"For the first time, Rice received over 20,000 applications for admission in the fall of 2017.
The nearly 20,900 applications also represent the largest year-to-year growth in the university’s history.
'We had an overall increase of about 16 percent in applications, which is extremely exciting,” said Yvonne Romero da Silva,
vice president for enrollment....' "

http://news.rice.edu/2018/03/14/rice-rec...lications/

I only applied to 3 schools when I was in high school back in 2000...how many schools are kids applying to these days?

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  I only applied to 3 schools when I was in high school back in 2000...how many schools are kids applying to these days?

In 2007, I applied to around 10 schools. One of those was USF though, which literally only required me to fill out a few questions with no essays, so I'm not sure that counts.

For students applying to elite universities, it's not surprising to apply to more than a few of them, plus some safety schools, because of how much of a crap shoot admissions are these days.

Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  I only applied to 3 schools when I was in high school back in 2000...how many schools are kids applying to these days?

I applied to 8 I think. My parents told me scholarship or no college.. so I targeted private schools with large endowments that were good at engineering - and the more I could apply to the higher chance I'd get some $$$

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

Yeah, I think you all have identified perhaps the biggest factor in all this.
I applied to 2 or 3 schools...

I applied to one.
My kids applied to ten each.

And there are online sites which will let you submit a common application to several schools.

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

I applied to 6 in the late-1990's.

They really should change the name of the Admissions offices as they aren't interested in admissions, they are interested in Applications. Don't even get me started on the scam that is college admissions in this era, not to mention the overall cost. In 40 yrs, it is has increased 10x. NOTHING in our world has done that except maybe health care and maybe entertainment, but the latter is optional. The money flowing through the universities into GOK where is the biggest silent scandal today.

(03-19-2018 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

I applied to 6 in the late-1990's.

In talking to a good friend who also did/does out-of-town alumni interviews, his experience was the same as yours -- few if any of his recs got admitted.

He also said all the kids were stellar academically BUT most of them clearly were applying to Rice as just another in a collection of similar schools. They didn't really know anything about Rice or convey a clear preference for Rice over the other schools on their lists.

My understanding is that Admissions at Rice (and at all peers) is very big on tracking "demonstrated interest." If they can predict that you likely wouldn't accept if offered, they would rather deny you even if you have the stats instead of admitting you and then taking a hit to the yield rate (% of admits who enroll, which is part of the USNWR ranking formula) when you go elsewhere. Perhaps the biggest thing you can do to demonstrate interest is interview ON campus. So I kind of suspect that most kids who do off-campus interviews are wasting their time and app fee no matter how smart they are unless they can truly convey that Rice is their first choice and that there were legitimate reasons they could not get to Houston.

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

Applications would be even higher with visible athletic success. Studies of schools that make NCAA tournament appearances have established that.

My guess is that the 16% year-over-year increase is mostly due to our having gone from top-20 to top-15 in USNWR?

(03-19-2018 11:42 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

I applied to 6 in the late-1990's.

In talking to a good friend who also did/does out-of-town alumni interviews, his experience was the same as yours -- few if any of his recs got admitted.

He also said all the kids were stellar academically BUT most of them clearly were applying to Rice as just another in a collection of similar schools. They didn't really know anything about Rice or convey a clear preference for Rice over the other schools on their lists.

My understanding is that Admissions at Rice (and at all peers) is very big on tracking "demonstrated interest." If they can predict that you likely wouldn't accept if offered, they would rather deny you even if you have the stats instead of admitting you and then taking a hit to the yield rate (% of admits who enroll, which is part of the USNWR ranking formula) when you go elsewhere. Perhaps the biggest thing you can do to demonstrate interest is interview ON campus. So I kind of suspect that most kids who do off-campus interviews are wasting their time and app fee no matter how smart they are unless they can truly convey that Rice is their first choice and that there were legitimate reasons they could not get to Houston.

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

Applications would be even higher with visible athletic success. Studies of schools that make NCAA tournament appearances have established that.

My guess is that the 16% year-over-year increase is mostly due to our having gone from top-20 to top-15 in USNWR?

Applications have been rising at basically all schools

(03-19-2018 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

That was ultimately my experience, too. Being in the mid-Atlantic, there was definitely some demand for my time to do interviews (where travelling to Houston could be more challenging). I did it upon graduating to help out. Did a couple of college fairs, too. I got into it because my dad also did them, and I generally enjoyed it.

But starting the mid- to late-90s, the decisions being made started making less sense to me. A few less-than-stellar interviews were accepted. And some of my best interviews were wait-listed or (in a couple of cases) denied, despite all other factors that I could see meriting inclusion. Obviously, I don't have access to applications, essays, and recommendations, but the decisions made no sense.

I stopped doing interviews within about a decade of graduating for those factors. My dad, who had been doing them longer, stopped shortly thereafter with similar experiences. Purely anecdotal, but it left a bad taste in our mouths about how our investment of time to be representative of Rice and find the best candidates didn't appear to have any impact.

(03-19-2018 11:45 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 11:42 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 02:44 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  ... how many schools are kids applying to these days?

10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

I applied to 6 in the late-1990's.

In talking to a good friend who also did/does out-of-town alumni interviews, his experience was the same as yours -- few if any of his recs got admitted.

He also said all the kids were stellar academically BUT most of them clearly were applying to Rice as just another in a collection of similar schools. They didn't really know anything about Rice or convey a clear preference for Rice over the other schools on their lists.

My understanding is that Admissions at Rice (and at all peers) is very big on tracking "demonstrated interest." If they can predict that you likely wouldn't accept if offered, they would rather deny you even if you have the stats instead of admitting you and then taking a hit to the yield rate (% of admits who enroll, which is part of the USNWR ranking formula) when you go elsewhere. Perhaps the biggest thing you can do to demonstrate interest is interview ON campus. So I kind of suspect that most kids who do off-campus interviews are wasting their time and app fee no matter how smart they are unless they can truly convey that Rice is their first choice and that there were legitimate reasons they could not get to Houston.

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

Applications would be even higher with visible athletic success. Studies of schools that make NCAA tournament appearances have established that.

My guess is that the 16% year-over-year increase is mostly due to our having gone from top-20 to top-15 in USNWR?

Applications have been rising at basically all schools

I am aware of the general trend but 16% seems above the norm. I could be wrong, though.

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

The number would be much higher with athletic success.

(03-19-2018 12:30 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 11:45 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 11:42 AM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(03-19-2018 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:47 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  10-15 is what I heard when I did local alumni interviews for Rice. (This year was my first year in decades not to do them.)

I am not doing local alumni interviews for the first time in 1.5 decades. Can I round up to decades? I felt like the admissions folks paid zero attention to my reports, so why do them? The two people I was most blown-away by as applicants in my 15 years of interviews were not admitted (I know for a fact that both had sufficient grades and test scores). I figured if they don't value my time, why bother?

I applied to 6 in the late-1990's.

In talking to a good friend who also did/does out-of-town alumni interviews, his experience was the same as yours -- few if any of his recs got admitted.

He also said all the kids were stellar academically BUT most of them clearly were applying to Rice as just another in a collection of similar schools. They didn't really know anything about Rice or convey a clear preference for Rice over the other schools on their lists.

My understanding is that Admissions at Rice (and at all peers) is very big on tracking "demonstrated interest." If they can predict that you likely wouldn't accept if offered, they would rather deny you even if you have the stats instead of admitting you and then taking a hit to the yield rate (% of admits who enroll, which is part of the USNWR ranking formula) when you go elsewhere. Perhaps the biggest thing you can do to demonstrate interest is interview ON campus. So I kind of suspect that most kids who do off-campus interviews are wasting their time and app fee no matter how smart they are unless they can truly convey that Rice is their first choice and that there were legitimate reasons they could not get to Houston.

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

Applications would be even higher with visible athletic success. Studies of schools that make NCAA tournament appearances have established that.

My guess is that the 16% year-over-year increase is mostly due to our having gone from top-20 to top-15 in USNWR?

Applications have been rising at basically all schools

I am aware of the general trend but 16% seems above the norm. I could be wrong, though.

+8% at Harvard: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/2...bers-2018/

+8% at Duke: http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/201...er-schools

so +16% is pretty great.. and I agree, probably a result of "low-information" applicants applying to all top-15 or top-20 schools

(03-19-2018 01:01 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  

(03-18-2018 11:40 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  Goes to show that athletics success is not vital for admissions interest.

The number would be much higher with athletic success.

Probably. Although the 25 millionish in subsidy we chuck in every year could arguably be repurposed to have also made it much higher.

Either way, what we are doing now is woefully sub optimal. To hit 16% growth despite that is impressive.

FWIW, 2-3 years ago I interviewed a Rice applicant. She was, by a significant distance, the most impressive applicant I had interviewed (probably 60-70 interviews spread across ~13 years at that point). She was not just in a tier by herself as an applicant, she made me realize that there were additional tiers above what I realized was possible, and sat in that tier by herself with a few empty tiers below her. I wrote a report basically pleading with Rice to admit her (her grades and test scores were great). She was super-involved, a leader in many activities, articulate, etc. I begged Rice to give her a scholarship in my report, as she expressed concern about affordability but said Rice was her top choice (and I believed her based on her knowledge of Rice). Rice wait-listed her. She went somewhere else and, during her freshman year in college, appeared on one of Forbes' 30-under-30 lists (I think it was the "Energy" list).

I stuck it out another year, when I interviewed the my 2nd favorite applicant. Not the same tier, but easily above everyone else. He wasn't even wait-listed. I didn't sign back up this year.

(03-19-2018 02:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  FWIW, 2-3 years ago I interviewed a Rice applicant. She was, by a significant distance, the most impressive applicant I had interviewed (probably 60-70 interviews spread across ~13 years at that point). She was not just in a tier by herself as an applicant, she made me realize that there were additional tiers above what I realized was possible, and sat in that tier by herself with a few empty tiers below her. I wrote a report basically pleading with Rice to admit her (her grades and test scores were great). She was super-involved, a leader in many activities, articulate, etc. I begged Rice to give her a scholarship in my report, as she expressed concern about affordability but said Rice was her top choice (and I believed her based on her knowledge of Rice). Rice wait-listed her. She went somewhere else and, during her freshman year in college, appeared on one of Forbes' 30-under-30 lists (I think it was the "Energy" list).

I stuck it out another year, when I interviewed the my 2nd favorite applicant. Not the same tier, but easily above everyone else. He wasn't even wait-listed. I didn't sign back up this year.

It’s a numbers game. Top applicants get in everywhere they apply which is why they often ask what other schools you’re applying too. Schools deny or waitlist a lot of those as previously mentioned here if they don’t think they’ll matriculate. There are more than enough kids applying to Rice at this point that would easily qualify on test scores and grades. Now you have to check a certain box they’re looking for to diversify the class. They like kids from every state for example, and I’m sure it gets a lot more particular than that.

Also the Forbes 30 for 30 lists are occupied by some pretty standard people they just have someone submit their names. I can think of some I know who aren’t doing anything especially great who have been included...