Wasn’t UChicago a late adopter to the common app and did virtually no marketing? But it’s always been a very elite “brainy” college.
@OldFashioned1, yes, they switched from disdaining playing the game (making applying even harder than normal with the Uncommon App) to being one of the schools that markets and games the admissions process the most in the span of a few years. The quality of the school hardly changed at all in that time frame
I usually say “tippy top school” or “lottery school” (even though I know some of the applicants are not the typical high caliber applicant). But the term “Elite” seems good.
Harvey Macharvardface Schools.
A decade ago, we would have rolled our eyes at the thought of a U5 league. But now it is here and in another decade, the U5 League may be as big as the U10 league is today.
Why is this a problem? Because it makes it increasingly difficult for the schools in such a league to spend quality time on each application. Most applications are read and decided in 5 to 10 minutes. Even a university like Stanford with a lot of resources, I think only promises one read of your application. If in those precious 5 minutes, you can’t make the application reader sit up and take notice, you are likely to be tossed aside. It also makes it crazy hard for students to get noticed, so it sets up incentives for students to do irrational and soul destroying things in high school just in the hope of getting noticed by the schools in this league.
If the U10 league grows to lets say 50 schools, then it will be a very sad day for our children and grandchildren. But as long as a U10, or a U5 or a even a U1 league exists, students will clamor for admission into these institutions, specially with the uncertainty in the US economy and the US losing its pre-eminence in the global economy. Prestige is becoming a simple remedy being tried by many to try and inoculate their kids against the vagaries of the US economy.
It is true that the students pursuing these universities are still a relatively small number of students, but my guess is they form a significant percentage of folks on CC and as the question was asked here, it is relevant to the readers of this forum.
I think it might be hyperbole to say that it’d be a “very sad day” when the U10 league hits 50 schools. It’s not a tragedy if a kid doesn’t go to one of them, and we’re adding a billion people to the planet every decade or so now, so it’s an inevitability unless we slow down a little. Besides, in 50 years there may be U10’s all over the planet.
Or maybe you’ll just be able to buy a Harvard chip and plug it into your baby and boom, you’re done!
Ok, I’ll bite. Back in the dark ages, when the U10 was U50, how much time did they spend reading applications? And how is it different now?
I would argue that it is now much easier to read with the sorting hat on. Absent a hook, HYS is only going to accept the top x of a high school class. Thus, it is really easy to skim applications ranked say, top third, and see if there is anything special that warrants further review, such as curing cancer. If not, auto-reject, Can be accomplished in less than 60 seconds.
Perhaps the bigger problem is with those 'rents who continue to perpetuate the myth that its Ivy or lifetime of unemployment???
I noticed HYS popped up a lot on this thread. Not HYP anymore?
sorry, I used S since it was part of the U5 group. Happy to amend to HYPS. No disrespect meant for P’ton. 
@MotherOfDragons, world population growth is actually slowing down dramatically. Only parts of Africa and a few places outside Africa have high fertility rates now.
The 5 most populous countries in the world are China, India, the US, Indonesia, and Brazil. India has the highest fertility rate at 2.5. The US is slightly below the replacement rate of 2.1 while Indonesia is slightly above. Brazil is below the US at 1.79. China balances out India with a fertility rate of only 1.55.
In 25 years, China will have a demographic crisis of too many old people and not enough young people.
The rate is slowing down-from what I see it’s gone from a global high of 22% in 1960 to the current rate of 10.7.
But if you have 8+ billion people reproducing at a rate of 10% vs. 3 billion at 22% in 1960, isn’t that still an overall higher number? Plus, the reproduction rates don’t reflect the fact that fewer of us are dying early, and more of us are staying on the planet a lot longer.
@MotherOfDragons, where are you getting your rate numbers?
And note that fertility rates are still dropping (in many parts of the world, below replacement level).
As for staying on the planet longer, sure, that’s also happening, but unless humans achieve immortality, a fertility rate below the replacement rate means an inevitable decline in population. It’s just a matter or when. Japan’s population is already decreasing and adult diaper sales now outnumber baby diaper sales in that country.
In any case, longer-living old people doesn’t mean more college students.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762181.html
And I’m a 46 year old full time college student.