MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: Efficient Frontier on June 15, 2018, 05:40:21 AM
-
Wonder if UofC also has insight into SATs/ACTs not being as predictive of success as previously thought.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/university-of-chicago-drops-sat-act-requirement-for-admissions-1529009194?emailToken=e88e2cce6cf9c81e2bb4291743347c61LsDiwziPVRScfRE2xEeti4icjtbo04EyqGBXyRmndinQ85ZitSeRXfNmt6ZYO1mpcxygtX1XWzV9xaTjGXDj/S7vBi0fnzix9c94Mkiqo08j41KhmF91BVZtJtonDiLt&reflink=article_copyURL_share
-
Who is going to want to go to that school if they can't brag about the high score you need to get accepted?
-
Kinda pointless no? If every other school still requires the SAT/ACT kids are still gonna have to take it.
-
How is this going to play in the Northeast????
-
Not alone
https://www.unigo.com/get-to-college/college-search/test-optional-colleges-10-colleges-that-dont-require-sat-or-act-scores
-
How is this going to play in the Northeast????
Obviously U of C is being dropped from consideration as we speak.
-
I think it is much easier for selective schools with large application pools to do this. It also gives them more flexibility to create diversity in their class without objective criteria that can inspire snowflakes to file lawsuits.
-
I think it is much easier for selective schools with large application pools to do this. It also gives them more flexibility to create diversity in their class without objective criteria that can inspire snowflakes to file lawsuits.
Asians are the group most likely to file lawsuits currently in this realm. Latest is lawsuit against Harvard, but a number of these were filed in last three years. Not sure if they are snowflakes or what the definition of diversity is.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/harvard-asian-admission.html
-
Kinda pointless no? If every other school still requires the SAT/ACT kids are still gonna have to take it.
They don't.
My daughter went to Lawrence, a very good (but hardly elite) small liberal arts school in Appleton. Not all that long after she got there, they stopped requiring any SAT/ACT scores.
Here is their stated policy:
We consider test scores if you elect to submit them, and we will accept self-reported scores. We are test optional because we know that there are inherent flaws in trying to sum up your ability and potential by taking a single exam. If you are pleased with your scores, we would be pleased to see them, but we don’t look at you any differently if you do not submit.
As the link provided by chicos II shows, there are quite a few schools that no longer require these scores. It's hard to call it a "thing" yet, but the number does seem to be growing slowly.
I consider it a very positive change.
My daughter got a 29 on her ACT and wanted at least a 30. She studied and studied and studied, took it again, and got her 30. She was pleased, but it was hard work.
My son, who was a mediocre student but tested well, did absolutely zero ACT prep. He showed up, took the test, and got the same 30. Leading my daughter to say: "I hate you."
My daughter applied herself at Lawrence and did very well. My son was an eff-up and flunked out of Illinois after a year. (He's now doing great, but that was a tension-filled time in our house.)
In other words, as predictors of academic success, the ACT didn't predict much. At least by this admittedly very limited anecdotal evidence.
-
My understanding is that standardized tests are a relatively good predictor of college success - meaning persisting and ultimately graduating.
However they are not as strong as predictor as the degree of difficulty of the high school courses (AP, honors, etc.) and the grades received in those courses. My guess is that Chicago feels the test scores are unnecessary since it already has the high school transcript.
-
My daughter got a 29 on her ACT and wanted at least a 30. She studied and studied and studied, took it again, and got her 30. She was pleased, but it was hard work.
My son, who was a mediocre student but tested well, did absolutely zero ACT prep. He showed up, took the test, and got the same 30. Leading my daughter to say: "I hate you."
Yeah, we're getting into this dynamic at our house. My first two cracked 30 (don't recall exactly what they got...I know she beat him by one...which she reminds him about...being extremely competitive has served her well). They did a bit of prep, but nothing out of the ordinary. My third just isn't as good at standardized tests as the first two. She's really worked and taken the test several times (including last week...fingers crossed). Her score is good, but she hasn't gotten to 30 (which is kind of a "magic" number for a lot of schools). Her grades are comparable to theirs and she's really worked hard and pushed herself in HS. She just doesn't click on these tests like her older siblings. I'm very curious to see how it all plays out in the admissions/scholarship process.
-
Yeah, we're getting into this dynamic at our house. My first two cracked 30 (don't recall exactly what they got...I know she beat him by one...which she reminds him about...being extremely competitive has served her well). They did a bit of prep, but nothing out of the ordinary. My third just isn't as good at standardized tests as the first two. She's really worked and taken the test several times (including last week...fingers crossed). Her score is good, but she hasn't gotten to 30 (which is kind of a "magic" number for a lot of schools). Her grades are comparable to theirs and she's really worked hard and pushed herself in HS. She just doesn't click on these tests like her older siblings. I'm very curious to see how it all plays out in the admissions/scholarship process.
Lawrence U, baby!
jk ... hope it all works out to her satisfaction.
-
My understanding is that standardized tests are a relatively good predictor of college success - meaning persisting and ultimately graduating.
However they are not as strong as predictor as the degree of difficulty of the high school courses (AP, honors, etc.) and the grades received in those courses. My guess is that Chicago feels the test scores are unnecessary since it already has the high school transcript.
This is absolutely true. Unfortunately, in some cases, the problems with testing can even affect this. Our kids' HS uses a standard test at the outset and uses it to place kids in honors courses. Same problem as mentioned in a previous post for my third daughter. She didn't get placed in honors as a freshman, and has been pushing hard ever since. She's gone to department heads and fought to be placed in honors and AP courses. Against their recommendation on several occasions. But she's worked hard and done great in those classes. I think that some kids who don't test well don't do that, so they have the lower test scores and don't have the rigorous HS courses.
We often recall the comment that the head of the math department made when she asked to be placed in AP Calc: "you will struggle." She did it anyway, worked her ass off, and did great. I told her that this exchange..."you will struggle"...will make a great theme for college application essay. And, that teacher is writing her faculty recommendation. I'm really hoping that the fact that she sought out harder classes and did well will help boost her up if her ACT/SAT scores aren't where she wants them. And, we'll have to look into these schools that are test optional.
-
I got a 33 on my act. I was a veeeeery bad student. Both in high school and college. I just didn't want to put in the time. The only reason I got accepted at places was because of the act. Glad I got out when I did haha.
-
How is this going to play in the Northeast????
As long as U of C continues to remain a highly selective school it won’t have any negative impact.
-
How is this going to play in the Northeast????
As long as U of C continues to remain a highly selective school it won’t have any negative impact.
I think it will work out well. More kids will apply now, as many self select out do to perception of high test score requirements. Spaces available will stay the same so acceptance rate will be even lower.
-
I may be naive but here's my question:
If you don't have standardized tests, how do you measure whether a student is prepared to go to college?
Consider that Student "A" goes to a college preparatory high school, get's a 3.0+ GPA, strong references and strong academic performance throughout high school. She is applying to the University of Excellence, which is highly selective, a near Ivy and has a huge academic reputation.
Now consider Student "B". Goes to West Bumfork Community High School in central Florida. He's athlete who was important to the football team. He has the same 3.0+ grade point, has apparently good academics and the benefit of playing football. But he skated because he needed strong grades to foster a football career and to assure West Bumfork defeats North Bumfork. His father went to the University of Excellence and he wants his son to go there as a legacy.
Student "C" has a learning disability. She has parents who want her to go to The University of Excellence. She goes to a good high school, gets a 3.0+ GPA and has a few teachers who will talk about how wonderful she is. She probably belongs in college and has a great attitude et al. But her coursework is LD-type classes.
At day's end, I always believed the ACT and SAT was designed to "standardize" these three applicants. They allow for the equalization of inherently unequal standards between high schools and allow for a comprehensive picture of a person in college. Perhaps someone can educate me, but my point is that all GPAs are not equal and all class rankings are not equal.
-
I may be naive but here's my question:
If you don't have standardized tests, how do you measure whether a student is prepared to go to college?
Consider that Student "A" goes to a college preparatory high school, get's a 3.0+ GPA, strong references and strong academic performance throughout high school. She is applying to the University of Excellence, which is highly selective, a near Ivy and has a huge academic reputation.
Now consider Student "B". Goes to West Bumfork Community High School in central Florida. He's athlete who was important to the football team. He has the same 3.0+ grade point, has apparently good academics and the benefit of playing football. But he skated because he needed strong grades to foster a football career and to assure West Bumfork defeats North Bumfork. His father went to the University of Excellence and he wants his son to go there as a legacy.
Student "C" has a learning disability. She has parents who want her to go to The University of Excellence. She goes to a good high school, gets a 3.0+ GPA and has a few teachers who will talk about how wonderful she is. She probably belongs in college and has a great attitude et al. But her coursework is LD-type classes.
At day's end, I always believed the ACT and SAT was designed to "standardize" these three applicants. They allow for the equalization of inherently unequal standards between high schools and allow for a comprehensive picture of a person in college. Perhaps someone can educate me, but my point is that all GPAs are not equal and all class rankings are not equal.
I don't have all the answers, but I guess I'd judge them on my face-to-face meetings with them, their essays, and their body of work.
-
I may be naive but here's my question:
If you don't have standardized tests, how do you measure whether a student is prepared to go to college?
Consider that Student "A" goes to a college preparatory high school, get's a 3.0+ GPA, strong references and strong academic performance throughout high school. She is applying to the University of Excellence, which is highly selective, a near Ivy and has a huge academic reputation.
Now consider Student "B". Goes to West Bumfork Community High School in central Florida. He's athlete who was important to the football team. He has the same 3.0+ grade point, has apparently good academics and the benefit of playing football. But he skated because he needed strong grades to foster a football career and to assure West Bumfork defeats North Bumfork. His father went to the University of Excellence and he wants his son to go there as a legacy.
Student "C" has a learning disability. She has parents who want her to go to The University of Excellence. She goes to a good high school, gets a 3.0+ GPA and has a few teachers who will talk about how wonderful she is. She probably belongs in college and has a great attitude et al. But her coursework is LD-type classes.
At day's end, I always believed the ACT and SAT was designed to "standardize" these three applicants. They allow for the equalization of inherently unequal standards between high schools and allow for a comprehensive picture of a person in college. Perhaps someone can educate me, but my point is that all GPAs are not equal and all class rankings are not equal.
It makes intuitive sense, but all depends on how valuable each of the variables are in predicting success.
I have zero doubt that UofC has concluded that ACT/SAT scores have less explanatory power for success at the school than the others they still collect.
-
I may be naive but here's my question:
If you don't have standardized tests, how do you measure whether a student is prepared to go to college?
Consider that Student "A" goes to a college preparatory high school, get's a 3.0+ GPA, strong references and strong academic performance throughout high school. She is applying to the University of Excellence, which is highly selective, a near Ivy and has a huge academic reputation.
Now consider Student "B". Goes to West Bumfork Community High School in central Florida. He's athlete who was important to the football team. He has the same 3.0+ grade point, has apparently good academics and the benefit of playing football. But he skated because he needed strong grades to foster a football career and to assure West Bumfork defeats North Bumfork. His father went to the University of Excellence and he wants his son to go there as a legacy.
Student "C" has a learning disability. She has parents who want her to go to The University of Excellence. She goes to a good high school, gets a 3.0+ GPA and has a few teachers who will talk about how wonderful she is. She probably belongs in college and has a great attitude et al. But her coursework is LD-type classes.
At day's end, I always believed the ACT and SAT was designed to "standardize" these three applicants. They allow for the equalization of inherently unequal standards between high schools and allow for a comprehensive picture of a person in college. Perhaps someone can educate me, but my point is that all GPAs are not equal and all class rankings are not equal.
BTW - this is completely a pet peeve of mine, but the use of “Ivies” as a blanket category of the best schools in the US isn’t a relevant distinction.
Ivy is an athletic league. Nobody should be confused about Cornell being a more prestigious institution than Duke, CalTech, Chicago, Northwestern, etc.
Cornell/Brown are not in the same realm of exclusivity or prestige.
-
BTW - this is completely a pet peeve of mine, but the use of “Ivies” as a blanket category of the best schools in the US isn’t a relevant distinction.
Ivy is an athletic league. Nobody should be confused about Cornell being a more prestigious institution than Duke, CalTech, Chicago, Northwestern, etc.
Cornell/Brown are not in the same realm of exclusivity or prestige.
(https://i.imgflip.com/7emog.jpg)
-
BTW - this is completely a pet peeve of mine, but the use of “Ivies” as a blanket category of the best schools in the US isn’t a relevant distinction.
Ivy is an athletic league. Nobody should be confused about Cornell being a more prestigious institution than Duke, (#9) CalTech (#10), Chicago, Northwestern (#11), etc.
Cornell (tie for #12)/Brown (tie for #12) are not in the same realm of exclusivity or prestige.
Uh.... yeah okay dude. Whatever you and the arrogant circles you travel in want to believe.
-
Uh.... yeah okay dude. Whatever you and the arrogant circles you travel in want to believe.
nicely played on the edit of Frontier's post.
-
OK, here comes the next fun episode of Name That Scooper!
Who is Efficient Frontier?
The sample size isn't large enough for me to know yet ... but we haven't seen Smuggles (Heisey) around these parts for awhile now, have we?
-
I don't have all the answers, but I guess I'd judge them on my face-to-face meetings with them, their essays, and their body of work.
What face to face meetings are you doing in undergrad?
-
What face to face meetings are you doing in undergrad?
smoochin' with the ladiez, aina?
-
What face to face meetings are you doing in undergrad?
Back in 2004-05, when my daughter was going around looking at small midwest colleges like Carleton, Grinnell, Lawrence and Dennison, she met with admission people at several schools, and even a couple of deans and university presidents.
A few weeks after her Carleton visit, she received a personal call from the head of admissions inviting her to go there even though she had "only" scored 30 on her ACT. And it wasn't because her daddy was rich or because she was a minority. She made an impression on people there. Ended up not going there because it was too expensive and Lawrence offered a lot more aid, but Carleton often is rated in the top-5 in most of those U.S. News ratings.
But I dunno ... maybe they don't do those kinds of things any more, though. I've been out of the game for quite some time, so others would know better than I do.
-
Back in 2004-05, when my daughter was going around looking at small midwest colleges like Carleton, Grinnell, Lawrence and Dennison, she met with admission people at several schools, and even a couple of deans and university presidents.
A few weeks after her Carleton visit, she received a personal call from the head of admissions inviting her to go there even though she had "only" scored 30 on her ACT. And it wasn't because her daddy was rich or because she was a minority. She made an impression on people there. Ended up not going there because it was too expensive and Lawrence offered a lot more aid, but Carleton often is rated in the top-5 in most of those U.S. News ratings.
But I dunno ... maybe they don't do those kinds of things anymore, though. I've been out of the game for quite some time, so others would know better than I do.
I applied at Marquette, Madison, Purdue, Notre Dame, and Embry-Riddle. I got into all of them and never set foot on campus before an acceptance letter. This was 2012. I could see face to face interviews dying as there would be a large portion of students who wouldn't be able to have the means to do all these interviews.
-
I applied at Marquette, Madison, Purdue, Notre Dame, and Embry-Riddle. I got into all of them and never set foot on campus before an acceptance letter. This was 2012. I could see face to face interviews dying as there would be a large portion of students who wouldn't be able to have the means to do all these interviews.
I didn't do any in 1978, either. Just saying my daughter did. Maybe they are more common with smaller schools, or maybe they aren't done anymore. I fully allow that the latter could be true.
-
I applied at Marquette, Madison, Purdue, Notre Dame, and Embry-Riddle. I got into all of them and never set foot on campus before an acceptance letter. This was 2012. I could see face to face interviews dying as there would be a large portion of students who wouldn't be able to have the means to do all these interviews.
Just so you know, your experience isn't very common. The visit almost always comes before the application at most schools, with the possible exception of the regional publics.
-
What's happening with the college admission criteria is similar to what's happening at companies and governments across the country. We're trying as hard as we can to take an inherently subjective issue -- accepting students for enrollment into a selective or elite university -- and turning it into a so-called objective set of criteria.
We eliminate the SAT/ACT because they are culturally biased. We replace them with an essay, a personal interview or self-disclosures that give an admissions director the capability to evaluate and quantify a candidate based on a subjective set of criteria that has been reduced to numbers. Whether it works or not depends on whether the system being used to evaluate candidates is tilted toward or away from a candidate's specific characteristics.
The success or failure depends less on whether an institution hits its goals and more on whether it avoids a lawsuit.
-
I think it will work out well. More kids will apply now, as many self select out do to perception of high test score requirements. Spaces available will stay the same so acceptance rate will be even lower.
Bingo. It will not make much of a difference on who gets in... but it will result in more applications from some students who have the GPA but not the high test score. Kids with high test scores will still submit their test scores. Kids that don't submit their test scores, are not playing on an even field - it is simply known that they got bad test scores - but maybe they would have gotten in anyway due to other factors.
Kid A with a 4.0 from a great school, great AP record, all the extras and a high test score, versus, the kid B without a test score, kid A gets in unless there is some other factor as work. No different than if kid B had submitted his/her test score and gotten rejected. But in this case kid b thinks he/she has a shot so applies anyway despite the lower test score.
So the results are higher potential rankings by US News:
1. More Applications and more rejections: Means higher selectivity rating, more rejections. All good for the school's rating.
2. Those who would have gotten in anyway with lower test scores, but now don't submit their test scores: Means higher overall accepted test scores for those accepted because a few that got in that would have anyway that now did not submit their test scores. Higher rating.
I see no down side for the school. 99% of those admitted will still have submitted test scores. Those that don't submit test scores are pretty much only getting in if they meet the criteria for those with lower test scores. So, the actual composition of the class changes very, very little.
Marquette should be paying attention. Marquette or UC, could always have an internal test for those who are accepted without test scores, requiring some to take a proficiency or placement test to qualify. And selecting from a pool or offering admittance based upon this alternative test geared to not have the bias of the ACT/SAT multiple choice format, etc. The result, more applications and higher test scores for those admitted. For those who say ranking shouldn't matter - well they do, that is simply reality. We are not competing in an "ought to be world" but in the real world where US News ranking matter.
Hopefully the board of trustees is paying attention now that even the highest ranking schools are playing the US News game.
-
Bingo. It will not make much of a difference on who gets in... but it will result in more applications from some students who have the GPA but not the high test score. Kids with high test scores will still submit their test scores. Kids that don't submit their test scores, are not playing on an even field - it is simply known that they got bad test scores - but maybe they would have gotten in anyway due to other factors.
Kid A with a 4.0 from a great school, great AP record, all the extras and a high test score, versus, the kid B without a test score, kid A gets in unless there is some other factor as work. No different than if kid B had submitted his/her test score and gotten rejected. But in this case kid b thinks he/she has a shot so applies anyway despite the lower test score.
So the results are higher potential rankings by US News:
1. More Applications and more rejections: Means higher selectivity rating, more rejections. All good for the school's rating.
2. Those who would have gotten in anyway with lower test scores, but now don't submit their test scores: Means higher overall accepted test scores for those accepted because a few that got in that would have anyway that now did not submit their test scores. Higher rating.
I see no down side for the school. 99% of those admitted will still have submitted test scores. Those that don't submit test scores are pretty much only getting in if they meet the criteria for those with lower test scores. So, the actual composition of the class changes very, very little.
Marquette should be paying attention. Marquette or UC, could always have an internal test for those who are accepted without test scores, requiring some to take a proficiency or placement test to qualify. And selecting from a pool or offering admittance based upon this alternative test geared to not have the bias of the ACT/SAT multiple choice format, etc. The result, more applications and higher test scores for those admitted. For those who say ranking shouldn't matter - well they do, that is simply reality. We are not competing in an "ought to be world" but in the real world where US News ranking matter.
Hopefully the board of trustees is paying attention now that even the highest ranking schools are playing the US News game.
Amen! Unfortunately they won't listen and these days seem to be far more concerned with saving the world and implementing a social agenda then managing their own reputation. Until the alums fight back, withhold donations and make clear to the powers that be on the BOT that an 89% admit rate which is what it was last year is unacceptable and will significantly damage MU's reputation over time, nothing is going to change.
-
Just so you know, your experience isn't very common. The visit almost always comes before the application at most schools, with the possible exception of the regional publics.
Between my two oldest kids, they applied to probably 12-15 colleges in the past few years. I only recall one that had an interview as part of the application process. We did visit a couple campuses, and took tours, but never had any interaction with anyone in admissions that was unique from an entire group taking a tour -- nothing that could have been used to base an admissions decision on.
-
What's happening with the college admission criteria is similar to what's happening at companies and governments across the country. We're trying as hard as we can to take an inherently subjective issue -- accepting students for enrollment into a selective or elite university -- and turning it into a so-called objective set of criteria.
We eliminate the SAT/ACT because they are culturally biased. We replace them with an essay, a personal interview or self-disclosures that give an admissions director the capability to evaluate and quantify a candidate based on a subjective set of criteria that has been reduced to numbers. Whether it works or not depends on whether the system being used to evaluate candidates is tilted toward or away from a candidate's specific characteristics.
The success or failure depends less on whether an institution hits its goals and more on whether it avoids a lawsuit.
You may be right, but that is an extremely curious way to look at it. In an apparent attempt to move to a more "objective set of criteria" they are moving away from arguably the most objective (albeit culturally biased) criteria in favor of far more subjective criteria.
I'm not criticizing the goal or even the methods. I'm just pointing out that standardized tests are far more objective than essays, interviews etc. I agree that they are flawed and culturally biased. But, they are more objective that essays and interviews. In my opinion, they are trying to do the exact opposite. They believe that the objective criteria are flawed, so they are seeking to move away from the objective criteria and to allow their own subjective opinions on who should be admitted. And again, I am not criticizing that decision.
-
Amen! Unfortunately they won't listen and these days seem to be far more concerned with saving the world and implementing a social agenda then managing their own reputation. Until the alums fight back, withhold donations and make clear to the powers that be on the BOT that an 89% admit rate which is what it was last year is unacceptable and will significantly damage MU's reputation over time, nothing is going to change.
But why does an acceptance rate matter? If 89 percent of applicants have the requirements and Marquette has the space, why should we reject 20 percent of them to artificially increase the rejection rate?
Ps can someone explain to me how anything but the English portion are biased? I mean math and science don't change based on where/how I grew up
-
But why does an acceptance rate matter? If 89 percent of applicants have the requirements and Marquette has the space, why should we reject 20 percent of them to artificially increase the rejection rate?
It doesn't matter. It's a dumb statistic meant to convey some sort of exclusivity. The only thing dumber are people who actually think it means something. Hopefully Marquette will continue to ignore the dumb calls from dumb people wanting them to manipulate that dumb stat.
-
Between my two oldest kids, they applied to probably 12-15 colleges in the past few years. I only recall one that had an interview as part of the application process. We did visit a couple campuses, and took tours, but never had any interaction with anyone in admissions that was unique from an entire group taking a tour -- nothing that could have been used to base an admissions decision on.
Same here. Collectively 15 apps between my two daughters, I believe 4 mostly generic campus visits. Some of the visits were better than others (Mizzou's was WAY more organized and impressive than ASU's), but ultimately the decisions came down to costs, school reputations and gut feel.
-
Huh.
Kid one: 4 applications and acceptances. Visited all schools before applying.
Kid two: 2 applications and acceptances. Ditto.
-
It doesn't matter. It's a dumb statistic meant to convey some sort of exclusivity. The only thing dumber are people who actually think it means something. Hopefully Marquette will continue to ignore the dumb calls from dumb people wanting them to manipulate that dumb stat.
Call me dumb all you want, but reality is reality. People look at rankings for most purchases now, and that is simply the reality. People look at US News for college decisions - to think or act otherwise is silly. I wouldn't buy a car without looking into reliability, cost of ownership, etc.
I look at Yelp when finding a new restaurant when traveling. I also look at other sources. I know Yelp is not perfect, but it is there and generally works. I'm sure a lot of restaurant people could tell me how dumb that is, to rely on crowd sourced rankings/reviews or non-restaurant regular people. But the owner better be paying attention to his/her Yelp reviews - to act otherwise is silly given the way the system works in reality versus ideals.
A guy from Chrysler/Fiat/Jeep could tell me why those reliability ranking stats don't matter and why... and I'm dumb for looking at them, but the reality is that people use these as a significant factor to judge quality/purchase decisions. I know I do and often wonder who is buying these low reliability high cost of ownership Chrysler products and why...
Most of us dump people don't know how to fully understand the quality of a school without looking at things like rankings. That may be wrong, but I bet there is some merit to the quality of a highly ranked school and ultimate connections/jobs, etc. Ya, we can rely on the brochures and a campus visit, but really that is in addition to rankings.
BTW, I normally don't use the word "dumb" and I'm only do so in this context since it is in your post to reply to your post.
-
Call me dumb all you want, but reality is reality. People look at rankings for most purchases now, and that is simply the reality. People look at US News for college decisions - to think or act otherwise is silly. I wouldn't buy a car without looking into reliability, cost of ownership, etc.
Well of course those are two completely different things. USN&WR college "ratings" are based largely on specious and irrelevant criteria while car ratings actually have their roots in objective data.
The fact that you are equating the two shows the massive problem.
Most of us dump people don't know how to fully understand the quality of a school without looking at things like rankings. That may be wrong, but I bet there is some merit to the quality of a highly ranked school and ultimate connections/jobs, etc. Ya, we can rely on the brochures and a campus visit, but really that is in addition to rankings.
Yeah you've bought into the hype. But in reality, "rankings" aren't going to make your children successful.
-
Huh.
Kid one: 4 applications and acceptances. Visited all schools before applying.
Kid two: 2 applications and acceptances. Ditto.
Are you talking about a campus visit? Or are you talking about a face-to-face interview/interaction with someone in admissions that would form the basis of an admission decision. As I mentioned, we "visited" several of the schools my son applied to, but none of those involved any sort of interaction that could have reasonably been the basis for a decision. We sat through the group presentation and went on a tour that was invariably led by a student. If that's what you're talking about when you refer to "visits", well then yes, my son did visit a couple campuses. But the context of the conversation was the use of "face-to-face" conversations as a criteria for selecting students for admissions. Nothing happened on these visits that shed any light whatsoever on my son as an applicant for these schools aside from showing enough interest in the school to actually visit.
That said, the University of Dayton is very open about the fact that you need a documented campus visit. Nothing happens at that visit that singles you out as an applicant, but they take that very seriously. They want to see proof of your interest in the school.
Georgetown required an in-person interview with a local alum. That's the only one I recall that required something face-to-face as part of the application process. Which, in our case, was kind of ironic...
-
Shouldn't the only ranking that matters be the job placement within the desired major? I really don't care how great of an engineering program a school has if I'm not looking to be an engineer. If you're looking at a major that is offered at fewer schools your list of possibilities will be smaller. I had a buddy in high school that was smarter than I was (both grades and ACT) but he ended up going to UWM because they were the only school in the state that offered architecture. Is UWM a worse school overall that MU? Yea, but for him it was the right choice because he could study what he wanted and pay in state tuition. You should be picking a school based on its ability to put you on a successful career path, not the percentage of people that it lets in.
-
Call me dumb all you want, but reality is reality. People look at rankings for most purchases now, and that is simply the reality. People look at US News for college decisions - to think or act otherwise is silly. I wouldn't buy a car without looking into reliability, cost of ownership, etc.
I look at Yelp when finding a new restaurant when traveling. I also look at other sources. I know Yelp is not perfect, but it is there and generally works. I'm sure a lot of restaurant people could tell me how dumb that is, to rely on crowd sourced rankings/reviews or non-restaurant regular people. But the owner better be paying attention to his/her Yelp reviews - to act otherwise is silly given the way the system works in reality versus ideals.
A guy from Chrysler/Fiat/Jeep could tell me why those reliability ranking stats don't matter and why... and I'm dumb for looking at them, but the reality is that people use these as a significant factor to judge quality/purchase decisions. I know I do and often wonder who is buying these low reliability high cost of ownership Chrysler products and why...
Most of us dump people don't know how to fully understand the quality of a school without looking at things like rankings. That may be wrong, but I bet there is some merit to the quality of a highly ranked school and ultimate connections/jobs, etc. Ya, we can rely on the brochures and a campus visit, but really that is in addition to rankings.
BTW, I normally don't use the word "dumb" and I'm only do so in this context since it is in your post to reply to your post.
Reviews on cars/resturants are largely different than college acceptance rates. Lol
-
Shouldn't the only ranking that matters be the job placement within the desired major? I really don't care how great of an engineering program a school has if I'm not looking to be an engineer. If you're looking at a major that is offered at fewer schools your list of possibilities will be smaller. I had a buddy in high school that was smarter than I was (both grades and ACT) but he ended up going to UWM because they were the only school in the state that offered architecture. Is UWM a worse school overall that MU? Yea, but for him it was the right choice because he could study what he wanted and pay in state tuition. You should be picking a school based on its ability to put you on a successful career path, not the percentage of people that it lets in.
Yes. Outcomes based ratings are much more important. Can students find internships? Who recruits on campus? Can students get into graduate or professional schools?
But that data is hard to find and to objectify.
-
Are you talking about a campus visit? Or are you talking about a face-to-face interview/interaction with someone in admissions that would form the basis of an admission decision. As I mentioned, we "visited" several of the schools my son applied to, but none of those involved any sort of interaction that could have reasonably been the basis for a decision. We sat through the group presentation and went on a tour that was invariably led by a student. If that's what you're talking about when you refer to "visits", well then yes, my son did visit a couple campuses. But the context of the conversation was the use of "face-to-face" conversations as a criteria for selecting students for admissions. Nothing happened on these visits that shed any light whatsoever on my son as an applicant for these schools aside from showing enough interest in the school to actually visit.
#LaxBros said he never set foot on campus. Sorry if I was speaking about a different context. I was simply meaning generic campus visit.
-
#LaxBros said he never set foot on campus. Sorry if I was speaking about a different context. I was simply meaning generic campus visit.
Gotcha. Yeah...we were talking about different things. My kids visited most of the schools where they applied (and then some). Ironically, my son ended up at one of the schools he never visited before applying.
The first time I ever set foot on Marquette's campus was when I stepped out of a cab in front of McCormick my freshman year.
-
#LaxBros said he never set foot on campus. Sorry if I was speaking about a different context. I was simply meaning generic campus visit.
Ahh that's where we all got confused. Generic campus visits are pretty standard, and while I didn't do any before I was accepted I did do them after.
I forgot who it was but someone was talking about face to face interviews which is what I was trying to say very rarely happens.
-
Ahh that's where we all got confused. Generic campus visits are pretty standard, and while I didn't do any before I was accepted I did do them after.
I forgot who it was but someone was talking about face to face interviews which is what I was trying to say very rarely happens.
That depends on who you have a face to face with. If you're still referencing deans/admissions personnel I agree, but when I was on some of my visits (2012) I was able to break off from my generic group tour when we got to the school I was interested in and get a private tour from a student. Getting info directly from someone who has taken the classes that you will be taking is a lot different than someone who most likely just sees you as another potential tuition paying student. Current student don't care where you end up and since they have next to nothing invested in your decision, you can skip through all the BS. That info is the valuable stuff.
-
The first time I ever set foot on Marquette's campus was when I stepped out of a cab in front of McCormick my freshman year.
I had never been west of Lancaster, PA until my parents drove me from Connecticut to Milwaukee for freshman orientation, which back then took place 2-3 days before classes began.
I forgot who it was but someone was talking about face to face interviews which is what I was trying to say very rarely happens.
I absolutely will defer to those who have been part of the process more recently and/or dealt with larger schools. I'm wondering if the small liberal-arts colleges like those my daughter applied to in the mid-00s still commonly have face-to-face meetings with applicants.
As I said earlier in this thread, her school, Lawrence, was one of the first to stop requiring prospective students take the ACT or SAT.
-
I had never been west of Lancaster, PA until my parents drove me from Connecticut to Milwaukee for freshman orientation, which back then took place 2-3 days before classes began.
My parents didn't even take me. Flight to Milwaukee; cab to McCormick. I was extraordinarily grateful to some kid name "Sal" who helped me drag my suitcase and foot locker out of the cab and into a blue bin. Funny that I still remember that name all these years later...I literally never saw him again after the stuff was in the bin. The whole thing was kind of overwhelming for a small-town kid.
-
I absolutely will defer to those who have been part of the process more recently and/or dealt with larger schools. I'm wondering if the small liberal-arts colleges like those my daughter applied to in the mid-00s still commonly have face-to-face meetings with applicants.
I would think that the significant improvements in on-line teleconference technology would make it pretty simple for schools to increase the use of interviews. I know that as my son has sought internships the last couple years, many companies are using video interviews as a first step. Some are even having applicants use video to record answers to written questions rather than actual live video interviews. Also, some companies apparently run those videos through programs that purport to analyze voice, body language, etc.
-
My parents didn't even take me. Flight to Milwaukee; cab to McCormick.
Same here. If I was mature enough to attend college, my parents figured I was mature enough to get on a plane, navigate my way through O'Hare to a connection to MKE and find my way to McCormick. Which I did.
My daughter visited three colleges, all of which had programs that were specific to her needs and desires. One was eliminated immediately because their academic program wasn't going to help her; one was eliminated because she didn't like running into an old high school acquaintance on her visit; which, left the third, where she went. During our visits to the third school (there were two), we met with program leaders, support staff and others to gauge her interest and engagement.
My son saw my daughter's experience and followed her two years later. We offered to look at two other schools but he all but threw something at us at the idea. One of the two was private and would cost about $15,000 more than where he went for an education that might not have been as good.
A school choice is only as good as two things. The first is the ability to provide the student what he or she needs so they can graduate. The second is to give them a commitment to lifelong learning so they will get and keep a professional job.
-
My daughter visited three colleges, all of which had programs that were specific to her needs and desires. One was eliminated immediately because their academic program wasn't going to help her; one was eliminated because she didn't like running into an old high school acquaintance on her visit; which, left the third, where she went. During our visits to the third school (there were two), we met with program leaders, support staff and others to gauge her interest and engagement.
My son saw my daughter's experience and followed her two years later. We offered to look at two other schools but he all but threw something at us at the idea. One of the two was private and would cost about $15,000 more than where he went for an education that might not have been as good.
My son visited a number of schools, and applied to even more. Got accepted to the school that he wanted to attend and was invited to a weekend where he did have a face-to-face interview for their honors program. But that was after he had been accepted, and was related to potential aid. That was the first time he had visited, but he was sold on it before we even got there. My daughter had a completely different experience in that she only applied to one school that she had visited 3-4 times.
-
Gotcha. Yeah...we were talking about different things. My kids visited most of the schools where they applied (and then some). Ironically, my son ended up at one of the schools he never visited before applying.
your kid is Jimmy F*ckin Butler? sweet.
-
Reviews on cars/resturants are largely different than college acceptance rates. Lol
Agreed, they are. But the point remains that the reality is that US News and to a lessor extent a few other ratings services are what consumers look to for the quality of a college... so ignore the consumer and call them dumb, who does that hurt.
The relevancy I am pointing out between different businesses and how consumers judge them is what consumers look to, and calling the consumer dumb is only going to hurt your business/school if you don't market to the reality. If your a restaurant you had better pay attention to yelp. If your a college you had better pay attention to US News. To do otherwise if silly.
-
Agreed, they are. But the point remains that the reality is that US News and to a lessor extent a few other ratings services are what consumers look to for the quality of a college... so ignore the consumer and call them dumb, who does that hurt.
The relevancy I am pointing out between different businesses and how consumers judge them is what consumers look to, and calling the consumer dumb is only going to hurt your business/school if you don't market to the reality. If your a restaurant you had better pay attention to yelp. If your a college you had better pay attention to US News. To do otherwise if silly.
Colleges and universities are institutions of higher education that should not be pandering to irrelevant data. It's anti-intellectual.
Believe me, there are plenty of ways that colleges and universities can market themselves to get the class that they want without resorting to this sh*t.
-
Agreed, they are. But the point remains that the reality is that US News and to a lessor extent a few other ratings services are what consumers look to for the quality of a college... so ignore the consumer and call them dumb, who does that hurt.
The relevancy I am pointing out between different businesses and how consumers judge them is what consumers look to, and calling the consumer dumb is only going to hurt your business/school if you don't market to the reality. If your a restaurant you had better pay attention to yelp. If your a college you had better pay attention to US News. To do otherwise if silly.
Do yelp ratings improve if you convince people to come to your restaurant but then turn them away because the restaurant is full?
-
Colleges and universities are institutions of higher education that should not be pandering to irrelevant data. It's anti-intellectual.
Well that is an extremely idealistic statement, that I genuinely wish would guide a lot more of their actions. Understand that in saying that, I'm neither criticizing Marquette for it's current approach nor defending the US News and similar rankings. At all. I just think that colleges and universities do countless things that are far more focused on consumer appeal than intellectual pursuits. One of the biggest, by the way, is what draws us all to Scoop to engage in inane arguments.
-
Colleges and universities are institutions of higher education that should not be pandering to irrelevant data. It's anti-intellectual.
Believe me, there are plenty of ways that colleges and universities can market themselves to get the class that they want without resorting to this sh*t.
Gotta figure your institution is wey down in da rankin's based on yo distain for da process, hey?
-
Well that is an extremely idealistic statement, that I genuinely wish would guide a lot more of their actions. Understand that in saying that, I'm neither criticizing Marquette for it's current approach nor defending the US News and similar rankings. At all. I just think that colleges and universities do countless things that are far more focused on consumer appeal than intellectual pursuits. One of the biggest, by the way, is what draws us all to Scoop to engage in inane arguments.
Marquette clearly isn't and obviously shares the Sultan's idealism. Refer to page 3 of the attached PDF from MU's office of institutional research to see how they compare to their self selected peer institutions. If they can continue to remain a desirable institution despite their extremely unconventional and counter intuitive approach to enrollment, more power to them! I would love to be wrong and hope MU continues to thrive. It will be interesting to see if and if so, how much of a hit they take when the 2019 US News National University rankings come out in September. If they maintain their current place or even better, move up a few slots I'll gladly eat crow and kneel before Sultan.
-
Gotta figure your institution is wey down in da rankin's based on yo distain for da process, hey?
We don't reply to the USN&WR survey and have no idea where we are ranked. We don't really care. We have record enrollment, record graduation rates and place 90+% of our graduates into jobs in their field of study or in graduate/professional school.
-
We don't reply to the USN&WR survey and have no idea where we are ranked. We don't really care. We have record enrollment, record graduation rates and place 90+% of our graduates into jobs in their field of study or in graduate/professional school.
Yep. Methinks some of our fellow Scoopers need to take their angst over to the Doom thread.
-
Gotta figure your institution is wey down in da rankin's based on yo distain for da process, hey?
We don't reply to the USN&WR survey and have no idea where we are ranked. We don't really care. We have record enrollment, record graduation rates and place 90+% of our graduates into jobs in their field of study or in graduate/professional school.
Obviously you know where your institution is ranked. Glad that your marketing program is successful. There is a cover for every pot. Your institution is not Marquette which has different requirements. The MU administration are slowly sinking the ship and have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
-
Obviously you know where your institution is ranked.
I literally have no idea.
I hate to break this to you but not every schools is obsessed with these rankings.
-
I literally have no idea.
I hate to break this to you but not every schools is obsessed with these rankings.
Type your schools name followed by US News Ranking and you will get the answer. I read Playboy for the articles too.
-
We don't reply to the USN&WR survey and have no idea where we are ranked. We don't really care. We have record enrollment, record graduation rates and place 90+% of our graduates into jobs in their field of study or in graduate/professional school.
The IU/PU system is doing well, aina, kin?
-
I literally have no idea.
I hate to break this to you but not every schools is obsessed with these rankings.
Here is a research report that essentially outlines a position similar to the one you are advocating for your school. Are the points that are being made in the report similar to your schools viewpoint internally ?
https://www.liberalartscolleges.com/us-news-college-rankings-meaningless/
-
Here is a research report that essentially outlines a position similar to the one you are advocating for your school. Are the points that are being made in the report similar to your schools viewpoint internally ?
https://www.liberalartscolleges.com/us-news-college-rankings-meaningless/
I think a lot of the reasoning under "The College Rankings Have Missing Pieces" is why we don't participate.
-
Here is a research report that essentially outlines a position similar to the one you are advocating for your school. Are the points that are being made in the report similar to your schools viewpoint internally ?
https://www.liberalartscolleges.com/us-news-college-rankings-meaningless/
Don't disagree with anything said in this report or the other articles it linked to. However, There were 2 quotes in particular in 2 different linked articles that stuck out:
1) At colleges across the nation, presidents and their staffs, trustees and special university task forces analyze one year's U.S. News charts and immediately begin plotting how they might raise their college's standing in the next issue. This is not surprising; the results of a rise in rank are significant, and the consequences of a dramatic fall can be severe.
2)That dirty little secret has started to slip out as competition intensifies to attract top students and scale the all-important college rankings. In an admissions battleground on which universities grapple for any advantage, rising by just one number in the U.S. News & World Report rankings leads to a nearly 1 percent increase in applications, a 2011 study at the Harvard Business School found.
Even though these articles are a few years old, my understanding is that the calculus hasn't changed and if anything has gotten worse. How else to explain the fact that for the past 5 years the most prestigious schools such as Harvard, Stanford and their ilk have all seen increased applications resulting in lower and lower acceptance rates?
I've never denied the US News Methodology is deeply flawed, panned by most higher education professionals, yet the overwhelming majority of them still do everything they can to game the system so their institutions rank as high as possible because the rewards of moving up and consequences of slipping are potentially severe. That's the concern.
I'll say one thing........For all my complaining about how MU doesn't play the game, they deserve a hell of a lot of credit for being incredibly courageous and remaining true to their Jesuit mission. I'm betting that their approach will backfire and damage their reputation but who knows, Maybe MU will be successful in convincing the higher education consumer at large that US News is nonsense. Here's to hoping I'm wrong. We'll see how they stack up soon enough.
-
Back in 2004-05, when my daughter was going around looking at small midwest colleges like Carleton, Grinnell, Lawrence and Dennison, she met with admission people at several schools, and even a couple of deans and university presidents.
A few weeks after her Carleton visit, she received a personal call from the head of admissions inviting her to go there even though she had "only" scored 30 on her ACT. And it wasn't because her daddy was rich or because she was a minority. She made an impression on people there. Ended up not going there because it was too expensive and Lawrence offered a lot more aid, but Carleton often is rated in the top-5 in most of those U.S. News ratings.
But I dunno ... maybe they don't do those kinds of things any more, though. I've been out of the game for quite some time, so others would know better than I do.
Those are all excellent schools. I think that smaller schools have the opportunity to use personal interviews to not only screen but also to help market the product to potential enrollees. I think competition for top talent is greater today than ever before and it is even more extreme at top tier schools such as those you listed.
I do know that Ivies have always used alumni screenings to evaluate potential applicants and that this feedback is weighted very heavily. I think schools want to ensure that their pool includes well rounded applicants rather than brilliant but one-dimensional mouth-breathers. Social skills and graces are factored into the equation and they should be, quite frankly.
-
The IU/PU system is doing well, aina, kin?
I think he works at the other UIPUI - University of ITT Phoenix of Upper Indiana. Their Cable Installer Degree is only outpaced by Sanitation Engineer job placements.
-
I think he works at the other UIPUI - University of ITT Phoenix of Upper Indiana. Their Cable Installer Degree is only outpaced by Sanitation Engineer job placements.
That’s not where I work, but would be proud to do so if it educates people and places them into meaningful careers.
-
Bartending Academy in West Allis is hirin', hey?
-
I applied at Marquette, Madison, Purdue, Notre Dame, and Embry-Riddle. I got into all of them and never set foot on campus before an acceptance letter. This was 2012. I could see face to face interviews dying as there would be a large portion of students who wouldn't be able to have the means to do all these interviews.
My son applied to a few Ivies and they found an alumnus near us to conduct the interview. He got into every school he applied to except his first choice (which was an Ivy), despite immaculate credentials. He must have really screwed up that interview. That or the fact that he hit an alumnus of that school's car early in his senior year a few months after he got his driver's license.
-
My son applied to a few Ivies and they found an alumnus near us to conduct the interview. He got into every school he applied to except his first choice (which was an Ivy), despite immaculate credentials. He must have really screwed up that interview. That or the fact that he hit an alumnus of that school's car early in his senior year a few months after he got his driver's license.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/CluelessEnchantingBarnowl-max-1mb.gif)
Looks like the University of Illinois!
-
My son applied to a few Ivies and they found an alumnus near us to conduct the interview. He got into every school he applied to except his first choice (which was an Ivy), despite immaculate credentials. He must have really screwed up that interview. That or the fact that he hit an alumnus of that school's car early in his senior year a few months after he got his driver's license.
I kid you not: the alumni interview for Ivy admission is important but not in the way one might think. The meeting is actually a mechanism for either screening out applicants or adding emphasis to a candidacy.
If an applicant is scheduled for an interview he is on the short list. Because these are usually done over dinner the individual's social skills are very much under scrutiny. An interviewer obviously wants to know why someone wishes to matriculate at his alma mater. And he also wants to hear how the experience will be of benefit in ways beyond trite "Miss America" expressions of world peace and free single malt for everyone.
I think that the essential value of the alumni interview to the college is to deselect candidates. I did them in Asia where the issues included language and cultural fluency, adaptation skills, and interests beyond Venturi shrouds.
-
I was extraordinarily grateful to some kid name "Sal" who helped me drag my suitcase and foot locker out of the cab and into a blue bin. Funny that I still remember that name all these years later...I literally never saw him again after the stuff was in the bin.
There were Three Sals who prowled the Marquette campus back in the day: Sal Bellomo, Tom Salley, and John Salamanski.
Tom Salley was ASMU President who strutted around Marquette sporting a Donegal Trilby and tweed jacket. His platform was to bring back the Block Party, allow overnight visitation in the dorms, and have more name acts on campus. Sal #1 won the Presidency in a landslide over the "serious" candidate Maureen Brady.
Sal Bellomo was "The Great Unwashed" who looked as if he had neither shave nor shower since arriving on campus. Years later in Iraq, we were getting an intel briefing at a TOC when the photo of a just captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed flashed on the screen. As the intel puke droned on about how they nabbed the Sheikh my visceral reaction to seeing this photo was to picture Bellomo dragging out the last vestiges of nicotine of yet another Camel while standing outside the Todd Wehr Chemistry Building in the freezing cold.
That photo of the Sheikh often has Rosie O'Donnell's mug photoshopped onto it making for a very believable image of what Rosie must look like in the morning. But for me it is always Sal Bellomo either smoking outside of Todd Wehr or leaning up against the juke box at The Lanche swilling Red White and Blues and arguing pro hockey with Bill McKinney from Holly, MI (who was a sportswriter but became a Jesuit).
I heard Sal #2 went on to be a prosecutor back home in NJ.
John Salamanski was a great guy at MU. He and I frequently drank together at Lenny's. With graduation we were scattered to the winds but just a few years ago theBabyDavid's mother and I went to the Int'l Pinot Noir Celebration (which I HIGHLY recommend) in Oregon's Willamette Valley and there was Sal #3. He is now a specialty wine distributor in Denver, focusing on smaller volume, 95 pt labels from WA, OR, and CA. He remains a great guy living an enviable life in CO ski country.
I have to guess that your Sal was one of these three guys.
You read all the bitching here and one would think MU grads cannot possibly get along. Fact is, back in the day, they were some of the best guys I ever met.
-
nm
-
nm
Wrong thread.
-
Don't disagree with anything said in this report or the other articles it linked to. However, There were 2 quotes in particular in 2 different linked articles that stuck out:
1) At colleges across the nation, presidents and their staffs, trustees and special university task forces analyze one year's U.S. News charts and immediately begin plotting how they might raise their college's standing in the next issue. This is not surprising; the results of a rise in rank are significant, and the consequences of a dramatic fall can be severe.
2)That dirty little secret has started to slip out as competition intensifies to attract top students and scale the all-important college rankings. In an admissions battleground on which universities grapple for any advantage, rising by just one number in the U.S. News & World Report rankings leads to a nearly 1 percent increase in applications, a 2011 study at the Harvard Business School found.
Even though these articles are a few years old, my understanding is that the calculus hasn't changed and if anything has gotten worse. How else to explain the fact that for the past 5 years the most prestigious schools such as Harvard, Stanford and their ilk have all seen increased applications resulting in lower and lower acceptance rates?
I've never denied the US News Methodology is deeply flawed, panned by most higher education professionals, yet the overwhelming majority of them still do everything they can to game the system so their institutions rank as high as possible because the rewards of moving up and consequences of slipping are potentially severe. That's the concern.
I'll say one thing........For all my complaining about how MU doesn't play the game, they deserve a hell of a lot of credit for being incredibly courageous and remaining true to their Jesuit mission. I'm betting that their approach will backfire and damage their reputation but who knows, Maybe MU will be successful in convincing the higher education consumer at large that US News is nonsense. Here's to hoping I'm wrong. We'll see how they stack up soon enough.
The real problem MU has is that it is not willing to compete with its peer group and play the marketing game. You are correct it will have a long term negative impact on the schools reputation, which I continue to say is snatching defeat from the Jaws of victory. If MU was willing to play the game it would be in a solid place in the rankings . The long term benefit to MU would be enormous because it would be in a better position to achieve its goals.