What's going on with the College Admission this year?

[jonri]

GFG--

The OP originally asked what his second child could do to improve his odds of getting into a top college. I answered that question.

I think that it helps kids to understand that college admissions is a lot like casting a school musical, even if they are a soprano and don't get the part. So many kids really don't "get" that they aren't just vying to be one of the 7.1% of students admitted to Harvard, they are vying to be one of a smaller percentage of applicants to Harvard who are the equivalent of sopranos who are admitted--and I personally think it helps to know that when the alto in their high school class gets in.

It also helps to understand that if you are not "naturally" different from the typical applicant, you should do what you can to make yourself unique. My example about an essay on the topic of growing up in two worlds, one Asian and one American, is not fiction. I know a wonderful girl who actually wrote such an essay when she applied to Stanford. I cringed. I knew that killed her chances. (That essay could certainly work in the right hands; it's just that you'd have to be an excellent writer to be able to impress an admissions rep who will have read lots of other essays on the same topic.)

There are schools, e.g., Duke, which weigh the essay much less heavily than most top colleges--and if your kid just can't write a good personal essay, I think it helps to know that. You can say it's phony or artificial for a kid who is interested in engineering to apply to Duke rather than Stanford because he can't write that well and Stanford weighs the essay more heavily than most and Duke less. I don't think there's anything wrong in doing that. And, while the kid might prefer Stanford, he might be happier at Duke than at Rose Hulman or RPI, which might have been his "matches."

I think there's some validity to your criticism, but I still think my advice is valid. You know, there might be a lot of schools in between the point at which your type is so rare you are given an almost full merit scholarship as your son was and the colleges where you can't get in because there are a zillion candidates just like you. It's not always one extreme or the other. There are, for example, schools which are not more than a quarter Asian-American, a la Stanford, but do have more than 10%. There are also kids who choose to go to a college with few folks who look like themselves, but find a way to interact with them out of school. One young African-American woman went to a women's college with few African-American students. She became very active in a national association of African-American college students and made African-American friends through that.

I assure you the young Asian girl in my kid's class who went to Harvard to major in studio art would have preferred to attend Yale, which rejected her, but I don't think her life was over because she went to Harvard instead.

Andison is extremely happy at MIT--and it wasn't on his original list.

And my young female neighbor is very, very happy at Macalester, which ultimately became her real first choice--even though she only visited it in the first place because her guidance counselor sat her and her parents down and said in effect "If you are willing to go to college in the Midwest, you'll be able to go to a better school than if you insist on staying within a few hours drive of New York"--which was her original plan. And, yes, though it take a bit longer to get home, I think she is--and more importantly she thinks she is--happier than she would have been closer to home at a college less academically rigorous and with a less diverse and talented student body than that she is enjoying at Macalester.

And seriously...at the undergrad level does it really matter if you go to the college ranked #1 in sociology or #8? But the way the most academically oriented American kids choose where to apply too often assumes that it does. And at least half of college students do switch their majors. (My kid would be one of them.)

So, yes, following my 'strategy' might not get you into your "dream" college--but from what you said, your S didn't get into his "dream" college without following it either. And every spring, I listen to kids who look at the list of colleges which have accepted them and start talking about a gap year because they don't want to go to any of them. And I think that some of them are all-state musicians who applied to Yale and Harvard and were rejected, but would have been happy at Stanford (which gets FAR fewer apps from all-state musicians) and actresses from Westchester County, New York who get rejected at Vassar, who might have been accepted to and happy at Carleton. (And the Lenny Dee Players are darn good.) Yes, it's harder overall to get into Carleton--but not if you are applying in the regular round as an actress from New York. That's the point.

In any event, I hope that your S and the OP's S are both happy when they get to college; most kids are. But I hope neither of your sons looks back at his high school career and says "If I'd known where I'd end up, I wouldn't have bothered to do X, Y or Z in high school. I only did that thinking it would get me into a more elite college.If I had known that it wouldn't, I wouldn't have done it."

[TheGFG]

I don't disagree with you at all, jonri, especially since you stressed that the student does not need to reinvent himself to employ the strategy. And yes, my example of a school where the student is perhaps too different may have been extreme.

However, as je_ne_sais_ quoi laments, the average person doesn't have easy access to the type of information you cite above, which would be invaluable when applying. That MIT must receive bizillions of applications from Asian science kids would be an easy guess. But how do you know that Stanford receives fewer applications from all-state musicians than Harvard or Yale? If I were more involved in the music world, would that be an equally obvious assumption, or are you a college counselor?

[menloparkmom]

"But how do you know that Stanford receives fewer applications from all-state musicians than Harvard or Yale"
It is known that Stanford has a weak music dept, and there are also relatively few performance opportunities for non music majors on campus. So students who are committed to continuing with music apply to Y and H over Stanford, becasue of the overall strength of the programs at those 2 universities.

[nngmm]

students who are committed to continuing with music apply to Y and H over Stanford, because of the overall strength of the programs at those 2 universities

Even if they are not committed to continue in music (they don't make any commitment at the time of application), but are good enough to impress the music department with their audition tape, they get a leg up in admissions. And it is easier to impress the music dept at Stanford than it is at H or Y from what I heard.

I don't think I would recommend Stanford for someone looking for a music career, but for students who want an opportunity to play in the orchestra or wind ensemble while pursuing another major, Stanford is a wonderful choice.

[bethievt]

The GFG

Yeah, I mostly mean if you figure out what you're looking for, you can find good schools that will give you all of that at every level of selectivity unless you are stuck on a handful of schools, mostly in the northeast, that hardly accept anyone. But the geograpfic factor plays in, as does a boy applying to a formerly all-girl school for an admissions advantage or a girl applying to an all-girls school for the same reason.

[jonri]

I'm an attorney/parent of '07 law school grad who is a refugee from the law boards. I'm not a professional--just someone who got interested in the whole process back then--as many CC parents have.

If you were more involved in the music world, it would be an equally obvious assumption. As menloparkmom's post indicates, the fact that Stanford is weaker in music than H or Y is well known. Kids who are interested in music but aren't *superstars* in music; I mean kids who are all-state in orchestra, but are unlikely to ever become professional musicians--figure that out and apply to H or Y because they get more excited about the opportunities for musical ECs at H or Y than at Stanford. They ignore the fact that everyone else can figure it out too.

They apply to H or Y and then apply regular round to "safeties" like Oberlin or St. Olaf's--other schools that also attract a lot of excellent musicians and have filled a lot of their places already in the early round. Then they are surprised when they get rejected despite much higher than median gpa's and SAT scores.

ALL of this stuff is public knowledge. And all kinds of kids make the same "mistake"--it's musicians, actors, debaters, chess players, kids into robotics, whatever. Which colleges have the BEST chess teams? The high school chess players research and find out and then apply to the colleges with the best chess teams at every level....just like the majority of all the other high school chess players in the US with high gpa's and SATs--even when the applicants are good, but not great chess players at a national level.

Then they do the same for majors. Which is the #1 ranked history department in the nation? Which is the BEST French department? Which is the BEST creative writing program? For the last--my "safety" will be Sarah Lawrence. Yeah right...it's harder to get into Sarah Lawrence as a creative writing major than it is to get into MANY colleges which are tougher to get into overall--and which have very good creative writing programs.

It's not rocket science...it really isn't. Hey, if you're good enough for Julliard, I'm NOT suggesting Stanford. I'm just saying that while there may be fewer performance opportunities for non-majors at Stanford, the good but not superstar musician might have a better chance of getting into Stanford and participating in what's on offer than getting into H or Y and making the student symphony orchestra.

If you are interested in a particular field, you usually can find info about it on the internet....kids already do. So, lets say you are into robotics. You check out college competitions. You see which schools do best in them. How about seeing which schools ompete but do not excel? Where you can be on a robotics team--but one which isn't going to be inundated with apps from every other kid into robotics?

Again, I'm not saying not to apply to the team with the best robotics team, if that's your dream. I'm just saying not to apply ONLY to schools with great robotics teams.

I'm also saying that when you look at reach, match, safeyy categories, especially at LACs, you shouldn't just look at the stats, but at the concentration of kids like you. That becomes crucial if you are applying in the regular round to a college which has an early round.

I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but I am sincerely trying to help. If anyone thinks my 'strategy' is repugnant, well, there's no need to use it. But, quite honestly, I don't think most kids or parents will find it such...and if used judiciously, I think some kids, at least, would be happier when the envelopes arrive.

[Alumother]

Jonri - I agree.

For example if you have really high SATs and aren't applying to Wharton go for Penn where they need talent for CAS.

If you are a guy, try Brown where they are short on guys. If you are a guy with a high verbal score, even better because guys with high verbal are hard to come by unless you are Yale.

If you are a swimmer with really good academic credentials but not overwhelming, don't go for Princeton where they send kids to the NCAA's, try Yale or Penn.

Etc.

[epiphany]

"ALL of this stuff is public knowledge."

completely agree. There is so much information available to non-insiders; it just takes time.

[mathmom]

Will Brown forgive my younger son's low math score? (Based solely on current PSAT score.) I agree with Jonri, I had a friend at Harvard who was the third best oboe, she hardly ever got to play, since most pieces only needed two. For playing opportunities she might well have been better off elsewhere.

Still you still need to go someplace that's good enough. I think it's okay to still apply to those top programs, but agree that casting a wider net for safeties, may be a good approach.

[collegebound5]

I hope this sheds light on whats happening in selective college admissions, and how one can gain admission to the most selective schools.
College admissions has become the most competitive ever. There are more children of college entrance age than at any other time in US history, but the size of college classes has not changed that significantly. As a result at many schools across the country there are 24,000 applicants applying for 1600 spots.
Added to this is the fact that several of the ivies and other selective schools have done away with single choice early action and early decision. As a result with over 20,000 appicants competing for admission, it is becoming virtually impossible for applicants to stand in the admission pool. In fact, the exceptional student with outstanding SAT scores and grades, and great extra curriculars often becomes ordinary.
It is important to stand out from the other thousands and thousands of also outstanding applicants. in order to get an admisison officers eye - especially one is not a highly recruited athlete, an under represented high achieving minority, a developmental legacy, or from an under epresented state like Idaho.
Of the 24,000 applicants who apply to very selective schools, the majority will have excellent SAT scores and grades. The majority will have more than just a checklist of extracurriculars. Most will be active in their school commuity. The problem is that there are thousands of applicants who are President of their class, and head of the debate club, star in their schools musicals and and/ or are Editor in Chief of the yearbook and Captain of their varsity team. As amazing at it sounds to have academic achievement and time for leadership in school and sports activities, this becomes ordinary, as everyone is exceptional.
At very selective schools there are ways that some applicants stand out amongst who also have the academics and scores to get accepted. One is for having passions that span years with extraordinary achievements on the national or international level in the arts and in areas that are out of the ordinary. Or to have interesting passions without those achievements but that show they have been developed over years. Other ways some applicants stand out are for having extraordinary academic achievement. These are the students who have perfect or near perfect SAT scores, while being number one in the class, and perhaps having published their research or were a semi finalist in a competitition like Westinghouse.
There are some applicants who just have really good SAT scores and grades, but the combination of the things they have done, or their essays and teacher recommendations just make them more interesting applicants, or the admissions committee thinks they will bring something that is needed to the campus.
What has happened in college admissions is that many who did not get into their early school if they did apply to one, or choose not to apply to one, found that in the regular decision pool, it was just too hard to compete against 20,000 or more applicants for a small number of spots. Many unfortunately found that they were waitlisted or denied. at schools that normally would have been considered matches. It used to be that passions and unusual achievement was needed to gain admission to just the ivy league and other first tier schools, but for second tier competitive schools, very good SAT scores and grades and extracurricular activities with leadership was enough. That has changed however. These second tier schools have found that they can be very selective as they have received also over 20,000 appiicants at most schools. They also hope to capture the students who were qualified for the ivy league and top tier schools who were waitlisted or not accepted.
I do feel that there is a lot of hope for waitlisted applicants this year. In previous years it was impossible to get off a waitlist as colleges estimated correctly the percentage of students who would come if accepted. However, this year is different. Many selective schools do not know who will accept their offer, as many who might have been accepted early to other schools did not apply early, and may be hoping to gain acceptance somewhere else.
Many colleges could not predict yield but still wanted to remain selective, so they accepted the number they did last year, but waitlisted a number just as large. I do believe that many will be offered spots off the waitlist.
For those of you waitlisted at one or several schools, who would rather go there than the schools you were accepted to, I would remain on the waitlist and rally to get one of those spots.
This was probably the toughest year in college admissions.
Where you got in or did not is not a reflection of who you are, and you should not take it personally if you were not taken. I am sure you were outstanding. It is just hard to stand out when everyone is outstanding

[collegebound5]

I hope this sheds light on whats happening in selective college admissions, and why so many are finding that they have been waitlisted or denied at schools they considered matches.
College admissions has become the most competitive ever. There are more children of college entrance age than at any other time in US history, but the size of college classes has not changed that significantly. As a result at many schools across the country there are 24,000 applicants applying for 1600 spots.
Added to this is the fact that several of the ivies and other selective schools have done away with single choice early action and early decision. As a result with over 20,000 appicants competing for admission, it is becoming virtually impossible for applicants to stand in the admission pool. In fact, the exceptional student with outstanding SAT scores and grades, and great extra curriculars often becomes ordinary.
It is important to stand out from the other thousands and thousands of also outstanding applicants. in order to get an admisison officers eye - especially one is not a highly recruited athlete, an under represented high achieving minority, a developmental legacy, or from an under epresented state like Idaho.
Of the 24,000 applicants who apply to very selective schools, the majority will have excellent SAT scores and grades. The majority will have more than just a checklist of extracurriculars. Most will be active in their school commuity. The problem is that there are thousands of applicants who are President of their class, and head of the debate club, star in their schools musicals and and/ or are Editor in Chief of the yearbook and Captain of their varsity team. As amazing at it sounds to have academic achievement and time for leadership in school and sports activities, this becomes ordinary, as everyone is exceptional.
At very selective schools there are ways that some applicants stand out amongst who also have the academics and scores to get accepted. One is for having passions that span years with extraordinary achievements on the national or international level in the arts and in areas that are out of the ordinary. Or to have interesting passions without those achievements but that show they have been developed over years. Other ways some applicants stand out are for having extraordinary academic achievement. These are the students who have perfect or near perfect SAT scores, while being number one in the class, and perhaps having published their research or were a semi finalist in a competitition like Westinghouse.
There are some applicants who just have really good SAT scores and grades, but the combination of the things they have done, or their essays and teacher recommendations just make them more interesting applicants, or the admissions committee thinks they will bring something that is needed to the campus.
What has happened in college admissions is that many who did not get into their early school if they did apply to one, or choose not to apply to one, found that in the regular decision pool, it was just too hard to compete against 20,000 or more applicants for a small number of spots. Many unfortunately found that they were waitlisted or denied. at schools that normally would have been considered matches. It used to be that passions and unusual achievement was needed to gain admission to just the ivy league and other first tier schools, but for second tier competitive schools, very good SAT scores and grades and extracurricular activities with leadership was enough. That has changed however. These second tier schools have found that they can be very selective as they have received also over 20,000 appiicants at most schools. They also hope to capture the students who were qualified for the ivy league and top tier schools who were waitlisted or not accepted.
I do feel that there is a lot of hope for waitlisted applicants this year. In previous years it was impossible to get off a waitlist as colleges estimated correctly the percentage of students who would come if accepted. However, this year is different. Many selective schools do not know who will accept their offer, as many who might have been accepted early to other schools did not apply early, and may be hoping to gain acceptance somewhere else.
Many colleges could not predict yield but still wanted to remain selective, so they accepted the number they did last year, but waitlisted a number just as large. I do believe that many will be offered spots off the waitlist.
For those of you waitlisted at one or several schools, who would rather go there than the schools you were accepted to, I would remain on the waitlist and rally to get one of those spots.
This was probably the toughest year in college admissions.
Where you got in or did not is not a reflection of who you are, and you should not take it personally if you were not taken. I am sure you were outstanding. It is just hard to stand out when everyone is outstanding

[TheGFG]

Does anyone else long for a simpler time when being on the honor roll, buying a junker car, and getting a date for the prom were "accomplishments"?

[arkitex]

puzzledad: do not despair! Although the 'Ivy League' schools deserve what reputation they have - they are excellent schools - they are not the only excellent schools around. Much of college is what your child chooses to make of it. I recommend you read this post that I saw yesterday from taomom: To the seniors of 2008 I think it will give you and your son hope and inspiration. From your description, your son will do well and prosper wherever he lands.

I would also encourage your son to write to the school that he mosts wants to attend, feels most connected with, that turned him down. Have him express in a very personal way what attracts him to the school, what he thinks he will bring to it and what he will be able to take from it, and ask them to reconsider the denial. Certainly commit to a school he's been accepted to by May 1, but have him send that letter before May 1. You never know what can happen. This should be sent without expectation, but with hope.

Oh! and on the younger child, encourage him to do all that he wants to do and continue to work hard. All of those accomplishments will teach him how to proceed in life and will prepare him for the future. College admission is a good goal, but he will gain much more in tangible and intangible ways that will be very meaningful to a successful life.

[jonri]

The idea of sending a letter to the schools which denied the OP's son is a very bad one.

Ivies do not reverse denials. Unless your counselor sent the wrong transcript, the College Board sent the wrong SAT score or some major error of that sort which you already know about and can document happened, a reversal is IMPOSSIBLE. There are hundreds of kids in this pile in the middle called "wait list." Someone on the "deny" list is NOT going to leapfrog past all of those hundreds of kids on the wait list and get in. It does NOT happen.

No matter what you say, the kid who sends that letter will get his hopes up that there will be a miracle. There won't be. It's better to move on.

He can, of course, pursue the wait list he is on if he chooses to do so.

[2collegewego]

puzzledad,

I really would love to know to what schools your son applied and to how many because, with his profile, it seems odd to me that he didn't get into any "high-ranking" schools. I wonder if you and I define high-ranking differently.

My children are non-Asian minorities. I can tell you that *none* of my children have ever been accepted at their first or second choice school! This year, my child was accepted at every school *except* 1st and 2nd choices where she showed TONS of interest. On paper, there's no reason why she wasn't accepted-- except perhaps, that they had too many applicants and they had to choose. Right now, we're in the same situation deciding on colleges. She got into several excellent schools, loves them all and she has to decide. There is nothing wrong with any of them-- except she can only go to *one* place.

I think the problem is that we don't know what the admissions officer has in front of him/ her. For example, I strongly suspect that her top choice rejected her because of her high school. I think that they are very specifically looking for a full-payer with high numbers from her high school and that is not who she is. Another example... You may be an oboe player and they may need a great oboe player-- but this year, they may have 3 competitive applicants who are oboe players: your son, the daughter of the secretary of state of a European country and a tribal kid who beat back cancer-- and admissions needs one more oboe player.

So there's nothing wrong being, like GFG's kid, the Hispanic well-rounded kid and there's nothing wrong being, like OP's kid, the Asian science-genius, any more than there's anything wrong with being my kid-- but that doesn't guarantee any of them entry into one specific school. I can peruse the CC boards for my dd's #1 and #2 choices and find kids who were accepted with lower stats-- but she's not who they wanted this year.

I really think the best advice I received was to build the list from the bottom up.