So it’s a bad thing that most applicants to these colleges are academically qualified? While applicants with an “I succeed if everyone else fails” mentality might agree, I don’t.
so then @lookingforward , what is your answer to the OP’s question?
I haven’t read anything that says other than “the vast majority are qualified” in some form or other. I’ll dig up more sources from the books I have if you would like.
And remember, if it was different, then it would be easier to predict elite acceptances, and we all know that is impossible. I learned that here!
Original: Would it surprise anyone if nearly half of the apps these elites receive are just “why not” apps that admissions more or less reject immediately because they can easily tell the student wasn’t serious?
My answer: No, doesn’t surprise me that nearly half are not going anywhere in an elite’s review process. Some will be “Why not?” and some will just be off target, no matter their stats. Remember, this is holistic. Just because a kid has top stats and some ECs that sound good, doesn’t mean he can master the application,present what the adcoms need to see.
The vast majority being “qualified,” is a nice reassurance. I find it misleading. These kids aren’t being chosen simply on stats. They may be qualified to do high level work. That isn’t what makes them reach final committee.
It seems to me that an applicant to an elite college may be qualified, in the sense that he or she would be able to succeed and graduate from that institution, but can still be one of the “no way, no how” candidates @blossom refers to. In other words (in my opinion) an unhooked student with no unusual ECs who has a B average in a strong high school curriculum and who has SATs of, say, 2000, is qualified to attend Harvard. But he’s almost certainly a “no way, no how” applicant.
People find it hard to believe that all that hard work in high school guarantees nothing in elite college admissions. You can be an A kid with 2300 and still miss the mark. See the Brown and Princeton stats on score/gpa categories.
CC likes to see this hierarchically, that one kid’s record makes him “better” than the next. And if they see (what on the surface, they think is) a good kid who gets rejected, they call crapshoot, lottery, or deceit. Or blame legacies. It’s the whole app, how a kid thinks, what comes through. And plenty of kids - we know this from CC, too- aren’t thinking past their hs experience and their wants/dreams, when they plan for college and fill out that app.
Just one school, but how would you analyze these oft-quoted stats WRT this question?
https://www.brown.edu/admission/undergraduate/explore/admission-facts
Postmodern, for elites, these are crushingly fierce competitions and stats only get you so far. 25-40,000 apps for a few thousand seats. I’m agreeing with jym and maybe others: every app gets a first read.
Some kids are just doing a Why Not? and if they aren’t capable or something else is off, they likely won’t make it to further reviews.
But imagine kid after kid with high enough gpa and scores. 2400+ vals and sals applying to Brown, larger than the freshman class. What distinguishes among them- or not- is often the quality of their thinking, the challenges they took on, how they understand, what they choose to present and write about themselves, and how. And just how they’ll contribute to that particular community. That’s not as simple as being a senior with good stats, having some hs ECs (even titles or some awards,) and maybe status as bfd in their one hs. And then hoping the dial lands on your number.
“I think the OP was asking if there are a lot of totally unqualified people are applying to elites and artificially reducing the admit rates, and it appears the answer is (unfortunately) no.”
“So it’s a bad thing that most applicants to these colleges are academically qualified?”
I think the point is that most kids / parents don’t want to stare the admit rates in the face, and it would make them feel better if (say) 60% of the apps were complete no-chancers, because then they’d feel that they were only competing with the 40% who are qualified instead of the entire pool. It’s called self-delusion. You have to stare the admit rate in the face and fully internalize it instead of reaching for “oh, there are a bunch of no-way-Joses in this pool.”
If I begin my essay with When I sees these essay, I be thinking, this topic here is just rocking, I likes it very much, do you think, my application will get a complete thorough reading? My feeling is that the an admission officer reads till he/she decides, “this candidate is not getting in”, then he/she just stops and moves on to the next app. If the officer can articulate why he/she rejected the application, with any level of credibility to his/her colleague, he/she is golden.
If you are not an URM, or someone with special hooks and fail to meet a minimum cut-off in the mind of the admission officer in terms of stats, I don’t think your application gets a real serious read. The officer just doesn’t have the time. Some applications like everything else in this world, get two, maybe three chances to make an impression. Some barely get one chance.
Duke’s admissions policies allow for every application to be given a “first read,” which will weed out roughly 50% of the applicants. The other 50% of the applications are given two “full reads,” one by a member of their “reading staff” and the other by an ADCOM officer. It is unclear who does the “first read” – local reps? full committee? automatic reject based on stats? The two “full reads” rate the applications on a scale of 1-5 based on 6 components, (grades, test scores, recommendations, ECs, etc.); they then look at other aspects (1st generation college, diversity factors, major, etc.). Here’s an article from the Duke Chronicle:
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2015/03/ferpa-request-gives-inside-look-duke-admissions-process
I presume other elites do something similar.
I think a LOT of kids who apply are “average” excellent students, as I freely admit my D is. She is delighted with the college she has ended up at, and of course, she is only average compared to some of the truly amazing candidiates that get into those tippy top schools. By March 31, she knew with certainty that she would not get into the Ivy she applied to. She loved the school, debated endlessly about applying, and did put a lot of effort into the app. But she learned more and more about admissions at the tippy tops. Unless her essays wowed them, she wouldn’t get in, because frankly, what she offered wasn’t exceptional. And her essays didn’t wow them:-) She is a white female (obv), from an over represented state, and had nothing exceptional on her app. They could fill many classes with kids like my D. She looks at the kids from our school who are going to Harvard, Brown, Columbia, MIT and others, and they either have a hook or something exceptional, except one guy. He kept his acceptance quiet, and honestly all the kids are really wondering what he had that got him accepted.
To answer the original question, I reckon that many applicants are qualified just from grades and test scores. I do think there are plenty of kids who are just throwing out apps, hoping one will stick. I also think there are probably more kids that are great students who hope against hope that they might be one of the lucky ones like the guy I just mentioned.
It occurs to me that if 20% of applicants to an elite college are not qualified–that should mean that their stats are lower than those of the lowest accepted applicant. And that can be relatively low for certain hooked students, at least as compared to the average. This fits in with my opinion that numerous “qualified” applicants nevertheless have essentially no hope of admission.
Lovethebard, good link. Duke gets credit from me for their openness, even if they can’t explain it all. This is from 2014, fwiw. First post includes CG’s comments.
It’s important to throw some brain cells into this, not assume.
Approximately half the applicants to an Ivy are very qualified. Here’s what a former admissions officer
at Cornell had to say:
“About 40% of the applications I read were from students who could clearly do well at Cornell.”
At Tufts this year, 50% of applicants were above the admitted student profile. 80% of applicants were deemed to be academically qualified.
"Over 50% were on or above our average admitted student profile. This is all to say, we, as well as most highly selective schools, live in a world where we have a wealth of strong applicants who we would be thrilled to admit to the class but a scarcity of spots that limit the number of acceptance packets we can send.
http://admissions.tufts.edu/blogs/inside-admissions/post/youre-great/
Now that admission rates are in the single digits there are many more academically qualified applicants
at elite schools than there are spots for them.
Of course, colleges each have their own definitions of “qualified”. A not-very-selective university may deem a frosh applicant with a 2.5 HS GPA and 900 SAT CR+M to be “qualified”.
Also, there are open admission community colleges that admit everyone.
Let’s say 20% don’t have the stats, period. (I think it’s probably higher, but either way.)
You guys think the remaining 80% all submit super detailed, college-specific supplements for EACH college? That’s what I’m getting at. I just don’t see THAT many applicants putting in hours on hours researching each and every college they apply to, and make custom essays. It wouldn’t take an adcom more than 1 minute to realize essays are recycled and only have surface level, if that, details about the school – which indicate the app was a “why not?” and not a I’m incredibly passionate about this specific elite college.
Ime, no they don’t. The real effort is in knowing the colleges well enough to present at your best. Not all high school kids are savvy to that, in the first place. If you’re asking for yourself or your child, try to take the smart approach.
I think @lookingforward may disagree with me, but I think the idea that intensive specific research into the differences between elite schools is needed is overstated. Obviously, the applicant needs to know about each school, but honestly, there needn’t be much difference between a “why Harvard” and a “why Yale” essay. Indeed, I’m not sure even a “why Columbia” essay has to discuss why the core curriculum is ideal for you. Rather, I think it’s more important for the applicant to explain clearly what she or he has to offer, and that probably doesn’t differ that much from school to school.
Don’t get me wrong–I’m sure there are applications that are obviously half-hearted or slapdash, but I think a kid who is a reasonable applicant to one of these super-selective colleges can prepare excellent application packages to multiple top colleges.
Let me expand on this a bit: I’m a bit concerned that some applicants will think that they must include something hyper-specific in the application, like “I want to study spaghetti string theory with Professor Flapdoodle, which is only offered at Penn.” Unless there is substantial other material in the application backing up this interest, I think it may seem fake.
No, I’m not talking about, eg, the core curriculum, but those kids who either blatantly confuse colleges or go so generic that their Why? is nothing. A lot of ‘reasonable candidates’ make this mistake. My experience with the Why Us sort of question (either specifically asked or embedded in other questions,) is that many pay it almost no heed. They really don’t know much about H or Y or the others, beyond their rankings. And as an interviewer poster noted recently, can’t answer intelligently in the face to face, either.
No, it’s not that hard and really shouldn’t point to some professor. But a lot of these high school top performers could stand to do a little more than they do.
Sometimes, it sure feels like a kid was sleepwalking through the app and I think OP is asking about that. I do think some kids make the excuse they didn’t focus enough on one app or another, but that’s after the results are in, a sort of self-protective instinct.
Kids admitted they tried very hard on some others they were rejected to as well. But it sure seemed like a majority of the apps that were rejected were “why nots”. Confirmation bias is certainly possible, but in the age of top kids sending out 8-15 apps, you have to wonder how many are lazy efforts that ad coms see right through…