Admission Rates: Selectivity and Social Impact.

Essays | Sam Landreth | July 20th, 2024.

Over the past two decades, the acceptance rates of top American universities, such as the Ivies, the University of Chicago, and even public state schools, have steadily declined. This decline is not a mere statistic, but a seismic shift in the educational landscape. The notion of obtaining a college degree has transitioned from a significant achievement to a basic expectation, leading to a surge in college applications. As a result, a disproportionately high number of universities are shifting to a new selectivity paradigm. The declining acceptance rates at top American universities reflect a change in the educational landscape, driven by the increasing demand for higher education, changing demographics, technological advancements, and institutional strategies. 

The University of Richmond defines “selective” as an institution that will admit "a ⅓ or less of their application pool". This definition means that about 100 colleges nationwide can be considered selective (as of the article's release in 2023). The University of Richmond fails to consider a significant factor: the people applying to these schools. In 1984, Doug Flutie, the quarterback for Boston College, led his team to the highest ranking in the program's history. With this successful season, he somewhat single-handedly boosted the total admissions to the school, which increased the application pool by 30 percent the following year. This rise in the application pool would then lead to a lower acceptance rate. When looking at a school's statistics, it is easy to assume that a lower rate means more selective. This was not the case, as the average test scores for the following year's class decreased significantly. This means that despite the increased pool size, the admission difficulty wasn’t affected. Higher selectivity, but not necessarily high standards- including activities like football and Greek life- attract individuals to things stereotypically grouped with non-academically inclined applicants. As reported in 2023, the state of Florida's two most prestigious public universities, the University of Florida and Florida State University, had admit rates of 23% and 25%, respectively (Gonzalez). Even though the two statistics are within two percentage points of each other, the difference in average score between the two on the SAT math section was only 60, with Florida State's median being 640 and the University of Florida's a 700. This once again plays into the idea of the character of the applicants, with Florida State being ranked highly in the country on multiple websites for its Greek life and party scene, attracting more applicants who feed this lower rate. So, although an institution's acceptance rate shows general signs of how selective a college may be, it's essential to keep in mind what the numbers represent. In this case, for clarity’s sake, a definition of a selective college is one with an average admitted SAT score of 1350, which leaves about 80-100 American colleges under this definition. 

Getting into top universities in the country has always been challenging, but these challenges continually rise. In 2006, the acceptance rate for the University of Chicago was about 38%; in 2018, it was 8%. In the same time frame, Northwestern's statistics also saw a similar decrease, from 32% to 8%. These schools represent the most significant drops in the rate of the twelve-year-long period. The undergraduate academic administrator of UChicago, Dean John Boyer, said that just twelve years ago: "some out-of-towners would confuse the University (UC) with the University of Illinois," He says that this doesn't happen anymore. This is because this school developed itself by investing in and promoting its academic prowess in a way it had never considered. These examples of acceptance changes have similarly been seen in other, more unnatural instances, with Northeastern University being notorious for such practices during the early 2000s. By working with the U.S News Report's "mantra 'smaller is better'" meaning reducing faculty-to-student ratios while also replacing old crumbling infrastructure with a new modern campus, the school's president, Richard Freeland, was able to take this "third tier, blue-collar, commuter based university", and turn it into an institution that is consistently ranked within the top 75 schools in the nation. Freeland's investment into the college had a substantial impact on this transition, but by playing into this "smaller is better" idea that US. News Report promotes, Freeland was able to manipulate the system. In an interview with Boston Magazine, he said, "there’s no question that the system invites gaming". These are a few dramatic examples of the system being exploited, but in a sense, they reflect an even more significant shift across all top universities in the nation. This represents the rat race across the nation for these lower rates, which leads to examples like "Duke's waiting list typically hav[ing] better SATs and higher class ranks than the students who end up enrolling", By doing this, universities can keep a lower yield and acceptance rate by admitting students they predict will attend and putting off students who are more qualified. This makes those students “just-in-case” options for the schools. In 2002, "Notre Dame rejected 39 percent of the high school valedictorians who applied" for the same reason: keeping the acceptance rate as low as possible and trying to predict the decision of students. How have these trends changed or been amplified in the scope of the current year, 2024?

There are a few reasons in the past five to ten years that can explain this continuation of declining acceptance rates. The first and most obvious indicator is the rising application pool. Specifically, the number of Hispanic students attending an undergraduate college has doubled from 2000 to 2020, going from around “1.5 million to 3.7 total students”. Most of these Hispanic students are second or third-generation Americans, reflecting the financial footing gained by staying in the country for generations. Another reason for this boom is the accessibility of CommonApp. Completing all of one's application processes on a computer is simple and accessible for a majority of the nation. In turn, a trend arises- the need for college counselors becomes less relevant, saving money and time for students. CommonApp also caused the number of college people applying to increase, as "In 2013-2014, students submitted 4.63 college applications on average. In 2021-2022, that number grew to 6.22". More applicants and the same amount of student spots will lead to a change in statistics. Just this year, six of California's seven most sought-after public universities received the most applicants in their institutions in school histories, and notable universities such as NYU, Michigan, and Penn State had reported the same record. However, universities that adopt an accessible application process, such as Tulane, drive down acceptance while increasing application accessibility. This is a win-win for everybody involved: Tulane gets a lower acceptance rate, contributing to its selectivity, and the applicants don't need to pay a fee. Although seemingly greedy at face value, these changes in numbers reflect advancements in technology and racial equality that have repercussions on the total percentage. A massive leap across a process that, just 60 years ago, was restricted to mainly white wealthy families and had applications sent with hand-written information. In those days, only about 10% of citizens had a college education. 

The results from this shift aren't only positive. Under these conditions the number of applications to fill out, the higher expectations for a student's GPA, SAT and ACT scores, and extracurricular activities rack an obvious toll for student stress, especially in an admissions process that keeps receiving more applicants. There's also a conversation to be had about rulings in affirmative action related court cases: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and SFFA v. UNC. The tension brought by all these admissions changes has led to the questioning of past programs that benefitted marginalized groups. Legacy is still a prevalent factor in a lot of higher-end universities; this is particularly troubling since these institutions, "provide a fast pass to professional success and economic well-being,".

Looking to the future, there's no sign of slowing down for admission rates. Test-optional schools that established temporary rules during COVID-19 now conclude that the SAT and ACT are necessary when finding college-ready students. Harvard professor Hopi Hoekstra stated that “[s]tandardized tests are a means for all students, regardless of their background and life experience, to provide information that is predictive of success in college and beyond” (Esaki-Smith). This, in turn, has both negative and positive effects: positive, because "test-optional has undoubtedly led to more students applying to schools without a test score. In particular, the most selective universities are seeing more applications than ever". This means these admit rates should rise across these competitive colleges. On the negative end, this means less opportunity for students who hadn't scored well on standardized tests, restricting them to colleges that may not be up to par with their actual ability because they aren't particularly good at test taking. 

College rates decreasing from the outside doesn't seem to be a positive trend. It may seem like a lower rate means less opportunity, but thankfully, the opposite is true. The decline in acceptance rates at top universities is not merely a statistical trend but a reflection of broader societal shifts, where college has become required, yet reachable, by all demographics. Pursuing higher education has shifted from an exclusive, white-dominated group, to a democratized environment that pursues equal opportunity. Despite the negatives that have persisted through the past few decades,, test-optional schools overturning their policies, and Universities gaming the admit rate system with unfair waitlist systems, the positives should not be overlooked. Equality continues to persist, and should for years to come in the world of further education.