Too funny! I was a 4 college applicant myself back in the day. And then it still seemed so laborious. I truly don’t even remember whether I handwrote my apps or, heaven forbid, “typewrote” them.
But I remain curious, so perhaps I’ll ask the question another way: why is the US so different these days than other countries on college apps?
Most of the answers above address the supply side - what is going on the college side of the equation. Why are there insufficient seats at elite schools? But also important is the question of why people care so much about going to an elite school in the first place (and yes I know it is more of an obsession on CC than in the gen pop).
A college degree is a presumptive ticket to a living wage. In the time since I applied in the 80’s, unions have been in decline, minimum wage has stagnated, health insurance and other benefits aren’t connected to jobs non-college graduates can so easily get. Housing is more expensive, households need two incomes. The stakes are higher. The more elite the school, the perception is the more options you have and the straighter line to a high-paying career.
The big debate on CC always seems to come down to whether the elite schools offer a better shot at financial success that the neighborhood public. To me just the existence of that debate itself demonstrates how important financial goals have become to the college application process. I don’t remember anyone talking about that in the 80’s. The emphasis on career track education- engineering, computer science, etc over humanities - also indicates people want post-secondary education to do something different than it used to. The elites dangle the promise of investment banking and FAANG, so it is no wonder people are willing to make enormous sacrifices for what looks like future financial security in a very financially uncertain world.
Once again, people talk about this issue, and they blame the universities, they blame the Common App, etc. Yet people here are not willing to put any blame on the parents. Yet there are a very large number of parents here on CC who are focused on getting their kids into the highest ranked college that will accept the kid, there are parents who every kid who comes on here to apply to the highest ranking college possible.
I mean, if parents are telling kids “apply to Harvard (Yale, Stanford, etc), take your shot, the worst that can happen is that they will reject you”, you will get 50,000, 60,000, or eventually 100,000 applications to each of these.
That is simple math - tell every one of the kids in the top 5% of their high school that they should send in their application to Harvard, and every kid in the top 10% of their class will do so. The top 10% of high school students is around 300,000 students.
At the same time we, the parents (and the teachers, and the counselors) keep on referring to these most popular colleges as the “tippy tops”, and keep on encouraging students to place admission to these colleges as a true measure of a student’s academic and intellectual quality.
For many or even most, of these students, the inevitable rejection is not an issue. They didn’t really believe that they would be accepted, and they hadn’t built their lives around being accepted. However, there are also the thousands of students who have been encouraged to focus on acceptance to an “elite” colleges as the end game of their entire K-12 education.
So long as the numbers of applicants keep on growing, these thousands of students are going to become increasingly desperate.
However, these 300,000 may not think of Harvard as their do-or-die college, but many are looking at a college which, until 2015 had an acceptance rate of 25% or 30%, like NYU. Since even people who are obsessed with HYPSM hedge their bets, they are also competing for places on the colleges that are a step down on the “prestige scale”. So now colleges like Bowdoin which in 2000 had an acceptance rate of 25%, or UChicago which had the acceptance rate of 40% in 2000, or NYU which had an acceptance rate of 29% acceptance rate in 2000, all have acceptance rates in single digits.
The insanity won’t get better, it will get even worse, since increasing numbers of students will be pulled in. As increasing numbers of colleges further and further down the “prestige scale” are pulled in the game as second, third, and fourth choices, increasing numbers of students will be competing, and increasing numbers of students will be disappointed. Students who are applying to colleges at the “bottom” of the “T-50” are facing acceptance rates in the 20%, and some even lower.
Yes, colleges which are relatively high on this scale are benefitting from it, but they are not who is actually driving it. All colleges are doing is massive advertising. They are not going to high schools and telling each and every students that “you are smart so if you don’t go to a top college, you won’t have a good time, and you won’t be able to find a job that is worthy of you when you graduate”. Colleges are not telling students “you need to get into a top college, otherwise you are not a success”. Colleges are not singing the praises of students who are accepted to “top” colleges, they are not proudly putting these kids’ names on the wall, and not boasting of the number of students from this or that high school who attended these colleges.
Colleges are not the ones who believe that it is worth paying huge sums of money, lying, cheating, or bribing testers and university officials in order to get kids into “elite” colleges. The Varsity Blues parents were willing to break the law, but for every parents who is willing to break the law to get their kids into an “elite” college, there are a hundred parents who think that it is worthwhile doing anything short of breaking the law. For every parents who is doing everything in their power, there are ten who are relentlessly pushing their kids because the parents believe that their kid MUST attend an “elite” college.
Parents are full participants in this insanity. We are not powerless victims of the Universities, the testing companies, and the Common App.
So I think the we are being a bit self-delusional when we are all trying to find anybody else to blame but us.
Of course, the kids themselves play this game, often even if their parents do not. It’s not as though kids listen to their parents all the time, and nothing pleases a teenager as mush as embracing some philosophy that their parents reject. “But DAD, you don’t UNDERSTAND, if I don’t get into Harvard, my life will be RUINED”.
While the colleges are really not big players in this game, high schools are.
First, the same prestige game is playing out in high schools. A quick perusal through the threads about prep schools here on CC reveals the same sort of admissions madness. Second, the more “prestigious” high school benefit immensely from the game, both in admissions to the high schools, and even more so, in college admissions
In fact, I think that these high schools are some of the biggest beneficiaries of college application madness. One of the biggest selling points of the wealthy private high schools is the number of students who they place in “elite” colleges, and one of the biggest sources of donations are from graduates who were placed in such a college.
If you end the game, they lose prestige, they lose one of their biggest selling points, and they lose the donations of grateful alumni who attended “elite” colleges.
The public high schools that serve wealthy communities benefit less, but they still benefit a lot. Their success in placement attracts the wealthy to the school district, which increases the tax base, and thus the amount of money available to the high school. Parents donate for clubs, competitions, sports, and all of those things which parents see as the passports to admissions to an “elite” college.
But again, it really all boils down to the parents. Parents who are desperate to get their kids into an “elite” college are wonderful sources of money, and the high schools are only to happy to encourage them in their beliefs.
In short, college admissions went wrong when parents became major players in college admissions, and when obsession with their kid getting into a prestigious college became something in which a very large number of parents started to engage. It wasn’t only simple prestige. Once, the “prestigious” colleges was the best local college or the state flagship. Now the are super-wealthy private colleges which are highly ranked.
It will only end if and when there are a large enough percent of parents (and kids) who are more interested in fit than prestige. Unfortunately, even among those who think that they only care about fit, a large part of what they think is “fit” is, in fact, “prestige”. “Oh, fit is very important, and, for my kid, high ranking is an important part of fit”.
Bottom line, what’s wrong is the focus on prestige by parents and kids. The way I see it, there are a number of choices:
A. Refuse to play the game, and use other factors besides ranking to determine the best college for your kid,
or,
B. Remain convinced that prestige is extremely important, and accept that this madness is the result of the focus on prestige, and see it as “the price of doing business”,
or, everybody’s favorite,
C. Remain convinced that prestige is extremely important, and blame the common app, the colleges, other parents, the government, the kids, and Social Media for it all. Bonus points for being in denial that you think that prestige is important, but are still use ranking as a major part of your kid’s college decisions. Even more points if you manage to blame something crazy like rock and roll or the weather.
No, that’s about right. College admissions went from being a carriage trade to a carnival show from the moment USNews entered the picture. Cheap airline travel added oxygen to the fire - things were so much simpler when every region had its own set of elite colleges.
It’s a lot of things. I think the cost of college also has created, for many families, the feeling that they need to buy “quality”. As @CateCAParent notes, there’s always this question of how this huge expenditure will translate into earnings. But it also means that schools who offer generous FA, including to middle class families, are going to see a lot of interest.
I don’t think there are so many more valedictorian out there today than there were 30 years ago. And I don’t think that 30 years ago they all found their way to tippy top schools either. (I know that the one in my graduating class was denied at the Ivy he applied to. He’s now a tenured professor at one of the impossible to get into schools. )
There IS more information available now on how to “crack the code” to get into top schools, something that pre test-prep and pre-internet was pretty closely held. (Just look at the matriculation lists for top prep schools from 40-50 years ago. They sent half their students- males - to HYP!) So part of the madness is also coming from people thinking they have crafted themselves into what these schools want. But in reality, they may have achieved only some part of that profile without being “the real deal”.
At the same time, schools have become more diverse. That is good for many, but not for the group that had preferred staus “back in the day”. Prep schools no longer offer a VIP entrance to HYP and suburban MA kids are now competing against kids from all over the country for seats at the NESCAC schools.
But at the end of the day, my sense is that there are a lot of schools out there that were decent regional schools 40 years ago that are now truly excellent institutions. Ratings do such injustice, especially if they make a kid feel unhappy about their options. The schools that are selective but not insane are terrific schools! Likewise, the kid who was a valedictorian but not admitted to an ivy is still smart and ambitious and likely to achieve great things at her state flagship.
I agree that the madness is being fueled in part by the belief in the premise that financial success is unattainable without a 4-year college degree (from any college). Kids who aren’t a good fit for the 4-year college model (or who flat out don’t want to go to college) are being persuaded or pushed by parents, peers and high school counselors to go with the hope that they will somehow make things work, invent a love for academia, graduate and go on to a successful career - lauding mom & dad along the way for forcing them to go to college.
There continues to be a negative stigma attached to kids who seek out the trades (or even the military - outside of the academies). That somehow, not going on to a 4 year college is a “failure”. There is little support from mainstream high schools or surrounding communities for kids who want to go directly into the workforce in fields like construction or food service or plumbing. Many high schools have gone away from requiring students to take home economics or auto shop, but instead have added more AP classes. I went to school in NY where they had BOCES (which they still have) but even back in the 80’s there was a lot of whispering about the “BOCES kids”. Even though most of us know a tradesperson who has been wildly successful, financially - some who have even been able to expand nationally, with much more impressive portfolios than the Ivy grad who ended up in middle management somewhere, the trades are generally look down upon.
As a result, there are a fair amount of college applicants in the mix who don’t want to be there or shouldn’t be there - and the collateral damage, in addition to vast increases in the overall numbers of college applicants, is a massive shortage in skilled tradespeople.
I would love to see more community-wide acceptance and support of kids who decide not to go to a 4 year college, more marketing and promoting of the trades by high schools and guidance counselors, and I would love to see all high schools go back to requiring that kids take at least one trade-focused elective. My daughter tells me that her friends from certain states were required to take trade-focused electives - so they came to college also being proficient in other skills like first aid, basic electrical or hair & make-up. You never know where a kids’ passion for something will be ignited. I would much rather have a happy kid with a passion for a service industry than a miserable one who is hating every day that they have to get up and sit in that cubicle. Happiness is much harder to attain and maintain than financial success.
First, a simple suggestion: tell your kids not to check that box on standardized tests that brings all the marketing mail. My kids got zero mailings or emails from schools.
Second, keep the number of applications down, and preferably apply only to schools you have visited. If everyone visited schools- and if not affordable do it virtually at least- and kept applications to 4-6 only, things would calm down. Yes the Common App makes it possible to apply to 20 schools, but that doesn’t mean you have to. And stress goes down without all those essays (and fees).
Third, people really need to absorb the fact that you cannot control outcome, whether with grades and scores, or even stellar EC’s. Teenagers should just live their lives naturally without thinking about college until they actually have to apply.
Fourth parents need to avoid talking about college and make sure their kids are following interests that are authentic. Spending high school years thinking about “getting in” can be toxic. Parents can also try to affect school culture by going to school committee meetings and talking to administrators. Eliminate rankings. Social media is a big problem but do what you can.
Fifth in this day and age, with high tuitions and loans, people want a return on their investment when they spend money on college, and the perception is that top schools bring more money. A pie in the sky idea is to go back to the idea of college for learning (which can also mean a good job). But the main thing is to avoid debt. Avoid debt and study philosophy if you want.
Sixth it is not just about getting in, which is basically a trophy mentality- for kids and parents alike. Focus needs to be NOT on getting in but the actual experience at the school. For many, the “top colleges” are not the best fit. They really aren’t. There is a lot of depression in Ivy League campuses because one the kid “gets in” (after years of focusing on that) there is a void, often filled by the next goal of “getting in”, like finance or med school. Parents can have a role in avoiding this phenomenon.
Finally social media plays a huge role in all of this. Tell your kids NOT to post college applications and results online. Every high school administrator has told me that most stress among teenagers is from social media.
Okay, now blame the colleges if you like. But I don’t think families are passive victims. Don’t play along. The biggest problems are high school cultures and social media.
Also a major factor in costs. The number of administrators per student. These administrators are often some of the highest paying positions in the school plus they each have to have healthcare which is another cost which outstrips inflation. Purdue is a school that concentrated on administrative costs and they haven’t had a tuition, room and board increase in 9 years.
A good solution to the social media issue might be having a specific “ I am going here” group. That way kids who are feeling anxious or upset can just avoid looking there and be safe in the knowledge that they won’t be “ triggered” on the general platforms. Those who want to celebrate together or be inspired can then do so on the designated page.
Many things have gone wrong. But if I have to pick one thing, it’s the popularity of college rankings, particularly USNWR rankings. If everything in a product category is priced similarly, why shouldn’t a comsumer who’s unfamiliar with the product category choose one that’s perceived to be “better” by others, especially when the “better” product may actually (or is touted to) cost less?
You really should just read Jeff Selingo’s book. It explains all of this. He spent a couple of years doing reseach, inclduing in the history of how we got where we are now (and yes, direct marketing and the USNWR rankings were the rocket boosters on the changes). It is a fascinating read and really clears up a lot about how admissions works currently.
I’ve been on CC since 2012 when my oldest D was entering the college search. I can say that this discussion has come up at least once a year in some form or another. I’m not suggesting it shouldn’t, as there are new students and parents each year, however, this is not a recent concern. As others have mentioned there are several things that have contributed to the perception that universities are attempting to pad their statistics. First is the number of students (as compared to years past), second the number of schools each student applies to (made easier through the common app) and the importance given to school rankings due to the number of high performing students. In the past, while everyone had heard of Harvard, most students applied locally. I’d say that holds true today with the exception of many who follow CC.
We have seen the recentering of SAT scores (I’m not sure about the ACT score) 2 or 3 times over the past 25 years which many believe has led to an increase in scores. We have seen a great deal of GPA inflation. This can be for a variety of reasons from simply a greater number of top students (many more students today come from families where both parents were college graduates than 20, 30 or more years ago), to varying grading systems and literal grade inflation. Finally, we have so much more information so that those who are good students know what is necessary to have a "strong’ application. This means that there is a much larger pool of excellent applicants who in many cases today are applying to the same limited number of "top’ schools.
Finally, why advertise? Well part of that can be associated with the students indicating they wish to be contacted on the various tests they take. Second, everyone advertises and it’s now cheaper and easier than ever with computers, internet, email and phones. The affect of this advertising is only important if the recipient makes it important. I ignore advertising for any number of products and services that I am either not interested in or can’t afford. Occasionally one does come across that does intrigue me. I think the same attitude should be had with college advertising.
My take, and I haven’t read all the posts, is that there are two main factors.
The Common App makes it so easy to apply to many colleges. This means high achieving kids apply to more schools because it’s just another application fee but often, not a lot more work. More and more colleges have joined CA. Then the snowball effect kicks in, and more and more kids apply to more and more schools because their friends do so.
Marketing has become more aggressive. Kids that have no business receiving ads (that’s what they are) from Harvard and U Chicago think they have a chance, because why would those colleges send them invitations to visit and apply if they didn’t? My son (an A-/ B+ student) is a great example of this. Why target him? He had a very high ACT score. There is zero chance he would have got in.
As far as I am aware, the numbers of students in college overall is fairly static, down from a peak in 2010 and 2011. Especially last year, many fewer students applied to college.
I completely agree. Parents control the narrative from a young age. My DD was never obsessed or interested in top schools as I stressed from a young age that her own efforts would determine her outcomes. As a result she was really able to focus on fit.
I haven’t read all the replies above, but how much has the international pool increased?
20% of the people can’t be in the top 1%.
I don’t know, but I recall hearing reports that in the last few years it’s declined due to policies of the previous administration. (Disclaimer, I haven’t checked this, and I don’t know specifically which policies.) Regardless, it’s probably not high enough to move the needle very much.
Grade inflation in high school contributes to the problem. If a student with a 3.90 is “only” in the top 15% of the class, there’s something wrong with the school’s grading system. And there’s something even more problematic about a system that encourages students to take online and local summer college classes just to bump up their high school gpa’s.
When I was in high school, a 3.7 was a good gpa. Kids with those GPA’s and SAT scores in the high 1200’s and low 1300’s were applying to and attending schools like Cornell (still a reach, but not crazy), Michigan, NYU and BU. Today, the same students would be counseled to not even bother applying to those schools, absent a significant hook such as recruited athlete.
If we had better data regarding GPA, and if high schools adhered to a true 4.0 scale with B+ and A- grades (the flat A/B scale encourages grade inflation imho), students wouldn’t feel the need to score so highly on standardized tests. Instead, everyone feels the need to pad their ACT and SAT score because there’s so much uncertainty surrounding the GPA.
No tuition increase, certainly (something that Mitch Daniels is justifiably proud of); I think that room and board has creeped up a bit from year to year, although @momofboiler1 would probably have a better idea.
True, however, those who are in the top 20% now, may have been in the top 5% 30 years ago. There are that many more students who are attaining GPAs and test scores that would have been rare in the past.