<p>Hello all. A few of you may remember me from the old PR board where I frequently posted about my older son. Now, five years later, it’s my younger boy’s turn (rising HS senior applying to college this fall for '07).</p>
<p>Have there been any changes to the college application process I need to know about since then? The only main ones I’m aware of are (1) you can’t hide a disappointing SATII score anymore, and (2) more kids are applying online.</p>
<p>I know it’s a vague question, but any help appreciated.</p>
<p>A lot more kids take the ACT now than ever before … as opposed to the days when there were ACT/SAT states. It is accepted almost everywhere in lieu of SAT/SAT II.</p>
<p>More schools are on the common app so they get many more applicants, thereby increasing competiveness for admission.</p>
<p>S1 applied to colleges in 1999-2000.<br>
SAT has changed format, SAT-II Writing has disappeared;all scores are now reported.</p>
<p>More students are taking the ACT.</p>
<p>Students are applying to more colleges; there’s a greater sense of competition abroad. We thought that applying to 7 colleges was being extra-cautious. It turns out that today it would be somewhat risky, especially since S did not apply to state uni.</p>
<p>Many schools that used to require 3 SATIIs (now called the SAT Subject tests) now only require 2 of them. This is probably because of the addition of the Writing component to the SAT test, which they view as a substitute for the old Writing SAT II.</p>
<p>Costs have risen rapidly. Selectivity at the top 50 schools has become a bigger problem. There are a lot of very well prepared kids who are being turned down. Many kids are taking advantage of the online common application and applying to many schools. This increases the selectivity and makes admission seem even more like a lottery.</p>
<p>Many schools require that you apply online. That’s the big change I’ve seen between my daughter #1 high school class of '04, and daughter #2 high school class of '06.</p>
<p>My kids also were 5 school years apart (d. graduated hs in 2000, s. in 2005). Although this isn’t about the application process per se, I believe that one of the things that has changed is how certain activities are viewed by colleges. For example, when my daughter was in high school, a summer where you paid for your child to go on a trip that included some community service to the poor seemed like a great thing to write about on your application. As these programs got increasingly popular, I think schools became progressively less impressed with experiences that parents can buy for them. Likewise, it used to be that any kid who did some summer research was thought to have a major hook for the top schools. This also has become more and more common, making it less impressive unless significant recognition in the form of either publication or awards follow. So, I guess in general, as more and more kids are undertaking similar activities, the bar for the wow factor continues to be raised higher and higher.</p>
<p>Roscoe, nice to see your name again. I only have one child and his next admissions saga is going to be involving graduate school, so this is purely anecdotal information from observation and reading these boards. I would say that the biggest difference is in the middle tier schools. </p>
<p>My son applied in 2002/3. Since then the colleges that he was able to consider safeties have increased in selectivity diametrically and would for him today be solid matches. He would have to drop down a strata to find true safeties.</p>
<p>Part of the reason is that more kids are applying to top tier colleges and there’s a trickle down effect. Part of the reason is that there seems to be a greater awareness of previously little known schools with high academic standards – the colleges that change lives syndrome.</p>
<p>And, most significantly, these middle tier schools have taken to offering substantial merit aid to attract kids who might have otherwise chosen more selectives. (If you’ve been following the merit-aid question thread you’ll know that this is a very controversial topic.)</p>
<p>My conclusion is that although the most selectives are still at the top in selectivity, the less selectives are now more selective and that means that the next tier is next. In helping you #2’s make his list you may have to recalibrate and expand. </p>
<p>It may just be our family, but it seemed like my daughter had bigger financial aid gaps than my son — she got packages that were larger, but with the increased COA we’d have to pay out of pocket more. There are other changed financial circumstances that could account for that – for one thing, the price of real estate has skyrocketed in California – but I’m mentioning this just as a cautionary note: don’t rely on your experience with kid #1 to predict financial aid awards for kid #2.</p>
<p>Roscoe, thanks for asking this question and thanks to everyone for the responses. My children are 4 years apart (well, except for the twins who are not “apart”) and I have been vaguely wondering about this myself, as my daughters are rising juniors. I appreciate the heads up. I will start devoting more energy to identifying true safeties for both girls. </p>
<p>Anecdotally from our high school though, it seems like the list of colleges, and number of kids accepted/matriculating at various ones, seems quite constant over the last 4-5 years–i.e., adjusting for high school class size, similar nuimbers going to the same schools as their older counterparts 3 and 4 years ago. </p>
<p>I thought that the comment about kids “buying” community service was interesting. My daughter just completed a 2-week Landmark program at an Easter Seals camp. The volunteers there were part Landmark kids (13), and others who had applied directly to the camp. She said that she thought the only difference between the ones who attended for “free” and the Landmark kids was that being with the Landmark group created a small community that made it a bit easier to have a group of friends from the outset, but that otherwise everyone had pretty much the same experience. From my point of view, though, Landmark was a helpful organizaitonal tool where the opportunities are identified, travel is organized, and there is some supervisorial contact if it is needed (it wasn’t, but a nice feeling of safety net for parents). These camps were intense and if colleges are disregarding them, that says more about the colleges I think.</p>
<p>It is interesting to look at these comments in toto. </p>
<p>They seem to fall into two groups:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Affordability is worse than ever. (No surprise!)</p></li>
<li><p>The “tricks” that worked a few years ago don’t now.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The affordability issue should be tempered by noting that state finances are no longer in meltdown, so state Unis are relatively better off financially than they were five years ago - fewer draconian faculty layoffs, no more 20% tuition hikes.</p>
<p>The EC issue is interesting and troubling. It appears to me that a race is on between parents and adcoms. The parents are constantly in search of that EC that will give an edge (does the word “hook” even mean anything anymore?) while the colleges are constantly trying to filter out those kids who do things just to get a leg up on admissions.</p>
<p>So, in one big way, I DON’t thing the EC issue has changed. Colleges look for kids with an unique passion. Few HS students really have one. And colleges try to filter out the appearance of a unique passion, especially when it can be bought.</p>
<p>newmassdad: good point. I would imagine that to some extent, the school’s/teaacher’s viewpoints on the kids would help to illuminate that, and in some cases it may just be quite obvious–whether for good or ill.</p>
<p>Perhaps I have gauzy memories of the way things were 5 years ago, but it seems like kids are much more inclined to use ED to “game” the system than had previously been the case. Kids who are interested in the most selective schools often seem to assume they should apply <em>someplace</em> ED to increase their chances of admission, whether or not they have a clear first choice.</p>
<p>The words “passion” and “hook” also have become overused, with kids misconstruing the concepts as being commodities to be created to impress colleges rather than as being byproducts of pursuits in which they’re already engaged.</p>
<p>I got sidetracked for a couple of days and was just now able to read all the reponses. Very helpful, and thank you all.</p>
<p>The change in the SAT I from two parts to three was so obvious that I forgot to mention it. But it raises the question: are colleges really looking at the Writing part and attaching the same importance as the reading and math sections?</p>
<p>(I’m sure this has been discussed already but I couldn’t find an old thread on a quick review.)</p>
<p>The cost of a college education is whooosh. My hat really goes off to parents who go through this multiple times.</p>
<p>It seems that more kids are under stress to get admitted to some to get into a “named” school by any means necessary. the buck shot approach to applying to 15-20 schools (have done very little if any research), and then asking total strangers which one to attend. </p>
<p>It is sad to see how desparate kids are becoming about the process; Some are just outright mean on one another, asking questions like to Adcoms really check if you have done all of the EC hours or if I were really an officer, to if my parents went to college in another country, am I considered a first generation student to the number of people now " found" that they are of a different ethnicity (my great grand mother’s uncle’s cousin twice removed was ___<strong><em>) and wondering if that makes them </em></strong> and if it will give them a “hook”</p>
<p>Roscoe, last year the consideration of SAT writing varied from one college to another – most said they were not yet putting much weight on the test, but using it more for statistical data. Of course, it would have to be our luck that my daughter scored much higher on writing than anything else; also, on the SAT verbal she was strongest on the analogies, which of course were omitted along with other changes. In any case, despite a very strong SAT writing score my daughter ended up submitting only ACT’s to most of her colleges. There are at least 3 class-of-2010 girls on this board who went the ACT route and ended getting into prestige/reach colleges. </p>
<p>Of course, since last year was transitional for the SAT writing, none of us has a clue as to what the schools will be doing with it for the coming year. It probably will still be a mixed bag.</p>
<p>Isn’t the major issue that it is much harder to get into many colleges than it was 5 years ago? We are about to reach the peak opf the baby boomlet and numbers applying this next year will be higher than ever.</p>
<p>Many top schools are actively seeking out low income applicants making it harder than ever for the middle class.</p>
<p>Loan amounts and interest rates are going up.</p>
<p>The randomness of who top colleges accept is at a peak, it is even hard to predict lower ivies and good LACs compared to 5 years ago.</p>
<p>Urban schools are in vogue and many have become much more competitive.</p>
<p>And so much more. These next couple of years, until the numbers drop, will be very tough and very random at the top 30.</p>