The first morning session I attended was "What Admission Directors Think" a share out of the results of an annual anonymous survey by Admission Directors. A few stats:
- 2/3 of responders said they had not met their admission goals by May 1
- 29% of colleges continue to pursue students after May 1 (aka poaching students who have already committed elsewhere)
- 1% of public colleges and 2% of private colleges admit to falsifying data when reporting to organizations like US News and World Report
- 7% believe there are systems in place to prevent false data from being reported
- Around 35% feel their boss judges them based on the school's ranking
I could expand on most of these topics, but for the sake of time I'll just say that this session left me with a lot to think about. It is also a reminder that colleges are made up of humans just like applicants and their moral compass can get just as turned around sometimes. The final piece of trivia that I learned is that the next predicted wave of international students after China will be Brazil. Expect to see Portuguese programs popping up where you might not expect them.
The next session I attended was "The Impact of Wait Lists in College Admission." This session was really a pleasure to attend. While I can't say I learned a tremendous amount of new information (contacting a school when you are waitlisted is recommended but not required, very few people traditionally get off the waitlist, schools waitlist way more students than they need to as an insurance policy to shape the class, etc), I did greatly appreciate the candor of the colleges that participated. The session was transparent and clear. Each participant college (Carlton, Pomona, University of Chicago and University of Michigan) gave both data and anecdotal explanations of their waitlist activity. My one criticism of the practices that were described would be aimed at the universities who both utilized what seem to be obviously bloated lists. But old traits die hard and it can't be easy for a director of admission to fix a problem that doesn't have a direct negative impact on them. I was interested to see how varied the response to join the waitlist was depending on the school. At Carleton, out of 1450 students waitlisted in 2013, only 385 ask to remain on the waitlist (none came off that year). Yet, at Chicago in 2013, 3000 students were waitlisted and 2886 accepted their spot (and, are you sitting down, 26 got a chance to move off the list and join the class). There were a few common practices among all four schools - mainly that the waitlist is not ranked or sorted at the time of decisions. Decisions about who to bring off the list, if any students at all, isn't determined until the shape of the class unfolds. Each school also gave more than the recommended minimum of 72 hours response time, in fact the panelists grant between a week and 10 days. All in all, this session was really well organized and extra points to the great moderator, a school counselor from Minnesota.
The afternoon was filled with the exhibitor fair and college fair. The picture above comes from one of the Exhibitor booths. One highlight from the fair- props to Williams College who includes their SAT Subject Test averages in their printed profile material. Very helpful!
Tonight I attended receptions hosted by Northeastern, Colleges That Change Lives, and the National Catholic College Admission Association. Big thanks to them for the chance to network, I can't believe we are already 2/3 of the way finished with this year's conference!
More to come tomorrow!
Posts
