<ul>
<li> just reporting on top national universities & LACS, per USNews lists</li>
<li>“~” means the count is projected or incomplete, or I am not sure its final</li>
<li>“+” positive growth over last year</li>
<li>“(#)” negative growth over last year</li>
</ul>
<p>Amherst (~1.2%)
Brandeis (10.8%)
Brown ~+21% (still approx)
Carnegie Mellon up maybe
Chicago ~+7%
Colby (7%)
Conn Col up slightly
Cornell +3%
Dartmouth +8.9%
Duke +17%
George Wash (2.3%)
Gettysburg ~(15%) (maybe just RD)
Hamilton ~(16%)
Harvard ~+5.6%
Kenyon (10%)
Lehigh (13%)
Marquette +15%
Middlebury ~(12%)
MIT +17%
Northwestern ~+2% (count incomplete, 3-4% expected)
Notre Dame up slightly
NYU +0.3%
Penn State ~+4 so far
Princeton +2.3%
Rice +12%
RPI ~up, but not quantified yet
St Olaf down
Stanford +20%
Texas A&M +6.7%
Tufts ~(3 to 4%)
Tulane ~+17% at least, more growth to count
UC Berkeley +0.4%
UC Davis +4.4%
UC Irvine +4.0%
UCLA +0.5%
UCSB (5.0%)
UCSD (0.7%)
USC down slightly
UConn ~+9%
U Illinois ~+12%
UNC +17%
UVa +16%
Vanderbilt +12%
Wellesley +3.6%
Wesleyan ~+20%
William & Mary +3.6%
Yale +13.6%</p>
<p>Notably regarding a few we had heard about by this time last year, no word yet from Penn, Williams, or Columbia.</p>
<p>With the 3 colleges that haven’t reported application numbers— If the data depend on the student newspapers, then when and if it’s reported depends on the newspapers’ editors. I believe that the Williams’ Record is next published a week from today.</p>
<p>Another thought about the numbers & the number accepted is the issue of decreased endowments & whether schools inaccurately predicted their yield. I recall that for Amherst their entering class for Fall 2007 was larger than expected so they wanted a smaller class to enter for Fall 2008 & sent fewer acceptance letters. For Fall 2009 I believe they want to increase the class size to bring in more revenue. </p>
<p>Williams also plans to increase class size. I imagine other private LACs will also do this as one of various attempts to deal with a shrinking endowment.</p>
<p>This was reported earlier in the Williams forum. ED applications were up 1.5% to 614 (231 accepted), “an all time high.” According to the 2008-09 CDS, last year’s numbers were 605 ED applications with 226 accepted. The ED acceptance rate was virtually unchanged from 37.4% to 37.6%. </p>
<p>Well, Doh! (I posted that very thing when P’ton & UVa dropped ED, adn H dropped EA. It’s the fallacy of ‘Build it (or give it away) and they will come’, which the UC will find out in a couple of years.)</p>
<p>Interesting on the Williams ED. The earlier (11/19/08) ED report had their ED apps at 563 by the deadline and expected to approach 580 with Questbridge. 614 is obviously a much bigger number (given that they had apparently counted every app in hand by their deadline)…wonder how that worked out? As they had publicized their total apps increase of 11% last year by 1/16 (granted the Williams Record publcation cycle is not too fast), which one could argue was “good press”, I suspect the current PR machine has found a favorable story in an ED apps increase to hopefully overshadow a later report on a total apps decline, like so many others are reporting…just a theory.</p>
<p>Wesleyan received 8,250 apps last year, and approximately 10,034 apps this year, which is a 21.6% increase if my math serves me correctly, so</p>
<p>Amherst (~1.2%)
Brandeis (10.8%)
Brown ~+21% (still approx)
Carnegie Mellon up maybe
Chicago ~+7%
Colby (7%)
Conn Col up slightly
Cornell +3%
Dartmouth +8.9%
Duke +17%
George Wash (2.3%)
Gettysburg ~(15%) (maybe just RD)
Hamilton ~(16%)
Harvard ~+5.6%
Kenyon (10%)
Lehigh (13%)
Marquette +15%
Middlebury ~(12%)
MIT +17%
Northwestern ~+2% (count incomplete, 3-4% expected)
Notre Dame up slightly
NYU +0.3%
Penn State ~+4 so far
Princeton +2.3%
Rice +12%
RPI ~up, but not quantified yet
St Olaf down
Stanford +20%
Texas A&M +6.7%
Tufts ~(3 to 4%)
Tulane ~+17% at least, more growth to count
UC Berkeley +0.4%
UC Davis +4.4%
UC Irvine +4.0%
UCLA +0.5%
UCSB (5.0%)
UCSD (0.7%)
USC down slightly
UConn ~+9%
U Illinois ~+12%
UNC +17%
UVa +16%
Vanderbilt +12%
Wellesley +3.6%
Wesleyan +21.6%
William & Mary +3.6%
Yale +13.6%</p>
<p>It’s not really a significant difference between what another member previously reported, but William and Mary says their applications are up 3.4%, not 3.6%, I believe. </p>
<p>W&M…hmmm…granted, an official press release should be more accurate than a school newspaper, but the paper is a bit more complete in providing some base stats…lemmesee if I can come up with a number from those newspaper base numbers, as the press release does not provide them other than a growth number & rough apps number for this year…</p>
<p>That original article ( [Applications</a> increase 3.6 percent to 12,000 | Flat Hat News](<a href=“http://flathatnews.com/content/69836/applications-increase-36-percent-12000]Applications”>http://flathatnews.com/content/69836/applications-increase-36-percent-12000) ) where the 3.6% was cited listed total apps as 12,053 with growth of 3.6% over the prior year, but no number for the actual app total for last year. I found a similar article reporting last years app’s growth ( [College</a> sees more apps | Flat Hat News](<a href=“http://flathatnews.com/content/college-sees-more-apps]College”>College sees more apps | Flat Hat News) )…the article cited: “more than 11,500” applying (so not a precise number), a 6.2% increase from the prior year, and what appears to be a more precise number for the prior year app total, 10,850 (at least its got one more significant digit, assuming that the likelihood of 11,500 of being rounded to the hundreds is pretty high). OK, working backwards then, I calculate that growth of 6.2% on 10,850 apps is 11,523 apps for last year, making their rounding to 11,500 plausible. Growth from 11,523 apps to this year’s 12,053 apps translates to 4.6%…which is neither 3.6% nor 3.4%!!! So, I got no clue, other than I suspect the basis for last year’s apps must be wrong, or it was updated after last year’s Feb article was written. [or please point out any errors I’ve made if you find them.]</p>
<p>Interesting to note that the drop in applications at Bowdoin is totally among men. In fact, female apps were up … insignificant number (2) but lopsided overall. Makes it tougher for women, easier for men.</p>
<p>Interesting. Ivies and other top schools like Duke and Stanford have skyrocketing increases in apps ranging from 2% at Princeton to 21% at Brown, while the elite LACs and schools outside the top 15 are decreasing (exception Wesleyan which is up huge). Wonder why? Financial aid maybe?</p>
<p>I would guess it might have more to do with feeling safety with a brand, a desire for a recognizable seal of approval, as opposed to financial aid. Enough of the LACs that could be viewed as academically prestigious but don’t have the immediate name recognition have competitive fin aid policies, such as no loans or higher income limits.</p>
<p>It could also be size & broader curriculum. Wesleyan is a larger LAC & offers a few graduate programs.</p>
<p>As bclintock mentioned earlier, it’s a logical flight to perceived ‘quality’ and financial aid. The perception i.e., named school is key for $200k. And, Harvard (throws money at nearly everyone below the tippytop income brackets) or Dartmouth/Vandy/Others (no loans) at a discount is a really sweet deal, while other great colleges are known for gapping and not much prestige beyond thier regional backyard. Thus, excellent, but not outstanding, students who would’ve gone to Bucknell or Lehigh under other financial conditions can no longer afford to go.</p>
<p>we’ll have to see what happens with Swarthmore and Williams. Under the “girl-centric” theory of applications growth, Swarthmore should experience an uptick along with Wesleyan while Williams should resemble Amherst’s more or less, flatline (this theory begs the question why Middlebury, with its strong reputation in languages should have dipped 12%.)</p>