Relieved to have this part of the process over. We have a good in-state option that is a good fit.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this. My D applied to nearly 20 schools for biology and was admitted to only a couple, which was devastating for her. ACT 33 and UW GPA 3.8 and weighed 4.2?. Many APs. Very strong in sports, but did not want to pursue the athletic recruiting route. Essays reflected her leadership abilities. She is not really sure what she wants to do, but is strong in sciences and math. Wondering if she should have applied undeclared.
A few years ago, older D applied with lower test scores, lower GPA and less rigorous course load and was accepted by many more competitive schools. She was more focused on what she wanted to do. Is that what made a difference? Or is it just a sign of the times?
If the desired major was more competitive for frosh admission, enrolling as an undeclared student would likely mean having to face another admission process to get into the major later.
“She was more focused on what she wanted to do. Is that what made a difference? Or is it just a sign of the times?”
Likely a combination of both. Just the past few years has seen significant changes in competition at a number of colleges. If your D19’s relative lack of focus (not sure exactly what you mean by that) came across in her essays, it may have undermined her chances too. When you say she applied to over 20 colleges, what was the broad reach/match/safety split?
Biological sciences seems to always be a hard admit because there are so many prospective pre-meds. That said, as noted in post #1, it’s not always easy to change majors so if that’s truly a students area of interest, I think it’s better to go for it from the start.
I do think that the competitiveness increases every single year. Relying on stats that are even a few years old aren’t always accurate.
Actually it was under 20 schools - they were heavier on the reach, but even the safety schools did not come through. Lack of focus refers to a clear career direction. She wants to pursue a graduate degree. ECs focused on sports, math and environmental clubs.
Applying as undeclared in theory may be easy, but in my opinion it hurts you more in the long run. First off getting into these schools will be more difficult, as if ones passion lies within Biology then their essays may not be as passionate as it would have if they discussed Biology. Secondly, a lot of these majors are impacted within the school and as a result getting into them is difficult to none once you get into these schools.
My guess is your second daughter perhaps applied to too many reach schools…and maybe overestimated her credentials and the types of colleges where acceptance would be guaranteed (which has to be the case for a true safety).
In addition, some colleges have become more competitive for admissions in the last several years…and maybe that was an issue too.
She applied as a biology major? Honestly, I don’t think that matters…it’s a college of arts and sciences major.
She has a good and apparently an ffordable match choice. Congratulations to her!
This is not enough information to estimate chance of admission, and different colleges have different admission criteria. It’s possible that not having an application that fit with the prospective major could have contributed at some holistic colleges, but there are countless other possibilities.
At many selective private colleges, major selection has little impact on general admission selectivity. Rather than limit admission by major, such colleges often let the major grow based on interest. For example, the Harvard lawsuit analysis found near negligible difference in admission selection for most different prospective concentrations. Some specific odds ratio for admission are below as a comparison to social sciences . 1.0 means same p / 1-p for admission as social sciences concentration. These are for full controls and unhooked “baseline”. I believe the only ones that reach statistical significance are a small preference for CS and a significant negative effect for “undeclared” applicants. The latter may relate to wanting to see an application that fits with the prospective major in holistic sense, like the OP touched on. For example, CS related ECs/awards for a CS major, along with strong math/CS grades, LORs, scores, related essays, etc… essentially a variety of factors all pointing to a genuine interest in the prospective concentration and high probability of being successful.
Public colleges are a different story and are more likely to have limited major enrollment and different general admission selectivity by major. However, the most selective majors tend to be higher BS salary majors, such as CS and to a lesser extent engineering, rather than biology. For example SJSU lists the minimum eligibility index score by major at http://www.sjsu.edu/admissions/impaction/impactionresultsfreshmen/ . A higher score means more selective. General biology was tied among many others as the least selective major, much less selective than undeclared.
Sometime the problem isn’t with the choice of major but with the story the application package tells, or doesn’t tell. If two kids apply as prospective biology majors – and one kid also has an app & transcript that confirms the strong interest (A’s in AP Bio & AP Chem, EC’s consistent with the bio interest) – and the other kid doesn’t have the same indicia of a strong tilt toward bio … then the kid whose app is consistent gets the nod. So while competition is part of it, it’s also just a matter of making an impression on people making the decisions. So hypothetically – a kid who came late to their interest in biology and doesn’t have much to back that up might indeed be hurting themselves because they have essentially established a new set of criteria by which their application would be judged… whereas if they don’t say they want to major in bio, then the ad com is not going to wonder why they didn’t take AP Bio.
But I agree we don’t have enough info about the OP to know – I’m thinking it’s just a matter of very competitive admissions these days and overestimating chances (so too many reaches, and “safeties” that weren’t really safe).
The statement that the older daughter was “more focused on what she wants to do” might suggest that the younger daughter’s app package just fell short on conveying a strong interest in attending the colleges she was applying to. Ad coms at all levels make decisions with yield in mind, and it can be hard for a student to close the deal on the “why this college” essay if the student really isn’t all that certain what she wants to study or why/how a particular college will be a good place for her.
I’m glad that there is an admission to a “match” school that you are pleased with. In the end a student can only attend one school – and sometimes the “match” is exactly what it should be.
Good points. It was a combination of too many reach schools and the essays could have been different.
She had A’s in both AP Chem and AP Bio, with a 4 on the AP Bio test. Science portion of ACT was 35. Related EC was 3 years in an environmental club - not the extensive EC in the area, such as research, as some may have. Main essay focused more on overcoming adversity and motivating others (in sports and other ECs).
She likes bio. Does well in it, but is not 100% sure that is what she wants to study. (Years later, older D is still on the same career path she has been on since early high school.)
One of the draws of visiting the more selective LACs was that many fostered an atmosphere that supported exploring different areas before declaring a major, which I think she could have benefited from. (I know, other schools do that as well.)
I am curious how these more selective schools would have reacted to hearing: I don’t know what I want to do, but this would be a great place to explore X,Y and Z and I am going in as an undeclared major.
With admissions so competitive, the application needs to have something that stands out, which grabs the attention of the admissions reader and is memorable. It doesn’t have to be academics — but it has to be something that gives the admissions reader a sense of what the student will bring with her and add to the campus. Not, what the campus will do for the applicant (“great place to explore”) — but what the applicant will do for the school (In your daughter’s case, leadership & motivating others)
But that brings me to another point, which may have been outside your daughter’s control, and could be an unknown to you. The ad coms also pay attention to the LORs, and there needs to be consistency between the essays and LOR’s. So if a kid’s essay is all about overcoming adversity, leadership skills, and motivating others – and then the LOR’s say something along the lines of “A is a great student, very bright and diligent, pleasure to teach” – the case hasn’t been made. In that example, the LOR needs to back up the claims in the essay, with specific details.
Your first daughter’s strong focus might have also been readily apparent her teachers — so very likely that it was mentioned in the LOR’s. With your second daughter, it might not have occurred to the teachers to write about the traits she was highlighting in her essay.
But it’s too late to second guess, and in any case, that sort of college admissions post-mortem might be no more than rationalization – we have no idea what the real reasons were.
And I think that the underlying problem does come down to targeting, and the problem is that with college admissions being so competitive these days, it’s a moving target. The schools that might have been matches a few years ago are no reaches, the schools that might have been safeties are no longer safe bets. I think that for the most part, the students who are most successful with college admissions are the ones who are able to identify a large number of match schools and apply to them – but again, that’s hard to do.
I thought of LORs also. While the coach’s LOR (3rd) would have been aligned, I am not sure how she communicated with her teachers. They would have been positive, but not necessarily aligned. This is all helpful to go over, as this is a learning experience for her. She is trying to make sense of what just happened and is ready to move on. So are we.
It’s tough because at most schools the kids never see the LOR’s. My kids did see theirs – and at my daughter’s school the practice was for the teachers to give the LOR’s directly to the student. My daughter had a Chem teacher who really liked her and approached her, saying that he wanted to write a LOR for her – he was a new teacher and quite eager, so she agreed. But it turned out that the teacher didn’t have a clue as to what colleges wanted – it was a generic, 2 paragraph, “great student” LOR that could have been mass produced on a template and plug in the name of any student – generalized praise, no details. At colleges that only wanted one or two LOR’s, that one didn’t make the cut. My daughter actually agonized a little because that LOR was more positive than a longer, more detailed LOR from another teacher that was also more nuanced – but went with the more nuanced LOR. My daughter had better than expected college results – although it was also a long time ago, in a more forgiving admissions climate — but I do think her applications gave the colleges a very good sense of her personality and individual strengths.
But again, in today’s admissions climate, your daughter could have had an absolutely perfect application package – and still gotten rejected. The top colleges are turning away thousands of well-qualified applicants in favor of a handful they admit, and unless a student knows they have a hook or something that truly sets them apart, it’s hard to predict results. If you look at any of the admissions results threads – it’s easy enough to see why most of the accepted students got in … but a lot harder to make sense of the many waitlist and rejection decisions. (Some of the rejections are what leave me really shaking my head-- there are some amazing students who are getting outright denied at colleges where you would have thought they had a good shot).
Yes, this is an example where letters of recommendation can inject what appears to be a randomizing element into a student’s college application – most students have no idea whether the teacher who likes them and in whose class(es) the student excels in will actually write a good recommendation that gives the details that would make a positive impact on the admissions reading of his/her application.
This may be a hidden advantage for students at “elite” high schools where teachers may be more experienced with writing letters of recommendation, and/or have been coached by dedicated college admissions counseling staff on how to write good letters of recommendation.
When my son was a junior the guidance department asked for some sort of short recommendations from two teachers to help the GC write her letter. My son got one from the orchestra teacher which could not have been more generic. He hadn’t really planned to use him unless the school asked for extra recommendations, but it was clear his would be useless. My kid got shown one of his letters - I didn’t see it - but he relayed the contents. I was amazed that the teacher really got my kid. He gave my kid a B+, but he turned around and explained that despite that B+ my kid understood math better than many of his A students.
But that actually wasn’t the question. This same kid was interested in IR, but his main ECs were orchestra and Science Olympiad. He disliked the kids who did Model UN. He loved history and took three AP history classes. So he applied undecided, and wrote one of his essays about a project he did involving neighborhood historical files. I’m guessing the admissions committees saw him as some sort of social science major, but he’d also taken two science APs and Calc BC.