<p>The point is that CU doesn’t have pre-applications.</p>
<p>See my post #1 - Columbia has a part one which is submitted with an application fee and contains only demographic info (simple fill-out-the-form). I know that to be true because I downloaded the paper form and read the instructions before I posted. Mama-three means that here sons did that part, and paid their fees, but never got around to doing the Part-II with the essays. I would assume that once an application fee is paid and a file opened, the student is counted as an applicant even if the the application is later abandoned or withdrawn. </p>
<p>This differs somewhat from procedures where students are asked to fill in some sort of pre-application or “part I” form without paying a fee until later – such as the way Dartmouth does it – and I don’t know whether those colleges count those as applicants or not.</p>
<p>It may very well be that many colleges use this two-part process precisely as a way to inflate their numbers – I don’t know. I do know that some colleges wanted this, some didn’t, and my own kids filled out several … but it never occurred to me at the time that it was for done any reason other than streamlining the data entry and file management process.</p>
<p>Columbia was reallly one of the hardest schools to get into this year. At my high school all six who got into either HYP were rejected from Columbia. There is no rhyme or reason to any of these admissions. One appilcant who got into Princeton was rejected from Harvard, Yale and several other ivies including Colulmbia. Those who got into Harvard, were rejected from Yale and Princeton too. Those who got into Princeton were rejected from Yale and Harvard too, and those who got into Yale were rejected from Harvard and Princeton too.</p>
<p>“Mama-three means that here sons did that part, and paid their fees, but never got around to doing the Part-II with the essays. I would assume that once an application fee is paid and a file opened, the student is counted as an applicant even if the the application is later abandoned or withdrawn.”</p>
<p>If this is what she means, then it’s not a pre-application. Several colleges have this policy. Brown has pretty much the same structure. Also, all the commonapp colleges have two parts, too. It’s not a pre-application and I don’t see why you would call it one since you have to submit the app fee. This is the 1st time I’ve ever heard someone asserting that this policy is practiced in order to gain lower admit rates. If your son is not sure about applying to CU, he shouldn’t pay the app fee. The CU application is structured in 2 parts, just like most of the college applications. I got lots of emails from Chicago just because I opened an account. They treated me like an applicant too but I don’t claim that they used this to increase their stats. Frankly, I find this whole theory a bit absurd.</p>
<p>Pearfire, since you are from Germany I will assume that English is your second language, so you may not be comfortable with the way many words and phrases are used interchangeably in English. I can understand how it can get confusing because it may seem in translation that there are nuances that really don’t exist in common parlance. Many colleges do the same thing as Columbia, but call their 'Part I" a “pre-application” or some other term. It doesn’t matter what it is called – what matters is what is on the form and how it is used. </p>
<p>The point is that the question has been raised as to whether some colleges engage in practices to inflate their application numbers by creating a two-stage application process, with the first step being very easy, requiring minimal information, and perhaps encouraged through aggressive marketing. I think it’s a legitimate question. </p>
<p>I don’t know the answer to the question – but I do think that it is one way in which many colleges (not just Columbia) might try to manipulate numbers in their favor.</p>
<p>You are not required to pay an application fee when submitting the Part 1 of the Columbia application. You have to pay to complete your application. </p>
<p>On the whole, most candidates complete their application to Ivy League schools. Most highly competitive colleges have a Part 1 & Part 2, but are sometimes named differently. For example, Common App and Common App Supplement.</p>
<p>Columbia does not prescribe to the Common App, which actually may hold the number of applicants down in comparison to the other Ivies. Most Ivies now accept the CA. </p>
<p>As a result of not accepting the Common App, I would actually wager that applicants to Columbia are probably more serious if they can’t just check a box on the Common App, but instead have to fill out a specific application and then answer specific questions only for Columbia.</p>
<p>“you may not be comfortable with the way many words and phrases are used interchangeably in English.” </p>
<p>I perfectly understood everything, thank you. </p>
<p>“I don’t know the answer to the question – but I do think that it is one way in which many colleges (not just Columbia) might try to manipulate numbers in their favor.”</p>
<p>They can’t “manipulate” the numbers. This theory is nonsense, because all the commonapp colleges require you to fill out “Part I”, which would be the main commonapp and a “Part II” which would be the supplement. Now applicants could simply submit the main app with the fee without sending the supplement. So these applications would be incomplete as well but still contribute to the stats. Therefore everyone does this and nobody can gain an advantage. </p>
<p>Lastly, what’s all the big fuss? Now that CU has the 2nd lowest admit rate in Ivy history, ppl start some weird theories as to why the data belies the truth.
More ppl apply to CU now, consquently we’ll have a lower admit rate.</p>
<p>okay </p>
<p>a) This “pre-application” as you call it, the part I and part II, applied to every single school that I completed my apps for. This includes Columbia, Penn, Chicago, and just about every other school including Princeton. The only reason why H and Y don’t have one is because they use the common app, but it’s still split between Common and Supplement. And Columbia as a matter of fact, does not account only part I was a completed application because my friend got in somewhere else ED and just left his app lying around and he got an email from columbia notifying him his app was being automatically withdrawn (for not being completed). </p>
<p>Oh and by the way, you should check out how Yale mysteriously found 300 “missing” applications after reporting their applicants went down 10%. And ditto to a previous post- my school had 9 Princeton admits, and of the 6 that applied to Princeton and Columbia, 4 were rejected. Same goes with yale and a girl who had HYP and some others but were rejected from Columbia. Am I neccesarily saying that Columbia is harder to get into than Harvard? (statistically it is…) but with over 21000 applicants, it’s now about as hard to get into Columbia as it is to get into HYP.</p>
<p>“my friend got in somewhere else ED and just left his app lying around and he got an email from columbia notifying him his app was being automatically withdrawn (for not being completed).”</p>
<p>This point completely refutes the assumption that the pre-application thing is used to increase its selectivity. We can end the discussion now. “Thank you, come again, ^^.”</p>
<p>For all of you still doubting that my sons pre-application was considered an application by Columbia here is the letter they each received:</p>
<pre><code>"We are regrettably unable to make a decision on your application to
</code></pre>
<p>Columbia University. Although notices of missing material were sent to you via both email and convential mail, required documents were still absent from your folder as of March 29, 2007."
“We must conclude that you no longer wish to pursue a place in Columbia’s Class of 2011, and make it clear that missing documents can no
longer be accepted.” </p>
<p>I do not think you can get any clearer than this. I in no way regret my sons decision to accept their early decision school they made a wonderful decision based on what they felt was right for them.As for the foolish thoughts that Columbia is not playing with numbers what does the above letter say to you. My sons never sent in our credit card number nor did they have their school records or essays sent. The fact of the matter is that in this case I know that they were each counted in the numbers. Why would anyone dispute this? I hope you do not continue to go through life believing that everything you read in print whether in the New York Times or other sources means it is truth. Someone who believes everything just because its in print could be sold the Brookyn Bridge. I will forward my information to the New York Times-maybe they will choose to investigate this further.</p>
<p>It’s not a pre-application, but the first part of the application. If you wish to withdraw, you could have called them.</p>
<p>When did you get this letter?</p>
<p>Momma-three, I hate to be mean, but you’re going to send your “information” to the NYTimes? Oh Noes!! </p>
<p>By the way, her sons got into Cornell early. I’d bet you 91.4% they wudn’t have gotten into Columbia anyway. Sorry- truth hurts. Just because Columbia doesn’t have a 20%+ admissions rate and isnt considered the ass end of the Ivy doesnt warrant all this ■■■■■■■■.</p>
<p>I dont know why that poster and her one follower feels a need to reiterate this one point. There really is no purpose. Irregardless of what she says (I am assuming it is a she) this poster seems really hung up on the fact that Columbia’s selectivity is being published as so high. The only explanation that seems to make sense is that her sons accepted early decision schools whose published acceptance rates are much higher. She seems bothered by the fact that her sons rescinded applications from schools where the acceptance was so low. She does not seem concerned that OTHER schools might have sent similar emails ect, but rather is very bothered that COLUMBIA is posting these low acceptance rates. He sons choose not to apply to Colubmia regular decision or early decision. The fact is that had her sons not rescinded their applications because they did not get into their early decision choice, they might not have gotten into Columbia.
The reality is that those who applied regular decision to columbia and were accepted had acceptance rates of much lower than 8.6% since that figure is an average of all who applied and takes into account the much higher early decision rate. Thus, Columbias regular decision rate was more likely to be 6% for those who applied regular decision.</p>
<p>And by the way Momma-three, if Columbia counted your sons as applicants- they would’ve sent rejection letters. You have no hard proof that they were indeed tallied into the final number.</p>
<p>And to play devil’s advocate- the only people who would do this is if they applied to somewhere other than Columbia early, and were subsequently accepted. Most people have the courtesy to withdraw their applications-- but out of the 21,000 Columbia University applicants- I’d guess less than 100 students were like your sons. So fine. Columbia’s acceptance rate was 8.901%, not 8.900%. Happy?</p>
<p>Cornell University (where Momma-three’s sons are going) had an early acceptance rate of 36.6%. The overall acceptance rate this year was a staggering 26%. </p>
<p>Congrats anyway- your sons made it into a school roughly as competitive as:</p>
<p>Bowdoin College (ME) 25%
Flagler College (FL) 25%
Rice University (TX) 25%
Texas College 25%
Mississippi Valley State Univ. * 25%
Haverford College ¶ 26%
United States Coast Guard Acad. (CT)* 26%
University of California–Berkeley * 27%
Univ. of Southern California 27%
Berea College (KY) 27%
Univ. of California–Los Angeles * 27%
Davidson College (NC) 27%
Colgate University (NY) 27%
**Cornell University (NY) 27% **</p>
<p>What’s the deal with Mississippi Valley State University?</p>
<p>Its wonderful that you are so loyal to your prospective University LEARN WHILE YOU ARE THERE! As for your childish attempt at a personal attack there is no further comment. I look forward to my sons and daughters ability to question and lead this country not just take a passive stand and believe everything in print. GROW UP!</p>
<p>There’s a fine line between intellectual curiousity and independence and going on someone else’s CC board with the sole purpose of tearing down a school’s rightful bragging rights.</p>
<p>Columbia University has gained so much momentum in the past few years and it will continue. The increased, and indeed, most selective nature of Columbia is a testament to this. Why don’t you stay on the Cornell board, and enjoy your sons’ admittance? Cornell is a fine school. There’s no need to tear Columbia down to ameliorate your own conscience about your sons not applying. As I said before, if your sons’, like 20,000 other applicants had gotten that thin envelope from Columbia- perhaps you’d be more inclined to believe these stats. </p>
<p>And as for your “threat” to contact the NYTimes with your “information”, that in my humble opinion, is profoundly hypocritical given your immense distrust in anything that is printed. Would you be happier if the Times ran a story on how Columbia had a 9.0% acceptance rate than 8.9%? If that floats your boat- you got more problems to worry about than whether or not Columbia is playing with the numbers (which it isnt).</p>
<p>Hmmmm, from reading this thread i would have to say the moms are the posters who are acting childish…</p>
<p>Especially calmom, though. She takes the cake for her lazy backhanded comment towards pearfire. /shakes head</p>