class, has just not gotten wildly more qualified academically. If you were a 1400-SAT type student seven years ago, you were solidly in the middle of the pack and today you still are. </p>
<p>CM certainly has become more selective; my point is that two different data points will give you different pictures about the extent of the changes in selectivity. </p>
<p>On the dozen or so most selective schools, no argument: it's bonkers and SAT scores are irrelevant.</p>
<p>Excellent school, but one reason CMC can break that 20% acceptance barrier is the fact that it has significantly smaller classes than the average LAC. It's total enrollment is barely 1,000 students.</p>