More applications doesn't = more acceptances

One of my students applied to 34 colleges last year. A New York city girl told me about a friend with 28 schools on her list. I watched a list grow from 8 to 17 colleges and another from 16 to 24. What’s going on?

Because of test optional admissions policies, many students gamble, figuring “why not try?” I advise them when to send--and not send--scores. I know which "test optional" colleges are really "test preferred," and a longer shot. However, we can also identify other schools where few admitted students have submitted scores.

But college enrollment managers are gambling-averse strategists, focusing on yield. Institutions that easily fill their classes ten times with full pay students respond to the application deluge by issuing more deferrals each year. Applying becomes more stressful as decisions grow more unpredictable. I stopped using the term “target” (based on GPA and test score matching) because students are disappointed about “targets” deferring them. “Possible” is a more precise term.

A smart, balanced list of 5 to 12 (or 16) likely, possible, and reach colleges still makes sense. Gambling ratchets up stress. Too often, those 17th through 25th colleges are added to the list because of “prestige,” and are “unlikelies” for every applicant, including valedictorians, academic competition winners, and published researchers.

A new study by a team of economists finds that although fewer than 1% of college students attend the highly selective, private “Ivy-Plus” colleges—the eight colleges in the Ivy League, the University of Chicago, Duke, MIT, and Stanford.

While I hope that all my students are admitted to every college they'd like to attend, I wish them (and their families) the wisdom to understand that it is strong students who will drive their success–not a bumper sticker.