- ACT and SAT scores
The consensus view is that these are important, although Mamlet and Vandeverde feel the scores "don't count as much as people think they do."[95] There are many reports that admissions departments consider only the highest test results in different test subsections, sometimes called superscore results or superscoring,[232] so if a student takes a standardized test during multiple sittings, for example, the highest math score and the highest verbal scores will be considered, regardless of which particular test date they were achieved.[233] Two sources in the Washington Post suggested that colleges routinely superscore the SAT test but rarely the ACT,[234] possibly because of difficulty processing five separate rounded numbers.[235]
Rigor of high school courses[edit]
Analysis of high school applicants.png
A consensus view is that taking rigorous high school courses is a plus.[69] Guidance counselors report that admissions personnel take a student's course of study into serious consideration when evaluating applications.[41][42] Admissions officers construct a high school profile and take into account such data as curriculum offerings, demographics, and grade distributions at the high school.[41] One adviser suggested taking the hardest courses that there were, and that the worst thing, in terms of evaluations, was to drop a hard course.[236]
Personal evaluation[edit]
Athletic ability[edit]
Athletes in popular sports such as football are recruited by colleges hoping to improve their athletic programs.
A survey of admissions officers revealed that 28% agreed that their school had accepted athletes despite having lower grades and test scores than others.[23] A survey by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that schools with strong athletics departments tended to have athletes with lower SAT scores than non-athletic students.[11] Athletes get better treatment even at elite colleges, according to one academic study.[11] A report suggested that some applications by athletes go first to a special committee for review by coaches, who may then, in turn, advocate for particular players.[18] Recruited athletes who play in-demand or "revenue" sports (i.e. generate ticket sales) such as football[237] or basketball can have a "significantly greater advantage in admissions" than others.[238][239] Some Ivy League coaches, seeking to improve the average academic performance of their teams, would admit mediocre athletes with top academic skills as a means to balance out the stellar athletes with below-average academic ability. To fix this "average score" arrangement in which there had been a temptation to admit an extremely poor student with great athletic ability, many schools went to a banding arrangement. For example, coaches would consider all wrestling applicants within a specified range or band of academic performance, and coaches could admit more wrestler-applicants who showed greater scholastic promise.[240] Howard and Matthew Greene report that coaches do not make admissions decisions, but they can advocate for a particular applicant.[69] And they report that committed athletes should explain in their applications how much time they have used towards perfecting their athletic ability:
We often talk with highly involved athletes who have little time for other activities outside of their sports. In many cases their grades suffer. Most student-athletes are not "recruited" to colleges, but colleges will respect their commitment and drive.
—Howard and Matthew Greene, 2003[69]
Particular skills[edit]
Some colleges are more likely to admit students with in-demand skills, such as writing, debating, theater management, science competitions, organizational skills, musical skills, and so forth.[239]
Personal initiative[edit]
Admissions personnel look favorably on applications where it is clear that the student, himself or herself, appears to be firmly in control over the whole application process; the appearance of pushy parents or coaching can have a dampening effect. Ideally it is best if the student, himself or herself, is in charge of organizing the college search and decision-making process; the "student must be in the driver's seat".[241] One admissions dean explained:[21] And admissions officers are turned off by "micromanaging parents".[67]
Students who really manage the show on their own, fill out the application on their own, make their own appointments for interviews, correspond with you on their own email account -- these students get extra points because they're managing their lives.
—Jennifer Delahunty, Admissions Dean at Kenyon[21]
Demonstrated interest[edit]
This can be an important factor in some situations, sometimes a "driving factor",[61] since a college may be more likely to say yes to a student likely to matriculate. Accordingly, it has been advised to become knowledgeable about schools being applied to, and "tailor each application accordingly."[43] College visits (including overnight ones), interviews, attending College Fair days, comments in the essay, and other indications of interest can be a factor for many colleges concerned about their yield––the percent of students who will say yes to an offer of enrollment.[18][114] According to Andover's college counseling director Sean Logan, it is important to have numerous contact points with colleges to show demonstrated interest: visiting, phone contact, emailing, visits to websites (including number of clicks as well as length of time on the website), whether a college visit included a tour and interview, and whether a college-recommended off-campus personal interview was done.[61] Schools such as Connecticut College and Emory University have been credited as "popularizing the yield game" by refusing well-qualified students who failed to show much real interest in attending, as a way to boost their yield scores.[114] One top high school student was waitlisted at a "likely" college[242] for showing lack of interest:
We assumed they weren't coming, because we didn't have much contact from them. We know they're probably using us as a back-up and they haven't done much to show any sincere interest, so we decided to waitlist them.
—Andover college counseling director Sean Logan, remembering a comment from a college admissions director.[61]
Active participation[edit]
Two wrestlers.
Students with special skills such as wrestling may be given preferential treatment.
One report suggested that colleges seek students who will be actively involved on campus and not spending every day studying alone in their rooms.[243] As a result, they are interested in teacher recommendations which suggest active classroom participation in high school classrooms, describing students who speak up in class, who ask questions, who are almost like an "unpaid teaching assistant" to help a high school teacher make a class great, or make a weak teacher's class bearable.[244]
Weeding out problem people[edit]
Admissions tries to screen out difficult people, spoilers, and "self-involved brats".[245] According to Dunbar, many colleges are "afraid of aggression", and recommends avoiding "harsh humor" or signs of severe emotion, anger, and aggression.[245] Admissions evaluators look for signals possibly indicating difficult people, such as nonconstructive or disrespectful criticisms of people by an applicant, or evidence of a drug or alcohol problem.[245] Colleges try to weed out dependent people who either follow their parents too closely, or do only what the "cool kids" do. Dunbar advised that "parental control of any kind, if detected, can be very damaging", and advised that students should not appear to be controlled by parental whims.[246]
Analysis of essays[edit]
Picture of a college building with steeple.
Dartmouth College admissions, according to Michele Hernandez, spends a week examining the possibles or Ps, and after much deliberation, accepts perhaps a sixth of them.
Michele Hernandez suggested that almost all admissions essays were weak, cliche-ridden, and "not worth reading".[193][247] The staff gets thousands of essays and have to wade through most of them.[248] When she worked as an admissions director at Dartmouth, she noticed that most essays were only read for three minutes.[193] Some too-common essay types were the "outward bound" essay about how a person discovered their inner grit while hiking tough mountains, or the "community service" essay about how a student discovered, while working among disadvantaged peoples, that "all persons were the same".[193] Admissions officers seek to learn how a person thinks, what kind of person they are, and their level of intellectual promise.[193] Essays are generally important only in borderline cases.[248]
Other factors[edit]
One report was that at Ivy League universities, 40% of students were so-called "special cases" including student-athletes, minorities, low-income, legacies, and development cases, and that admissions standards were typically lowered for these groups.[18]
Full-paying students[edit]
While there is general agreement that chances for admission are higher for students who are prepared to pay the full price, there are indications that this has been even more prevalent in the past few years given economic uncertainty and rising college costs,[249] particularly at schools without large endowments. Half of admissions officers at both public universities and a third of officers at four-year colleges were actively seeking students who could "pay full price" and did not need financial aid, according to one survey of 462 admissions directors and managers in 2011.[250] The report suggested that full-pay students tended to have lower high school grades and test scores than other students, compared to other applicants, on average.[250] Two other reports confirmed that public university admissions officers were actively seeking out-of-state and international students since they paid higher rates for tuition.[23][250] Another report found that one in ten admissions officers had said that their college admitted full-pay students despite their having lower average grades and test scores.[23] Reports vary about whether the financial neediness of applicants impacts admissions chances; one suggested that applicants with strong academic credentials or talents are more likely to get financial aid, but that depending on the college, "borderline admits" needing money were most vulnerable;[251] a second report was that "colleges like rich students".[251] One view was that financial aid depends on how a specific student compares with other students:
What this means is that your financial aid package from a reach college may not be as attractive as the package from one of your target, or well matched, colleges. If you are looking for generous scholarship aid, you need to look at colleges and universities where your academic profile is strong compared to that of the average admitted student.
—Hannah Serota, college counselor[251]
By contrast, other schools practice need-blind admission.
Geographic diversity[edit]
One view was that state schools strive to admit students from "all parts of a state,"[11] which suggests that applicants who live farther away from a given school had a better chance of admission. But a contrary view was that geographic location of the applicant matters perhaps only slightly, if at all; Hernandez looked at acceptance ratios to Dartmouth for different geographic locations, and found that geographic distance was not a factor influencing admittances.[252]
Race and ethnicity[edit]
Outdoors with people.
Students at the Commons at Green River Community College in Washington.
A survey of admissions personnel suggested that two-fifths had said yes to applicants from minorities despite having lower grades and test scores than other applicants, on average.[23] At the same time, rulings by the Supreme Court have prevented race from becoming an "overriding factor" in college admissions.[11] A report suggested minority students have a better chance overall at selective colleges.[18] In the case of multiracial students, they have a choice of which box to check since it may be perceived either as "gamesmanship" or reflecting one's racial makeup.[253] Some Asian-Americans have felt loathe to describe themselves as Asian, or to reveal information about their ethnic background, on the supposition that college admissions departments discriminate against them because of their ethnicity and consider them incorrectly to be "boring academic robots", according to several reports.[18][254] Typically, Asian applicants require a SAT score 140 points above that of a comparable white student, and considerably higher than that of a non-Asian minority, to have a similar chance of admission.[255][256] Asians get a "raw deal" in Ivy admissions, according to Hernandez, and have to be much better students than the typical white applicant to be admitted.[257] She wrote that it benefits an applicant to be African American, Latino, or Native American, since colleges can advertise their diversity as a result.[258] The admissions practices of Harvard and Princeton were investigated for possible discrimination against Asian-American applicants by Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.[255] An important development in 2012 is that the Supreme Court decided to review the case of Fisher v. University of Texas which may affect university-based admissions decisions based on race.[259][260]
Legacy applicants[edit]
Main article: Legacy preferences
There are differing views about how important it is to have a family member or relative who also attended a college. It is clear that it is a factor; one report suggested that having a family member who is an alumnus gives "a leg up" for applicants.[11][261] One report suggested that siblings do not count as legacies.[261] In some cases, a parent's attendance at a related graduate school counts as a legacy, but most colleges do not count this.[261] Many selective private colleges have a higher admit rate for alumni children as a way to "keep the larger set of alumni happy and giving", and being a legacy applicant can mean as much as "100 or 200 points on the SAT".[262]
Legacy admissions have had a history of controversy; economist Peter Sacks criticized the practice of legacy admissions as a "social reproduction process" in which "elite institutions have an implicit bargain with their alumni ... ’You give us money, and we will move your kid to the front of the line.'"[238] Another agreed that legacies perpetuated a "hereditary aristocracy".[262] But an opposing view is that all colleges, to varying extents, make choices as part of the admissions process, including state schools which charge in-state residents (with taxpaying parents) a lower rate than out-of-state residents, and it was argued that there was not really much difference between taxpaying parents contributing to a state school as well as generous alumni contributing to a private school—both with the possibility that it will help their offspring get into college.[238] Consultant Donald Dunbar suggested that admitting legacies encourages future donations, and in turn these incoming money flows help the school subsidize the education of more minority students;[263] another source suggested that alumni gifts was important in helping a college pay for need-blind programs.[262] Legacy admissions was criticized by Daniel Golden in his book The Price of Admission in which elite schools gave "heavy preferences to the wealthy", according to essayist Neal Gabler in the Boston Globe.[64]
Family wealth[edit]
Main article: Development case
In certain cases, family wealth of applicants is considered, based on potential to make a substantial donation[18] to the school (above and beyond paying tuition, and separate from considerations such as ability or fame). Such candidates are known as development cases, and are intended to bolster the finances of the university, especially to its further mission. The practice is not widely discussed by universities that use it, but is reported to be used by a number of top-ranked schools, Ivy League and otherwise, and has been associated with Duke University (which acknowledges its use) and Brown University (which does not comment), especially since the 1980s.[264]
Personal connections[edit]
Counselors and admissions directors tend to agree that in a few selected cases, connections were important. A report based on a survey of admissions directors suggested that "whom you know does matter", since higher-level administrators and prominent alumni and trustees can exert pressure on the admissions departments to admit certain applicants.[250]
Other considerations[edit]
There was a report that more colleges are resorting to computerized fact-checking software, as well as anti-plagiarism tools such as Turnitin, which checks documents for unoriginal content on the web,[131] possibly as a response to well-publicized scandals in which a student won admission to Harvard University by fraudulent means.[265] Supplementary materials generally carry "no weight" in college admissions, according to one view.[35] A report in Time Magazine suggested that many elite colleges used a vaguer measure of institutional fit to decide who is admitted, which is based on nonacademic qualities and may favor "underrepresented minorities and students who demonstrate exceptional talent."[208] Students who take a "gap year" between high school and college can benefit if the year was enriching and developing and helped the student mature.[69]
Acceptances and rejections[edit]
Notifications[edit]
Students are usually notified of a college's decision in April, sometimes in the last two weeks of March, unless they had applied using an early approach, and are usually notified by email,[241] although some colleges still send "fat" envelopes (usually an acceptance) or "thin" envelopes (usually a rejection). A trend appears to be declining percentages of acceptances to leading schools.[266] There are indications that the percentage of students who say "yes" to an offer of admission (the yield) has been declining, from 49 percent in 2001 to 43 percent in 2009.[7] Admitted students may also be awarded financial aid. There are two kinds of financial aid: need-based aid, awarded entirely on the financial specifics of the student's family, and merit-based aid, given to students judged to show exceptional academic promise. Several reports confirm that accepted students who are dissatisfied with an aid offer should contact the college to see if the offer can be improved.[99][35] International students who have been accepted should complete an I-20 form.[39] A disappointing aid package may be appealed with a polite call to the school's financial aid office, while being thankful for any funds that have already been offered.[99] In some cases, it is possible to bargain with a school for a more generous aid package, particularly if there is a more generous offer from a second school which the first school sees as a competitor. One report suggested that even by May 2012, there were 375 colleges which still had space for freshmen or transfer applicants for fall of 2012.[267] Seniors accepted to college are expected to maintain good grades during the spring; for example, one hundred high school applicants accepted to Texas Christian University, whose grades plummeted in the spring of their senior year as a symptom of senioritis, received so-called "fear of God" letters from an admissions dean asking them to explain themselves, and threatening to rescind offers of admission.[268]
Wait list considerations[edit]
Colleges use waitlists to hedge their bets, uncertain about how many accepted students will say yes, and to draw applicants from the waitlist when vacancies open. In addition, waitlists allow colleges to target acceptance letters to students likely to attend to maintain the college's selectivity ranking and yield.
About half of colleges use a wait list, particularly those which accept fewer than half of all incoming applications.[4][30][269] Since students on average tend to be sending out more applications, colleges have been having a tougher time knowing for certain whether the students to whom they have offered admission will, in fact, attend in the fall. Some of the uncertainty is related to the phenomenon of students applying to more and more schools, sometimes 15 or more, to increase their chances in a statistical sense, but this adds a new layer of guesswork for colleges trying to predict how many accepted students will say yes,[270] and puts waitlisted students in "limbo"[271] or the "basic equivalent of purgatory," according to US News.[272] In addition, many colleges lose some students due to a phenomenon sometimes called summer melt,[273] meaning that some students, even ones who have sent in a deposit, will not show up in the fall, and melt away, and this "melt percentage" can be as high as 5% to 10% of persons who have paid a deposit.
The admission process is a complicated dance of supply and demand for colleges. And this spring, many institutions have accepted fewer applicants, and placed more on waiting lists, until it becomes clear over the next few weeks how many spots remain.
—Jacques Steinberg in The New York Times, April 2010[270]
As a result, colleges use wait lists as a hedge to make sure they have enough students in the fall. Some schools "under-invite" applicants in the regular admissions season to appear highly selective and then about-face and accept them from their wait lists later.[8] One report is that Vanderbilt gets a tenth of their freshman class from the wait list.[8] But it varies from college to college and from year to year. For example, in 2010 Stanford and Yale wait-listed 1,000 students while Duke wait-listed 3,000 students.[271] Overall, one survey suggested that 30% of wait-listed students are eventually accepted,[271] but this is an average figure for all wait-listed students, and the percentage is dramatically lower at elite or prestigious schools. There is a report suggesting that in recent years, the lists are more fluid than in previous years in the sense that there is more activity regarding wait lists which have become more of a "safety net" for colleges rather than students.[11] Estimates vary about how many college applicants find themselves on a wait list; one report was that 10% of applicants were wait-listed.[272]
Average yields and wait list acceptances
for selected schools 2009-2010
Sources and notes:[274][275][276][277]
College Yield Wait list
acceptances
Harvard 75% 70
Dartmouth 52% 95
Stanford 71% 76
U. Pennsylvania 63%
SUNY New Paltz 21%
Cornell 49%
Amherst 35
Lafayette 26%
U. North Carolina 54%
U. Iowa 33%
Connecticut College 30% 44
Colorado College 35%
One adviser suggested that students who are wait-listed "work the wait list" by staying in touch with the admissions office to make sure they know the student will attend if accepted,[11] and possibly take steps such as forwarding new grades and making a subsequent college visit,[41] or send a one-page letter or 60-second video describing a strong desire to attend and the reasons.[270][276] A former dean of admissions at Franklin and Marshall College suggests that students not view the wait list letter as a "polite denial" but rather as a possible opportunity.[41] A second report in 2011 confirmed this, and it suggested that private colleges without "billion-dollar endowments or 40,000 applicants" were finding that the period from May to the start of classes in fall was a time of uncertainty, with many institutions seeking new applicants, and unsure how many of the applicants that had promised to attend would, in fact, show up in the fall.[278] What can happen is that institutions at the top of the "food chain" accept students from their wait lists, and these students in turn sacrifice their deposit to schools lower down the chain, generating vacancies and uncertainty.[278] A downside to wait lists is that by the time a student is accepted, there may be much less money available for scholarships or grants.[11] There was a report in The Wall Street Journal of a few colleges such as Franklin & Marshall which deliberately waitlisted overqualified students on the assumption that even if accepted, they would almost certainly not enroll.[114] The alleged purpose was to boost the admissions yield rate––the percentage of students who accept a college's admissions offer––as a means to improve the college's overall performance on the influential US News college rankings.[114]
Duke University in 2010 had 27,000 freshman applicants, accepted 4,000 and placed 856 on its waiting list in April, since it was uncertain how many of those accepted would choose to attend; in this sense, the wait list is a form of hedge for the university to guard against uncertainty.[270] Duke does not rank students on the wait list, but chooses based on other characteristics.
The consensus view is that these are important, although Mamlet and Vandeverde feel the scores "don't count as much as people think they do."[95] There are many reports that admissions departments consider only the highest test results in different test subsections, sometimes called superscore results or superscoring,[232] so if a student takes a standardized test during multiple sittings, for example, the highest math score and the highest verbal scores will be considered, regardless of which particular test date they were achieved.[233] Two sources in the Washington Post suggested that colleges routinely superscore the SAT test but rarely the ACT,[234] possibly because of difficulty processing five separate rounded numbers.[235]
Rigor of high school courses[edit]
Analysis of high school applicants.png
A consensus view is that taking rigorous high school courses is a plus.[69] Guidance counselors report that admissions personnel take a student's course of study into serious consideration when evaluating applications.[41][42] Admissions officers construct a high school profile and take into account such data as curriculum offerings, demographics, and grade distributions at the high school.[41] One adviser suggested taking the hardest courses that there were, and that the worst thing, in terms of evaluations, was to drop a hard course.[236]
Personal evaluation[edit]
Athletic ability[edit]
Athletes in popular sports such as football are recruited by colleges hoping to improve their athletic programs.
A survey of admissions officers revealed that 28% agreed that their school had accepted athletes despite having lower grades and test scores than others.[23] A survey by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that schools with strong athletics departments tended to have athletes with lower SAT scores than non-athletic students.[11] Athletes get better treatment even at elite colleges, according to one academic study.[11] A report suggested that some applications by athletes go first to a special committee for review by coaches, who may then, in turn, advocate for particular players.[18] Recruited athletes who play in-demand or "revenue" sports (i.e. generate ticket sales) such as football[237] or basketball can have a "significantly greater advantage in admissions" than others.[238][239] Some Ivy League coaches, seeking to improve the average academic performance of their teams, would admit mediocre athletes with top academic skills as a means to balance out the stellar athletes with below-average academic ability. To fix this "average score" arrangement in which there had been a temptation to admit an extremely poor student with great athletic ability, many schools went to a banding arrangement. For example, coaches would consider all wrestling applicants within a specified range or band of academic performance, and coaches could admit more wrestler-applicants who showed greater scholastic promise.[240] Howard and Matthew Greene report that coaches do not make admissions decisions, but they can advocate for a particular applicant.[69] And they report that committed athletes should explain in their applications how much time they have used towards perfecting their athletic ability:
We often talk with highly involved athletes who have little time for other activities outside of their sports. In many cases their grades suffer. Most student-athletes are not "recruited" to colleges, but colleges will respect their commitment and drive.
—Howard and Matthew Greene, 2003[69]
Particular skills[edit]
Some colleges are more likely to admit students with in-demand skills, such as writing, debating, theater management, science competitions, organizational skills, musical skills, and so forth.[239]
Personal initiative[edit]
Admissions personnel look favorably on applications where it is clear that the student, himself or herself, appears to be firmly in control over the whole application process; the appearance of pushy parents or coaching can have a dampening effect. Ideally it is best if the student, himself or herself, is in charge of organizing the college search and decision-making process; the "student must be in the driver's seat".[241] One admissions dean explained:[21] And admissions officers are turned off by "micromanaging parents".[67]
Students who really manage the show on their own, fill out the application on their own, make their own appointments for interviews, correspond with you on their own email account -- these students get extra points because they're managing their lives.
—Jennifer Delahunty, Admissions Dean at Kenyon[21]
Demonstrated interest[edit]
This can be an important factor in some situations, sometimes a "driving factor",[61] since a college may be more likely to say yes to a student likely to matriculate. Accordingly, it has been advised to become knowledgeable about schools being applied to, and "tailor each application accordingly."[43] College visits (including overnight ones), interviews, attending College Fair days, comments in the essay, and other indications of interest can be a factor for many colleges concerned about their yield––the percent of students who will say yes to an offer of enrollment.[18][114] According to Andover's college counseling director Sean Logan, it is important to have numerous contact points with colleges to show demonstrated interest: visiting, phone contact, emailing, visits to websites (including number of clicks as well as length of time on the website), whether a college visit included a tour and interview, and whether a college-recommended off-campus personal interview was done.[61] Schools such as Connecticut College and Emory University have been credited as "popularizing the yield game" by refusing well-qualified students who failed to show much real interest in attending, as a way to boost their yield scores.[114] One top high school student was waitlisted at a "likely" college[242] for showing lack of interest:
We assumed they weren't coming, because we didn't have much contact from them. We know they're probably using us as a back-up and they haven't done much to show any sincere interest, so we decided to waitlist them.
—Andover college counseling director Sean Logan, remembering a comment from a college admissions director.[61]
Active participation[edit]
Two wrestlers.
Students with special skills such as wrestling may be given preferential treatment.
One report suggested that colleges seek students who will be actively involved on campus and not spending every day studying alone in their rooms.[243] As a result, they are interested in teacher recommendations which suggest active classroom participation in high school classrooms, describing students who speak up in class, who ask questions, who are almost like an "unpaid teaching assistant" to help a high school teacher make a class great, or make a weak teacher's class bearable.[244]
Weeding out problem people[edit]
Admissions tries to screen out difficult people, spoilers, and "self-involved brats".[245] According to Dunbar, many colleges are "afraid of aggression", and recommends avoiding "harsh humor" or signs of severe emotion, anger, and aggression.[245] Admissions evaluators look for signals possibly indicating difficult people, such as nonconstructive or disrespectful criticisms of people by an applicant, or evidence of a drug or alcohol problem.[245] Colleges try to weed out dependent people who either follow their parents too closely, or do only what the "cool kids" do. Dunbar advised that "parental control of any kind, if detected, can be very damaging", and advised that students should not appear to be controlled by parental whims.[246]
Analysis of essays[edit]
Picture of a college building with steeple.
Dartmouth College admissions, according to Michele Hernandez, spends a week examining the possibles or Ps, and after much deliberation, accepts perhaps a sixth of them.
Michele Hernandez suggested that almost all admissions essays were weak, cliche-ridden, and "not worth reading".[193][247] The staff gets thousands of essays and have to wade through most of them.[248] When she worked as an admissions director at Dartmouth, she noticed that most essays were only read for three minutes.[193] Some too-common essay types were the "outward bound" essay about how a person discovered their inner grit while hiking tough mountains, or the "community service" essay about how a student discovered, while working among disadvantaged peoples, that "all persons were the same".[193] Admissions officers seek to learn how a person thinks, what kind of person they are, and their level of intellectual promise.[193] Essays are generally important only in borderline cases.[248]
Other factors[edit]
One report was that at Ivy League universities, 40% of students were so-called "special cases" including student-athletes, minorities, low-income, legacies, and development cases, and that admissions standards were typically lowered for these groups.[18]
Full-paying students[edit]
While there is general agreement that chances for admission are higher for students who are prepared to pay the full price, there are indications that this has been even more prevalent in the past few years given economic uncertainty and rising college costs,[249] particularly at schools without large endowments. Half of admissions officers at both public universities and a third of officers at four-year colleges were actively seeking students who could "pay full price" and did not need financial aid, according to one survey of 462 admissions directors and managers in 2011.[250] The report suggested that full-pay students tended to have lower high school grades and test scores than other students, compared to other applicants, on average.[250] Two other reports confirmed that public university admissions officers were actively seeking out-of-state and international students since they paid higher rates for tuition.[23][250] Another report found that one in ten admissions officers had said that their college admitted full-pay students despite their having lower average grades and test scores.[23] Reports vary about whether the financial neediness of applicants impacts admissions chances; one suggested that applicants with strong academic credentials or talents are more likely to get financial aid, but that depending on the college, "borderline admits" needing money were most vulnerable;[251] a second report was that "colleges like rich students".[251] One view was that financial aid depends on how a specific student compares with other students:
What this means is that your financial aid package from a reach college may not be as attractive as the package from one of your target, or well matched, colleges. If you are looking for generous scholarship aid, you need to look at colleges and universities where your academic profile is strong compared to that of the average admitted student.
—Hannah Serota, college counselor[251]
By contrast, other schools practice need-blind admission.
Geographic diversity[edit]
One view was that state schools strive to admit students from "all parts of a state,"[11] which suggests that applicants who live farther away from a given school had a better chance of admission. But a contrary view was that geographic location of the applicant matters perhaps only slightly, if at all; Hernandez looked at acceptance ratios to Dartmouth for different geographic locations, and found that geographic distance was not a factor influencing admittances.[252]
Race and ethnicity[edit]
Outdoors with people.
Students at the Commons at Green River Community College in Washington.
A survey of admissions personnel suggested that two-fifths had said yes to applicants from minorities despite having lower grades and test scores than other applicants, on average.[23] At the same time, rulings by the Supreme Court have prevented race from becoming an "overriding factor" in college admissions.[11] A report suggested minority students have a better chance overall at selective colleges.[18] In the case of multiracial students, they have a choice of which box to check since it may be perceived either as "gamesmanship" or reflecting one's racial makeup.[253] Some Asian-Americans have felt loathe to describe themselves as Asian, or to reveal information about their ethnic background, on the supposition that college admissions departments discriminate against them because of their ethnicity and consider them incorrectly to be "boring academic robots", according to several reports.[18][254] Typically, Asian applicants require a SAT score 140 points above that of a comparable white student, and considerably higher than that of a non-Asian minority, to have a similar chance of admission.[255][256] Asians get a "raw deal" in Ivy admissions, according to Hernandez, and have to be much better students than the typical white applicant to be admitted.[257] She wrote that it benefits an applicant to be African American, Latino, or Native American, since colleges can advertise their diversity as a result.[258] The admissions practices of Harvard and Princeton were investigated for possible discrimination against Asian-American applicants by Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights.[255] An important development in 2012 is that the Supreme Court decided to review the case of Fisher v. University of Texas which may affect university-based admissions decisions based on race.[259][260]
Legacy applicants[edit]
Main article: Legacy preferences
There are differing views about how important it is to have a family member or relative who also attended a college. It is clear that it is a factor; one report suggested that having a family member who is an alumnus gives "a leg up" for applicants.[11][261] One report suggested that siblings do not count as legacies.[261] In some cases, a parent's attendance at a related graduate school counts as a legacy, but most colleges do not count this.[261] Many selective private colleges have a higher admit rate for alumni children as a way to "keep the larger set of alumni happy and giving", and being a legacy applicant can mean as much as "100 or 200 points on the SAT".[262]
Legacy admissions have had a history of controversy; economist Peter Sacks criticized the practice of legacy admissions as a "social reproduction process" in which "elite institutions have an implicit bargain with their alumni ... ’You give us money, and we will move your kid to the front of the line.'"[238] Another agreed that legacies perpetuated a "hereditary aristocracy".[262] But an opposing view is that all colleges, to varying extents, make choices as part of the admissions process, including state schools which charge in-state residents (with taxpaying parents) a lower rate than out-of-state residents, and it was argued that there was not really much difference between taxpaying parents contributing to a state school as well as generous alumni contributing to a private school—both with the possibility that it will help their offspring get into college.[238] Consultant Donald Dunbar suggested that admitting legacies encourages future donations, and in turn these incoming money flows help the school subsidize the education of more minority students;[263] another source suggested that alumni gifts was important in helping a college pay for need-blind programs.[262] Legacy admissions was criticized by Daniel Golden in his book The Price of Admission in which elite schools gave "heavy preferences to the wealthy", according to essayist Neal Gabler in the Boston Globe.[64]
Family wealth[edit]
Main article: Development case
In certain cases, family wealth of applicants is considered, based on potential to make a substantial donation[18] to the school (above and beyond paying tuition, and separate from considerations such as ability or fame). Such candidates are known as development cases, and are intended to bolster the finances of the university, especially to its further mission. The practice is not widely discussed by universities that use it, but is reported to be used by a number of top-ranked schools, Ivy League and otherwise, and has been associated with Duke University (which acknowledges its use) and Brown University (which does not comment), especially since the 1980s.[264]
Personal connections[edit]
Counselors and admissions directors tend to agree that in a few selected cases, connections were important. A report based on a survey of admissions directors suggested that "whom you know does matter", since higher-level administrators and prominent alumni and trustees can exert pressure on the admissions departments to admit certain applicants.[250]
Other considerations[edit]
There was a report that more colleges are resorting to computerized fact-checking software, as well as anti-plagiarism tools such as Turnitin, which checks documents for unoriginal content on the web,[131] possibly as a response to well-publicized scandals in which a student won admission to Harvard University by fraudulent means.[265] Supplementary materials generally carry "no weight" in college admissions, according to one view.[35] A report in Time Magazine suggested that many elite colleges used a vaguer measure of institutional fit to decide who is admitted, which is based on nonacademic qualities and may favor "underrepresented minorities and students who demonstrate exceptional talent."[208] Students who take a "gap year" between high school and college can benefit if the year was enriching and developing and helped the student mature.[69]
Acceptances and rejections[edit]
Notifications[edit]
Students are usually notified of a college's decision in April, sometimes in the last two weeks of March, unless they had applied using an early approach, and are usually notified by email,[241] although some colleges still send "fat" envelopes (usually an acceptance) or "thin" envelopes (usually a rejection). A trend appears to be declining percentages of acceptances to leading schools.[266] There are indications that the percentage of students who say "yes" to an offer of admission (the yield) has been declining, from 49 percent in 2001 to 43 percent in 2009.[7] Admitted students may also be awarded financial aid. There are two kinds of financial aid: need-based aid, awarded entirely on the financial specifics of the student's family, and merit-based aid, given to students judged to show exceptional academic promise. Several reports confirm that accepted students who are dissatisfied with an aid offer should contact the college to see if the offer can be improved.[99][35] International students who have been accepted should complete an I-20 form.[39] A disappointing aid package may be appealed with a polite call to the school's financial aid office, while being thankful for any funds that have already been offered.[99] In some cases, it is possible to bargain with a school for a more generous aid package, particularly if there is a more generous offer from a second school which the first school sees as a competitor. One report suggested that even by May 2012, there were 375 colleges which still had space for freshmen or transfer applicants for fall of 2012.[267] Seniors accepted to college are expected to maintain good grades during the spring; for example, one hundred high school applicants accepted to Texas Christian University, whose grades plummeted in the spring of their senior year as a symptom of senioritis, received so-called "fear of God" letters from an admissions dean asking them to explain themselves, and threatening to rescind offers of admission.[268]
Wait list considerations[edit]
Colleges use waitlists to hedge their bets, uncertain about how many accepted students will say yes, and to draw applicants from the waitlist when vacancies open. In addition, waitlists allow colleges to target acceptance letters to students likely to attend to maintain the college's selectivity ranking and yield.
About half of colleges use a wait list, particularly those which accept fewer than half of all incoming applications.[4][30][269] Since students on average tend to be sending out more applications, colleges have been having a tougher time knowing for certain whether the students to whom they have offered admission will, in fact, attend in the fall. Some of the uncertainty is related to the phenomenon of students applying to more and more schools, sometimes 15 or more, to increase their chances in a statistical sense, but this adds a new layer of guesswork for colleges trying to predict how many accepted students will say yes,[270] and puts waitlisted students in "limbo"[271] or the "basic equivalent of purgatory," according to US News.[272] In addition, many colleges lose some students due to a phenomenon sometimes called summer melt,[273] meaning that some students, even ones who have sent in a deposit, will not show up in the fall, and melt away, and this "melt percentage" can be as high as 5% to 10% of persons who have paid a deposit.
The admission process is a complicated dance of supply and demand for colleges. And this spring, many institutions have accepted fewer applicants, and placed more on waiting lists, until it becomes clear over the next few weeks how many spots remain.
—Jacques Steinberg in The New York Times, April 2010[270]
As a result, colleges use wait lists as a hedge to make sure they have enough students in the fall. Some schools "under-invite" applicants in the regular admissions season to appear highly selective and then about-face and accept them from their wait lists later.[8] One report is that Vanderbilt gets a tenth of their freshman class from the wait list.[8] But it varies from college to college and from year to year. For example, in 2010 Stanford and Yale wait-listed 1,000 students while Duke wait-listed 3,000 students.[271] Overall, one survey suggested that 30% of wait-listed students are eventually accepted,[271] but this is an average figure for all wait-listed students, and the percentage is dramatically lower at elite or prestigious schools. There is a report suggesting that in recent years, the lists are more fluid than in previous years in the sense that there is more activity regarding wait lists which have become more of a "safety net" for colleges rather than students.[11] Estimates vary about how many college applicants find themselves on a wait list; one report was that 10% of applicants were wait-listed.[272]
Average yields and wait list acceptances
for selected schools 2009-2010
Sources and notes:[274][275][276][277]
College Yield Wait list
acceptances
Harvard 75% 70
Dartmouth 52% 95
Stanford 71% 76
U. Pennsylvania 63%
SUNY New Paltz 21%
Cornell 49%
Amherst 35
Lafayette 26%
U. North Carolina 54%
U. Iowa 33%
Connecticut College 30% 44
Colorado College 35%
One adviser suggested that students who are wait-listed "work the wait list" by staying in touch with the admissions office to make sure they know the student will attend if accepted,[11] and possibly take steps such as forwarding new grades and making a subsequent college visit,[41] or send a one-page letter or 60-second video describing a strong desire to attend and the reasons.[270][276] A former dean of admissions at Franklin and Marshall College suggests that students not view the wait list letter as a "polite denial" but rather as a possible opportunity.[41] A second report in 2011 confirmed this, and it suggested that private colleges without "billion-dollar endowments or 40,000 applicants" were finding that the period from May to the start of classes in fall was a time of uncertainty, with many institutions seeking new applicants, and unsure how many of the applicants that had promised to attend would, in fact, show up in the fall.[278] What can happen is that institutions at the top of the "food chain" accept students from their wait lists, and these students in turn sacrifice their deposit to schools lower down the chain, generating vacancies and uncertainty.[278] A downside to wait lists is that by the time a student is accepted, there may be much less money available for scholarships or grants.[11] There was a report in The Wall Street Journal of a few colleges such as Franklin & Marshall which deliberately waitlisted overqualified students on the assumption that even if accepted, they would almost certainly not enroll.[114] The alleged purpose was to boost the admissions yield rate––the percentage of students who accept a college's admissions offer––as a means to improve the college's overall performance on the influential US News college rankings.[114]
Duke University in 2010 had 27,000 freshman applicants, accepted 4,000 and placed 856 on its waiting list in April, since it was uncertain how many of those accepted would choose to attend; in this sense, the wait list is a form of hedge for the university to guard against uncertainty.[270] Duke does not rank students on the wait list, but chooses based on other characteristics.
No comments:
Post a Comment