There is not one single aspect of the college application process that is “student friendly” let’s be honest here.
11 Likes
I am curious what you mean here.
The “extra” students who would be deferred to RD under a December EA release, but who would be accepted under a January EA release, would also be accepted in RD, or at least that’s what would make sense to me. Perhaps the wrench that test optional threw into yield algorithms made figuring this out too difficult for enrollment management, a bridge too far.
Pushing back EA release to allow some applicants accepted ED elsewhere time to withdraw allows the university more control, but really only offers the Dec EA-deferred-but-Jan EA-accepted applicants a slightly earlier release date, Jan vs March, with no other obvious benefits that I can see, as it doesn’t change the need for RD apps for that group.
If a student is getting deferred in both Dec and in Jan release scenarios, then the release date has no effect.
It’s easy to make rhetorical statements on such topics. I can think of at least the following aspects of college applications which are student friendly:-
- More and more colleges are adopting Common App - makes it easy to apply to multiple colleges
- Fee waivers for those who can not afford it
- Test Optional policies for a vast majority of colleges to support students who don’t have equitable resources
- Non binding nature of acceptances for majority of the applicants, even though colleges have a huge challenge managing their yield
- Providing NPCs so applicants can get an idea of what to expect to pay
Things arent perfect with college admissions, but doesn’t mean we have to be impractical about how colleges manage their process to fill a class.
2 Likes
This is true for most, but not quite all schools.
1 Like
Couple of thoughts regarding your points on the aspects of apps being student friendly.
- Colleges are adding more and more supplemental essays to gauge real interest in their school now that students can send in 15-20 apps. Creates problems determining yield which trickles down to more students getting deferred. (& spending untold hours writing essays)
3)Test Optional inflates SAT/ACT scores when only top scores are sent in. Adds stress to students whether to send in decent scores that pre-pandemic would have been great. The SAT as not “equitable” has been debunked. Lots of free test prep online for a motivated student at any income- standardized tests simply reflect society as a whole.
5 Likes
I’m personally not a fan of TO policies. It’s the only universal measure which can objectively gauge an applicant’s competence, since GPAs are extremely subjective.
The system isnt perfect. My point is to not make it sound like colleges are a villain here.
3 Likes
Respectively disagree with your post. The disparity in SAT/ACT scores highlights the inequity of education both in and out of school, driven by differences in the amount of money and time parents of “means” are able to invest. As reported in many articles on this topic, kids in disadvantaged areas end up beind the starting line even when they start school at age 5 or 6. It is so much deeper and more meaningful than the motivation level of the student.
Not to mention the point that students who intend to pursue the arts or any major that is not math-centric also benefit from TO. I appreciate that this is an unpopular position, especially here on CC. And I agree that TO inflates test scores that are actually reported for the reasons mentioned. That said, I have a student at an ivy who benefitted from TO, had my student had to submit test scores who knows where they would have landed. My student had an amazing application and a test score would have detracted from the GPA, the other standardized tests taken, the ECs and so on. My student proved test taking skills with AP scores in subjects they pursued. I live and die on this sword because for students with average math skills, test scores take away from all other achievements in and out of the classroom and I think it is too nuanced for an admissions committee to balance. They cannot unsee an average SAT/ACT score, even if there will be 0.0 math, science, etc. pursued.
2 Likes
Agreed in-principle, except that for majors where Math and Writing competence have proven to be a good indicator of success. I love Purdue for being Test Expected.
2 Likes
The common app allowing for students to apply to 20 colleges doesn’t benefit the students, it causes more demand, it gives the college more money in fees and kids apply often to schools they’d never dream of attending because it’s easy. Students don’t need to apply to 20 schools, in fact that’s absurd, but they feel they need to because of the competitiveness.
To combat this some colleges have gone with more supplemental essays, but this puts more of a strain on the students who now have to write a billion essays. Only to get deferred and be told “Hey, I know, write more essays!” with my personal favorite being the LOCI or as I like to call it the “get down on your knees and tell me how much you love me” essay.
The test optional puts more pressure on the kids should I or should I not submit. It over inflates the scores to the point where you feel like if you are asking “should I submit a score in the top 1% of all test takers” is insanity. Either the tests mean something (in which case you should require them) or they don’t (in which case you should go test blind). They can’t be both at the same time. Test optional makes the school look good with insanely high scores.
The deferral is the crown jewel in the not beneficial to students given that the kid has worked hard to get everything in on time and the are told “you know we are going to push it because I’m going to make sure that something better doesn’t come along”. It puts them in limbo and when you are deferring 30K+ kids as some schools do, they could do a better job and allowing some of those kids to move on. No universe exists in which every one of those kids has a shot after round 1.
This is a process that fills even the most confident child with self doubt.
The lack of transparency on institutional priorities leave kids often wondering why they were denied when sometimes it has nothing to do with anything within their own control. It creates stress.
This is why there is book after book written trying to some extent shine a light on it, but even top AOs admit the process isn’t fair and isn’t easy on the students. Because it isn’t.
25 Likes
All valid points.
Agree to all, especially the deferral points. Cut these kids loose.
3 Likes
I too share the same concerns. Just that I’m also considering the practical challenges schools face in filling up their classes. If they over or under enroll it’s going to hurt everyone.
I disagree with the notion that being able to apply to more colleges is student friendly. I think it has actually backfired and created the stress filled situation we have today. The ability to throw in 20 colleges on one app has created a mess for all involved, made even worse by TO policies. It’s created the need for nearly all students to apply to more schools because of lower acceptance rates, higher fees, lots more stress for students. It’s a vicious circle. Compare this to how the UK manages it - 5 schools max, the requirement to meet certain entry qualifications to even be able to apply, and the Clearing process in July, opening up all available spots for students to apply to. This is why Oxbridge does not have crazy low acceptances rates like in the US. The system in the US has created a level of stress for high school students that is unprecedented.
9 Likes
Well, I didn’t say applying to multiple colleges is student friendly - it’s a personal choice.
What I meant is that for those “choosing” to apply to multiple colleges, a common platform helps having to not retype a lot of details.
Amen!!!
Having been through the super competitive boarding school process with our kids, the equivalent in that world is kids with 95th percentile SSAT scores (and that’s 95th in an already highly motivated, self-selecting group) should retake the test in an effort to score higher.
Ironically, if students had to type in each application separately it would probably relieve some of the pressure because there would be far fewer applications, higher acceptance rates, and schools would not need to use deferral like they do now because they would actually have time to read the applications instead of dealing with the mounds of apps they get now. It would be easier all around. My gut tells me many applications barely get read because of the volume. UC app readers get paid about $2.50 per app I think and probably spend 2 minutes on each first pass. Think about how much time kids are putting into these apps for someone to dismiss it in 2 minutes.
8 Likes
Totally agree with all of this and just another example…in our high school in Colorado there were 76 kids that applied EA to Purdue. 76! there is NO WAY even half of them have any intention of going to West Layfayette, Indiana for college but its just so easy to apply, they figure why not. The handful of kids who had their heart set on Purdue (and wont get into Ivies) now have a much harder time getting accepted because of the competition. This is just one example but its a vicious cycle.
10 Likes
This is a perfect example!
1 Like