<p>
[quote]
The percentage of students attending state u's has ballooned as places at state u's (especially 2nd and 3rd tier ones) has massively increased. The same hasn't happened at the privates.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Think those numbers are about to grow even more massively at public Us. this year, next year, the year after that, and then who knows....</p>
<p>to the OP, yes, it looks like a slight majority of LACs are seeing a downturn from last year. Here's the pared-down list (from a variety of credible to rumored sources) from the applications growth thread:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/631215-applications-growth-class-2013-a-5.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/631215-applications-growth-class-2013-a-5.html</a></p>
<p>Amherst (~1.2%)
Bowdoin (1.7%)
Bucknell (~5%)
Carleton (4%)
Colby (7%)
Colgate down
Conn Col up slightly
Davidson +1.3%
Gettysburg ~(15%) (maybe just RD)
Hamilton ~(16%)
Kenyon (10%)
Macalester (9.7%)
Middlebury ~(12%)
St Olaf (1.5%)
Swarthmore ??
Trinity Col down maybe
Vassar +2.7%
Wellesley +3.6%
Wesleyan +21.6%
Whitman "about flat", maybe up
Williams ??</p>
<p>Out of the 17 LACs reported (or rumored)....11 are down & 6 are up.</p>
<p>Hard to speculate on how this sampling of some of the most selective LACs will represent the entire LAC world.</p>
<p>I agree with Arcadia that one year does not make a trend....many of these schools have seen tremendous app growth over the past few years. Other than being great fodder to chat about here on CC (in my case because the data are there), short term trends IMHO don't say a whole lot about school quality or attractiveness.</p>
<p>I think 'rentof2 really hit on it. While the good times rolled it seemed no problem to many to tap into home equity or borrow waiting for your portfolio to go up as it had been steadily doing. That crashed in a big way and people got real. Add to that the arrogance of academia, believing that raising costs at twice the pace of inflation was OK. Just like everyone else, I don't think the powers that be at college's ever imagined it could get this bad.</p>
<p>Things didn't look nearly as bad in the Fall as they do now. I believe there are still many in the applicant pools who's parents thought all would be better in the Spring. If bookies don't have a pool going for college yields, they should. </p>
<p>This will be the year of the full pay kid slipping into colleges they would not have last year. Are the need blind schools ethical? Mostly IMO. Will reality hit when they go to the wait lists? Probably IMO.</p>
<p>I do feel for 'rentof2's daughter and others who have been aiming at the state flagship all along. These kids will be impacted. And I don't think this portends a trend. It's just another casualty of this economy and will reverse when the economy does.</p>
<p>Williams College Application Numbers</p>
<p>Per this article, dated 2/11, RD applications declined: "This year’s Regular Decision applicant rate dropped approximately 20 percent from last year’s unusually high number, down from 7,552 to 6,001."</p>
<p>The article includes comments by Adm Director, Dick Nesbitt, about relatively stable ED numbers, increased diversity in ED admits, & possible reasons for decrease in RD applications, including the economy & new application requrement of a personal essay.</p>
<p>hmom, I agree with you, but I think there will be a trend this year, next year, at least the following year. I do think that many parents will refuse to tap into home equity (if and when available) for the next few years, and I don't think that parents will be as willing to take on plus loans, or private loans. I think many more parents will ask their kids to go to a less expensive school, state school, 2 years of cc first depending upon what their pocketbooks will allow. I think many more parents will be interested in building back up their retirement accounts over finding the "dream school" at any cost. They will want to have an emergency fund in case they become unemployed. I think that there will be many more parents that will be unwilling to sink their last nickel to pay tuition. None of this applies to the truly wealthy.</p>
<p>BTW, I think there are plenty of parents during the application season who think "scholarships" will pay for most of college. They will let their child apply anywhere. Once they see what they are being asked to pay out of pocket, many more will say "no". You read about it all the time on CC, but this year there will be many more parents saying no, or even changing a yes to a no over the summer (hence, the no shows).</p>
<p>I think you're right northeastmom. Historically major downturns teach a lesson that effects things long after the economy has recovered.</p>
<p>^^ Wow! That's a really big hit taken by Williams. I'm surprised.</p>
<p>Right hmom, the memory will stick with people for some time. After several years, memory fades, and parents will start to handle college bills in a similar manner as in the past. It will take some time, and the change will be more gradual. Perhaps the same family that was willing to borrow 10k per year, 5 years from now would be willing to borrow 5k per year, but not 10k. Today this family likely would not be willing to borrow a dime. Figuring this all out will make a lot of money for enrollment management companies.</p>
<p>I was thinking the same thing. Great recession proof career: college enrollment manager!</p>
<p>In this discussion of declining apps at selective LACs, has anyone looked into whether it might be due to an increase in binding early apps? If more of the kids who could be expected to submit 10 or 12 apps are being removed from the game early by doing a binding early app, that could explain a decrease in total numbers for this group of schools. </p>
<p>Purely anecdotal, but the seniors we know at prestigious private schools have applied binding/early in droves. It is the norm, not the exception. At my d's diverse public h.s., with a graduating class of around 300, I think two students applied and were accepted early (binding). A couple others did early action. I wonder if the decrease in apps, despite the increase in overall graduating seniors, isn't due to a strategic choice made by sophisticated applicants or advice from counselors.</p>
<p>bclintonk:</p>
<p>The Williams hit isn't functionally as big as it looks. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Williams have been riding a ridiculous bubble of application over the last two years, fueled significantly by international apps. To put it into perspective, Williams apps this year are about the same as they were for Fall 2006. They just lost the bubble. </p>
<p>I haven't heard a peep out of Swarthmore on application numbers, yet.</p>
<p>As for someone who asked about Early Decision. Both, Swarthmore and Williams had the same number of Early Decision apps this year as last. Neither saw a decline.</p>
<p>In the article by Williams they said their explosive numbers last year could have been attributed to Yale and Princeton no longer having Early Decision, so by comparison their numbers might not be significantly off. I surmised that the numbers this year were more in keeping with reality. Secondly, (and I think it's been said elsewhere) that same Williams article said: </p>
<p>
[quote]
Despite the decrease in applicants for Regular Decision, Nesbitt noted that “the overall applicant quality is outstanding.” He added, “If of last year’s record high number of applicants, the bottom group has dropped out, then it’s not a bad thing.”
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What a PR spin! I think the Williams pool is highly likely to be self selected for income as opposed to capability. From what I see it still tends to be popular with the prep school and elite public high school set. The rest of the world never heard of it! Maybe a barometer for how poor folks are feeling in upper middle class America?</p>
<p>
This is a classic case of pot calling the kettle elite. Your kid is going to a school very similar to Williams, afaik.<br>
According to hmom5, Dartmouth adcoms did a fine job filtering out mean girls and haters. But I bet it's equally popular with the "prep school and elite public high school set."</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the Williams pool is highly likely to be self selected for income as opposed to capability.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sure the rich kids are a capable bunch. My daughter is getting very generous need-based aid from Williams, she's capable too.</p>
<p>What does one do if applying to a supposed need blind school and your ability to pay full freight is borderline? Do you check the "fin aid required" box? (I have always been suspicious of need blind schools that ask the question and have a consistent percentage of full payers, year in and year out.)</p>
<p>Electron, I was responding to the admission director's claim that those who did not apply this year were the bottom of the pool academically. I have a very hard time believing that. My guess is that there and at many schools, those that didn't apply this year who would have in the past are highly likely to be kids with high EFCs whose parents are not willing to pay $50K at this point in time. </p>
<p>Sleepless, I guess you decide if you can bite the bullet and pay. I have deep suspicions too.</p>
<p>Seems to me that if you have 7000 applications or 15000 applications. A class size of 500 and a class size of 1000 respectively is pretty close to the same. Taking into account Middsmith's reference, both Williams and Dartmouth did quite well in the ED round. Both are relatively the same in selectivity. And while I don't know how Williams counts their applications, I also know that Dartmouth counts applications as those who have sent in their fees/intend to apply forms as opposed to just counting completed applications (although Midd does that as well, and they are really down in Apps). I just think you risk painting yourself in a corner if you take two such similar demographically oriented schools and try to say, "but that doesn't happen where my kid is because he's more special and admissions has nothing to do with our ability to foot the bill." I also think Dartmouth benefits in completed applications because there is no additional essay (and is why Williams said they were done in apps because they added an additional essay (good point). For those who complete the common application why NOT send one into Dartmouth if you can and want to afford the fee? Afterall, they say they are need blind, will meet 100% of your need AND do it without any loans so you'll emerge from college debt free. Seems to me it's the easiest button to push!</p>
<p>And just to be fair: Williams and Dartmouth are about when it comes to UNKNOWNS when you get to the midwest -- except of course in those circles that know education. Then again I had never heard of Carlton until I moved out here either.</p>
<p>Modadunn,
I assume Dartmouth requires the Peer Rec letter sent before they are willing to consider an application as completed. So, it's not quite so easy as pushing the send button.</p>
<p>Further, while I absolutely agree that Dartmouth does not have instant name recognition in the midwest, "Ivy League" does and that's more than one can say about Williams.</p>
<p>And just to be fair: Williams and Dartmouth are about the same when it comes to UNKNOWNS when you get to the midwest -- except of course in those circles that know education. Then again I had never heard of Carlton or St Olaf until I moved out here either.</p>
<p>Umm.. a peer rec? I think you need more than that to distinguish selectivity. Son did not even consider Williams but that was for very different reasons. And while I agree on the whole Ivy League thing, Son did not apply to Dartmouth because it WAS Ivy league. Not sure what that all means in regards to this conversation, but this whole williams v D thing seems to be more about rivalry than true regard for the education.</p>