Some interesting research on how schools using Naviance affect how their students approach applications.
Extract:
“After adopting the tools, Chicago Public Schools saw two- and four-year college enrollment increase by 26 percent, and Arizona’s Flagstaff High School noted a nearly 13 percent spike in its college acceptance rate.
Whittled down, the research shows that more information leads to more applications, and that students rely on their peers’ judgment in helping them determine the right fit for college.
But there are some caveats. Mulhern found that when Naviance was introduced to the district she evaluated, fewer students applied to so-called reach colleges, where students are less certain of their admissions prospects. Similarly, more apply to and enroll in “safety” institutions, where students feel more confident they will receive an acceptance.”
So, in short, Mulhern found that Naviance fulfills its advertised purpose. It helps students to figure out which colleges are the best for them, and where they should put their time, effort, and money.
The negative spin that Edsurge is putting on the results are interesting. I wonder how many of their advertisers make money through “College Consulting”, or are websites which have their own college admissions calculator, which is much more opaque that Naviance’s. Add to that the fact that Naviance has access to the data from the kid’s school, which is, as has been pointed out here, an important factor in calculating chances of acceptance, which gives Naviance another advantage on top of the one they have by being used by so many school districts.
So what better way to sabotage Naviance than to monger fear among parents, and among colleges?
The language used in the title of the article is telling: “Naviance Wields Much ‘Power and Influence’”. What isn’t explicit, but is added mentally on by many, if not most readers, is the word “Too”, as in “Naviance Wields TOO Much ‘Power and Influence’”. The actual words of the researcher were: "This research shows this technology has a lot of power and influence”. See the difference?
I don’t see the issue with building a more robust likely and target list based on data from an individual student’s school. I’m sure kids are still adding reaches, just not as many. That’s what my children’s college counselors urged them to do.
Harvard would probably see a huge drop in applications if every public high school student was forced to look at the scattergram before applying. Use naviance people!
Naviance just accounts for part of what’s reviewed, for a holistic admit.
I never used it, never even set up my password. I didn’t care how many and with what stats got an admit over the last x years. I relied on a different approach, based on what the match was, other than scores. Worked.
As long as kid are patted on the head and told they have a shot, despite what’s missing, they will continue to apply out of their range. It’s emotion driven.