Harvard has not reported any info yet, and Stanford won’t report.
According to Common App, the number of early applicants has increased by 13% and the total number of applications has increased even more by 22% (i.e. each applicant on average submitted more early applications) over last year. So it isn’t surprising that many colleges saw double-digit percentage increases in early applications this year.
Boston College says double the number of ED applicants this year over last
Thank you, I was looking for a word from Common App! Do you have a link?
Thank you! I also find this to be interesting: “Applications to public members drove most of the overall increases in total volume. The number of applications to public members increased 28% from 2019–20 (relative to 15% for private members).”
It appears the non-restrictive EA at public universities is becoming more of a draw as acceptance rates go down?
This is great information. Thanks for providing. Still reading through the details…
Common app added about 60 schools this year, including the 12 Illinois publics and U Alabama.
It’s not clear on their data whether they have accounted for that increase in this year’s numbers by including the 60 schools’ prior year’s application numbers on whatever platform they were using in 2019 and 2020. Does anyone know?
From page 1: “These analyses are restricted to members that have been continuously active since 2019–20.”
Ahh, thanks, so it doesn’t include the 60 new members this year, nor the 42 new members in 2020. Do you know what proportion of total applications go thru common app?
I don’t and it doesn’t seem to be data that is widely shared…?
Thanks, I have never seen that data either!
My student applied to GaTech because they require test scores. We feel thankful that some schools are still valuing testing.
It remains to be seen what weight they will give it. Last year was not great for those with high test scores, and Georgia Tech has said that they are required to consider them but only take it once. Doesn’t sound like they are putting much weight on them.
It does appear that the general trend from colleges is to give less weight to standardized test scores. And we’re probably going to see more and more schools go Test Blind especially with the focus on first-generation applicants and URM who traditionally either don’t have access to testing and testing prep or for one reason or another, don’t take SATs/ACTs.
I am a bit conflicted on this topic personally. I inherently understand the inequity and relationship of higher scores to higher socio-economic levels but at the same time, test scores are one of the only quantitative national standards where students can be “compared” against each other. I also have issues “changing” the game abruptly and going Test Blind (realize that this was escalated by the pandemic but even so, there were a bunch of schools announcing that decision even beforehand). I would have preferred a future statement such as, in 5 years time, we will no longer consider test scores in admissions… Which would allow time for middle school students to understand that the admissions game is changing.
My two cents. Interested in hearing other opinions on this…
Boston College - "This year’s ED I applicant pool totaled 2,940 applicants - a 50% increase over last year’s pool… As we did last year, we will admit approximately 800 ED I applicants with an admit rate of 27%.’
Wow, 50% increase! Crazy numbers.
I agree with you. I definitely understand wanting to give more opportunities to kids who don’t have the resources to prep a lot for these tests. This is an important goal. On the other hand, I think the tests do add some value. I have a college daughter who met with a tutor twice and studied on her own for a few weeks, and got a 1560. My son studied diligently for a year (throughout the pandemic when nothing else was going on in our totally shut down California community), with a tutor, and got a 1390. He is a strong student, like she is. Same zipcode, SES, income, school, family. They even share genes! So in our house, the SAT does add information above and beyond family socioeconomic status. She is at an ivy and doing great, and he would get eaten alive where she is, as would have been predicted by their test scores. And even though their scores were affected by income, school opportunities, privilege, etc., the DIFFERENCE between their scores had nothing to do with those things. We spent way more money on tutoring for our son, and he studied so much more, but his score was still quite a bit lower than our daughter’s.
I think this is exactly why GeorgiaTech is minimizing test scores this year even though they are required by the state, if you believe the statements from the Georgia Tech admission group. Anyone who follows their admissions group knows that there is a real push towards access and a dramatic increase in both first generation and underrepresented minority candidates. Last year this resulted in a huge jump in admitted first generation and URM students. I expect this trend will continue.
This focus last year created an environment where many high stat in-state kids who would’ve likely gotten in the year before were not admitted. Those increased admissions have to come from somewhere. This was compounded by the fact that their yield was high, as many kids who would’ve typically gone Ivy League level ended up at Tech. It was a trickle down effect.
This is great! Would have focused on other things for sure!