No hate here. My D applied to 16, and had nearly as many supp essays and short answers. But I went over them with her - she made a google doc of all the prompts - and helped her determine which ones were candidates for recycling with minor edits. So the # went down quite a lot. There was at least one school she dropped in the end because she couldn’t bring herself to do the supps for it, I think it was Tufts. She almost bailed on the app for the college she is happily attending today but I nixed skipping that one. We did a lot of coffee shop Sundays during app season. I brought a book, she brought a laptop and worked through her list.
@Sue22 Back in the mid 80s, coming from a NYC private school, I applied to 8 - by hand, don’t think I typed them, pretty sure I hand wrote them. I clearly remember the lined page in the app packet where I had to try to fit my essay perfectly without going over. 3 were SUNYs - so one app, the other 5 were match/reach with their own apps. I visited some, not all. With a couple of friends, I flew People Express (!) to Middlebury for like $20 each way. Visited other schools and overnighted with friends from my HS who were there. Didn’t visit a few at all.
The bottom line for me is that if we expect a school to potentially spend tens or even hundreds of thousand of dollars of FA on a student the least we can expect of that student is a 250 or 500 word “Why us?” essay.
It’s not the schools’ fault that students are applying to every top school in sight and about the only things they could do to discourage that behavior would be to make it harder, not easier, to apply.
You are acknowledging that you are making a choice but then complain about the work involved with the choice you make. Seems to me you want to eat your cake and have it too. Another example of first world problems. In terms of issues with respect to college, the number of essays has to be pretty low on the list.
In terms of “elite” colleges, we have a 9+ page thread on how to define elite. There have been several “objective” formulas tossed out in that thread. But then there are subjective tweaks that need to be made to add this school or another (which should be on the list but isn’t with the objective formula) or remove this or that school (who shouldn’t be in the list but is included with the objective formula). I think its comical to watch the mental gymnastics there.
And even better is no one could answer the question (asked multiple times) about why it mattered. Closest anyone came was to wow your neighbors. Though in reality, that was the way to determine if a school is elite: if your neighbor says “wow” when you tell them your kid is going there, the school is elite. How much more objective can you get than that gem?
I know a bunch of kids going to so called “elite” schools. And I know of bunch of kids (probably more) with elite stats who are not going to so called elite schools (most of them not having applied to any). Never heard anyone of them complaining about the number of essays or how arduous the process is and none of the kids who did not apply gave the arduous nature of the application process as the reason.
@preppedparent Mine applied to 18 (including 5 UCs) and there were lots and lots of supp essays and short answers. I did a quick count and got 62. Only 2 colleges had no extra essays. Caltech, MIT, and Stanford had the most essays. At least for Caltech and MIT, it did seem like they were trying to figure out “who fits here” rather than “who wants to go here”.
So, December break was pretty miserable for him, but he got them done and is happy now. I don’t think it is that broken. Different colleges want different things, and the Common App prompts are so general that they are unlikely to learn much from that essay.
Some would say it is for them too - it’s gotten a lot harder to get into our flagship. More kids overall? More internationals? More choosing it by default when they don’t get into “elites”? IDK.
That might make sense only if you thought the colleges were getting useful information from the “Why us” essay. If a kid is writing a “Why us” essay for 15+ schools, half of it ends up being the same boilerplate in all the essays and the other half ends up stretching the truth as to why each one is the “best fit”.
In some ways the “Why Us” essay is really a “Why Me” essay. How that student would fit into that college, what s/he brings to the community, how s/he might take advantage of all the school offers and make it a better place, become a successful alum that makes the college proud.
A lot of that is going to be true for more than a couple of similar schools. One of my kids was a budding epidemiologist. That essay was easy to write because it was mostly about her, but how she would be a great fit at Tulane (tropical medicine!), Emory (CDC!), etc. - “here’s everything I did in high school that shows how committed i am to this, my summer work, my course choices, my independent study,” and so on.
“It’s not the schools’ fault that students are applying to every top school in sight and about the only things they could do to discourage that behavior would be to make it harder, not easier, to apply.”
Actually the selective schools are somewhat at fault, not for low acceptance rates but the way the process is not transparent. If they basically said, unless you’re hooked, your chances of getting in is less than 2%, a lot less students would apply. They won’t of course as they want to see more applicants, be at 1% acceptance rate and then tout it in a press release.
The odds are already ridiculous. I don’t think a change from a published rate of 5% to one of 2% would matter. Lots of kids have their eyes on that golden ring and they’re willing to play the lottery for a chance at it.
At the Stanford tour, the admissions person started off her presentation with something like “don’t worry, no one in this room will get accepted.” So I think they do say what #110 says they don’t “If they basically said, unless you’re hooked, your chances of getting in are less than 2%.” As Sue22 noted, a lot of students still apply. In fact, I’d guess almost every kid in that crowded room at Stanford is applying, despite being given absolutely no illusions during the official presentation. And I’ve heard from friends that the presentations at other tippytops aren’t that different. The math really isn’t that hard. The official admit rate is say 5%. That includes athletes, kids of former presidents, etc. So the rate for a regular person has to be lower. What part of it would lead a bright kid to think their chances were above rather than below the official admit rate if they were unhooked?
I do think there is a substantial part of the applicant pool at Stanford and the Ivies, that have no chance based on low stats. So I do think kids with high stats may have a better than average chance at top schools. But that may mean 7% vs 6%!
Quite the rough-and-tumble discussion here. Broken? Yes, very. The college admissions process has become an arms race and a lot of smart, balanced, well-prepared kids are losing out to the ones who really learn to play the game.
Yet, wait a second. Just how rational is it to so ardently pursue a private university admission that will end up costing $300K over four years with little hope of any return on investment? For aspiring premeds, a medical degree will cost another $300K, at least. So kids enter life, or medical residency, with the equivalent of a big mortgage and no house. (Be careful what you ask for!)
Back in the Dark Ages I had zero parental support. I was fortunate to be employed and in California, which at that time had a well-funded and accessible system of higher education. I started in a local community college, transferred to UC with advanced standing, and then completed my medical education at a UC med school. I worked full time all through undergrad, part time in med school, and finished the whole thing with $44K in student loans. It still took most of a decade to pay them off, including major hardship during the five low-paid years of residency. Never for one instant did I seriously consider a private option, not even that big neon “H”, but then again, I was writing the checks. That’s the best reality check in the world.
My S’17 just finished the application season with a single state university acceptance out of 7 UC and 3 Cal State applications (weighted GPA 3.6, strong ECs, SAT 1370/1600). He suffered from a difficult year in 10th grade, relatively few APs, and the choice of Computer Science as a major. He ended up graduating high school magna cum laude. Weighing his options and the financial implications (!), he decided instead to attend the local community college Honors program (for free), with a strong track record of successful transfer into UC in two years. He will have plenty of 529 money left over for grad school with little or no debt. He will very likely go on to change the world, in a good way.
As admissions become increasingly competitive, it is natural for applicants to cast wider nets. Colleges benefit because they get to appear more selective while collecting millions in application fees from hopefuls. Trophy hunters get ego gratification. US News gets to write stories. CC gets lively discussion. Yet the ideal “fit” between applicant and school becomes ever harder to achieve. I wrote a long post on the current UC situation for any who are in the California bubble and interested in a totally different way of structuring the admissions process: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-general/1975773-uc-admissions-observations-on-2016-17-and-a-modest-proposal-long-post-p1.html
As usual, another college thread that only refers to the Ivies/UCs. As if those are the only colleges that a majority of college-bound HS seniors apply to.
We did a lot of coffee shop Sundays during app season. I brought a book, she brought a laptop and worked through her list.