The Selectivity Myth: Most Colleges LESS Selective, Not More

Roger_Dooley · 11-02-2009, 11:04 AM

With schools like Harvard, Columbia, etc. now accepting fewer than one out of ten applicants, there's a perception that getting into a good college is tougher than ever. While it's true that at a small number of schools the number of applicants for the same number of slots keeps rising, these schools are the exception:

Quote:

A small number of colleges have become much more competitive over recent decades, according to Caroline M. Hoxby, an economist at Stanford University. But her study -- published by the National Bureau of Economic Research -- finds that as many as half of colleges have become substantially less competitive over time.

The key shift in college admissions isn't increased competitiveness, Hoxby writes. Rather, both trends are explained by an increased willingness by students generally, and especially the best students, to attend colleges that aren't near where they grew up. This shift increased the applicant pool for some colleges but cut it for others.

"Typical college-going students in the U.S. should be unconcerned about rising selectivity. If anything, they should be concerned about falling selectivity, the phenomenon they will actually experience," Hoxby writes.

From News: Competitiveness Reconsidered - Inside Higher Ed .

I suspect that with the expected decline in high school grads, the trend to lower selectivity at the vast majority of schools will continue.

FBBG · 11-02-2009, 11:37 AM

Great post. Question: is it even more difficult to get into HYP now than it used to be??

A persistent, though perhaps dumb, question I can't figure out is: The admissions rate at HYP etc may always be going down, but has the selectivity rate gone way up at the same time? In the past 15 years has the quantitative "quality" of admitted students at HYP-etc gone up relatively as far as the admit rate has gone down?

And if it's no more difficult today to get accepted at Yale or wherever than it was 15 years ago, why all the angst?

armaryland17 · 11-02-2009, 11:40 AM

Nonetheless, one stills has to stand out!

mom2collegekids · 11-02-2009, 11:43 AM

I still think that the popular schools are harder to get into...ivies and similar, top 3-4 UCs, top flagships, and now even the top 3 Cal States!

Hunt · 11-02-2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

In the past 15 years has the quantitative "quality" of admitted students at HYP-etc gone up relatively as far as the admit rate has gone down?

I think it has, although I'm not entirely sure that "quantitative" is the right word. I'm not sure the grades and scores of admitted students at HYP are that much higher than in the past, but I think that the overall achievement levels of these students has increased. In part, I think this is just because of the increasingly national (and international) reach of the applicant pool.

mommusic · 11-02-2009, 12:16 PM

The trick is to discover a great school that the rest of the world hasn't discovered yet!

crimsonchin68 · 11-02-2009, 01:50 PM

i think the average applicant has dramatically better stats than our predecessors. i was talking to my parents and they thought an sat in the 1200's was good when they went to school, and people didn't study for them either. i outdid my dad by 200+ points on the sat reading/math and it's still just ok. at this point anything outside 1550+ is pretty good at best. now there are also ap tests and it's not uncommon for people to enter college with half an associate's degree or even half a bachelor's at this point. the fact that most colleges have become less selective doesn't really mean anything because most students want to go to the top schools anyway. it's great that i can have a bunch more safeties, but the acceptance rate for most places i'm applying has gone down.

ctyankee · 11-02-2009, 02:42 PM

Quote:

i think the average applicant has dramatically better stats than our predecessors. i was talking to my parents and they thought an sat in the 1200's was good when they went to school, and people didn't study for them either. i outdid my dad by 200+ points on the sat reading/math and it's still just ok. at this point anything outside 1550+ is pretty good at best. now there are also ap tests and it's not uncommon for people to enter college with half an associate's degree or even half a bachelor's at this point. the fact that most colleges have become less selective doesn't really mean anything because most students want to go to the top schools anyway. it's great that i can have a bunch more safeties, but the acceptance rate for most places i'm applying has gone down.

First, the SAT has been 'dumbed-down' twice since your dad took it. So your score versus his amounts to 'apples and oranges.'

As far as the "Most Colleges LESS Selective, Not More" standpoint ... MOST schools don't matter (when the subject is selectivity). So, going any deeper into it is pointless. That said, because of the common app, kids are applying to more schools. This can give the appearance that a school is less selective, when in fact a student never was going to go there and only did the application because he/she could do it quickly and easily.

Hunt · 11-02-2009, 03:53 PM

My observation doesn't really have much to do with grades and scores, but rather with what portion of students admitted to the most selective schools are "superachievers" compared to 30 years ago when I attended college. I think more of them are.

ctyankee · 11-02-2009, 04:20 PM

Quote:

My observation doesn't really have much to do with grades and scores, but rather with what portion of students admitted to the most selective schools are "superachievers" compared to 30 years ago when I attended college. I think more of them are.

To me "superachiever" is a misnomer if the only thing they have achieved are awards and the like. Plus we've become a society where awards are given out for just participating in a baseball league. Certainly, magnet sites like this allow for the 'super-dweeb' to have found his people. We had the same kids 30 years ago, they just were spread out with no Internet web sites to draw them together and make it appear like there are more of them then they really are.

: ) · 11-02-2009, 04:40 PM

Much more is expected of a candidate today. Years ago it was all about the grades - now they simply aren't enough.

BfloGal · 11-02-2009, 04:56 PM

ctyankee-- please elaborate on your statement that 'the SAT has been dumbed down twice' in the past. I'm asking from a vantagepoint of curiosity-- what has actually been done to the SAT, and how do you know?
Thanks.

ctyankee · 11-02-2009, 05:12 PM

Years ago it was about the grades and the scores. Now it has become more and more about the grades with more and more schools (e.g. Bowdoin) going S.A.T. optional.

I will agree that window-dressing is up. Three sports are better than one. Five school clubs are better than two. Creating a charity versus helping an existing charity one-ups the game. The net-net being that kids are now mediocre in three sports versus more skilled in one. I love the parents that report with pride across their faces how they have been driving their kids from one activity to the next activity.

Yes, expectations (of a sort) are up. Results are not.

Quote:

ctyankee-- please elaborate on your statement that 'the SAT has been dumbed down twice' in the past. I'm asking from a vantagepoint of curiosity-- what has actually been done to the SAT, and how do you know?
Thanks.

Sure. This should help. The test has been 'recentered' multiple times as well as changes to what the test contains.

SAT - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

navarre1 · 11-02-2009, 05:47 PM

I'm not buying that study one bit. None of these are considered elite schools and they are all more selective than ever.

University of Florida
University of Central Florida
University of South Florida
University of Alabama
Auburn University
Florida State University

Lets see, every school my child has considered is more selective than ever..That's 100%

navarre1 · 11-02-2009, 05:54 PM

ctyankee, are you saying a 1549 CR/M SAT is just pretty good? I'm guessing that's not what you wanted to say.

"at this point anything outside 1550+ is pretty good at best."