You Got Rejected from Your First Choice College. So What?

The following is a guest post from Robert Kelchen, doctoral candidate in Educational Policy Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The Washington Post’s Campus Overload blog recently featured a guest post, “Getting Rejected from Your Dream School(s) isn’t a Bad Thing” by Eric Harris, a junior who attended the University of Maryland after being deferred by his first choice (Duke) and rejected by six of the other eight colleges to which he applied. (He was also accepted by Emory.) Eric’s story is hardly unique, as numerous blogs and websites feature stories of students who were rejected by their first choice college. Most of the popular media accounts of students rejected by their first choice college are from students like Eric—those who applied to a large number of highly selective (and very expensive) colleges and universities and still attended a prestigious institution.

The kinds of students who are typically featured in the media are very likely to enjoy college and graduate in a timely manner, no matter where they end up attending. But the students who should be prominently featured instead are those whose first choice colleges are very different than their other options (much less selective four-year colleges, community colleges, or no college at all). Just-released data from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program at UCLA shows that only 58 percent of students attending four-year universities were attending their first choice college in fall 2011; nearly one-fourth of students were rejected by their first choice. This suggests that a fair number of students fall into this category, but little is known about their college outcomes.

As a part of my dissertation, I am using data from the Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study to examine the college experiences of students who attended their first choice college to those who attended another college—either because they were rejected by their first choice or because they were accepted by their first choice but did not attend. WSLS students all come from modest financial backgrounds and were Pell Grant recipients during their first year of college, so it is likely that the cost of college played a much larger role in their college choice process than for students like Eric.

It is important to note that students end up at their first choice college as the result of three decisions: applying to their first choice (not explored in my study), getting accepted, and then attending after being accepted. I model the acceptance and attendance decisions using available information on the students’ demographics and academic preparation, their high school of attendance, and their first choice college. This is an important step in establishing a causal relationship because WSLS students who attended their first choice college tend to come from different backgrounds (especially from more rural areas) than those who did not.

I use interview and survey data to explore whether students’ academic and social integration levels differed between students who attended their first choice and those who did not for either of the above reasons. The interviews suggest that most students reported being happy with their college of attendance, regardless of whether that was their first choice college. (Whether this is actually true or whether this is an example of self-affirmation bias, in which people try to portray a disappointing event in the best possible light, cannot be determined.) There are also few differences between students who attended their first choice and those who did not on survey measures of academic and social integration.

I also use academic outcomes from the University of Wisconsin System and the National Student Clearinghouse to estimate the effects of attending one’s first choice college. After modeling the selection process, I find no statistically significant differences on academic outcomes between students who attended their first choice and either group who did not. (This dissertation chapter is nearly complete, so stay tuned for the full results.)

It appears that being rejected from one’s first choice college is not the end of the world for most students. The psychic costs appear quite high in much of the popular media, but we don’t need to feel too sorry for students who are forced to attend a highly selective college that may have been their seventh choice instead of their first. I spent three years in college working in the admissions office at Truman State University, and I talked with plenty of students for whom Truman was not their first choice. After being rejected by elite, expensive universities, they came to Truman and turned out just fine. So don’t worry too much about getting rejected by your first choice college—especially if paying for college was never one of your concerns. Everything will be okay.

You have read this article college admissions / competition / daniel devise / elite / first choice / Washington Post / Wisconsin Scholars Longitudinal Study with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2012/01/you-got-rejected-from-your-first-choice.html. Thanks!

Clout Goes To College - UPDATE

Here's an update on this blog post ("Clout Goes to College") from last week.


Chicago Tribune (6/10/2009): "University of Illinois shields data on clouted students"

The University of Illinois has refused a request by the Chicago Tribune for test scores and grade-point averages of applicants who appeared on its admissions clout lists, saying the release would violate privacy rights even if the students are not named.

Open records experts scoffed at [the] reason for withholding the information, saying the data do not identify the student and as such cannot be an invasion of privacy.

Experts point to a 2002 decision in which the University of Wisconsin was forced to turn over test scores, grade-point averages and class rankings. In that case, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that when a request does not seek personally identifiable information, there is no overriding public-policy interest in keeping records confidential.

Chicago Tribune (6/10/2009): "Gov. Pat Quinn to create panel to probe U. of I. admissions"

Gov. Pat Quinn will appoint a panel Wednesday to investigate University of Illinois' admissions practices, stepping into the controversy nearly two weeks after the Tribune first reported the existence of a clout list for well-connected applicants.

Quinn's seven-member Admissions Review Commission, led by well-respected retired federal Judge Abner Mikva, will have 60 days to complete its work, according to an executive order expected to be signed by the governor.

You have read this article Chicago Tribune / college admissions / governor / Pat Quinn / University of Illinois with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/06/clout-goes-to-college-update.html. Thanks!

Clout Goes To College

Over the last several days, the Chicago Tribune's Stacy St. Clair and Jodi S. Cohen have produced an eye-opening series ("Clout goes to college") on the so-called "clout list" (or "Category I" list) utilized by the University of Illinois, apparently affording the well-connected a leg up in the admissions process at that state's flagship campus. And, yes, even former Governor Rod Blagojevich and influence peddler Tony Resko make guest appearances in this series. It's a good read.

At a time when it's more competitive than ever to get into the University of Illinois, some students with subpar academic records are being admitted after interference from state lawmakers and university trustees, a Tribune investigation has revealed.

Hundreds of applicants received special consideration in the last five years, according to documents obtained by the Tribune under the state's Freedom of Information Act. The records chronicle a shadow admissions system in which some students won spots at the state's most prestigious public university over the protests of admissions officers, while others had their rejections reversed during an unadvertised appeal process.

While UI officials initially downplayed the use of the clout list, they since have suspended its use pending further investigation. "Clout list put on suspension" (6/2/2009)

Is anyone really surprised by the existence of such a list or the fact that well-connected students get preferential treatment? In actuality, is it necessarily any worse than legacies or athletes receiving special consideration? Don't all such exceptions trample upon an assumed merit-based admissions process?

I'm no expert in this area -- but I imagine that this isn't simply an "Illinois is corrupt" issue, but that such practices are rather widespread in college admissions processes. Am I wrong? Or is UI simply a bad apple spoiling the whole bunch?

You have read this article Chicago Tribune / college admissions / University of Illinois with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/06/clout-goes-to-college.html. Thanks!

Should Colleges Require the FAFSA?

Humor me -- I want to float an idea and see what happens.

Put aside for the moment the fact that the U.S. Department of Education is considering significantly revising and/or eliminating the FAFSA. Take as a prior that this form is required to get financial aid. Also take as a prior that people tend to revert to "default" options rather than make special efforts, so we need to structure choices so that defaults result in positive rather than negative outcomes (thanks, behavioral economics and just-plain-sense people).

What if the FAFSA were a requirement for enrolling in college classes (perhaps to start at 4-year colleges with tuition exceeding $1000)? I mean AFTER admission, not before. You get into college, come to orientation and the University provides all the assistance necessary to help students complete the form, and processes it for everyone. If you don't want to file, ok, but you'd need to check a box saying "no thanks."

With FAFSA completion rates under 50% at many institutions, money is simply left on the table. Colleges worry about economic diversity but have no idea what the profile is of non-FAFSA-completers. And sometimes they want to direct special assistance at the lower-income crowds.

So why not help students and families overcome the barrier that is the FAFSA, and reward them for it?

Has anyone tried it? With what results? What are the pros and cons? Write in, let me know. Thanks!

You have read this article college / college admissions / financial aid / U.S. Department of Education with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/04/should-colleges-require-fafsa.html. Thanks!

UPDATE: Higher Ed Cop Out #1

It's a trend! According to the New York Times: "Facing fallen endowments and needier students, many colleges are looking more favorably on wealthier applicants as they make their admissions decisions this year."

Says Morty Shapiro, "There's going to be a cascading of talented lower-income kids down the social hierarchy of American higher education, and some cascading up of affluent kids."

Darn straight-- remember cop out #1? Need-Sensitive Admissions. Lovely.

You have read this article college / college admissions / higher education / low income / New York Times / students with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/03/update-higher-ed-cop-out-1.html. Thanks!

Higher Ed Cop Out #4

Today's topic: Defining a college's "popularity" by its admissions yield.

I know, it's fun to try and assign schools and colleges a status according to how cool and popular they are-- it's just like the little social games we play in grade school.

But a common method for assessing the popularity of colleges-- by using the admissions yield (% of accepted applicants who enroll), is just plain stupid.

This is practice employed not only by popular publications like the U.S. News and World Report but also by many academic researchers. Take this list of the most popular national universities:

1. Harvard
2. Brigham Young
3. University of Nebraska-Lincoln
4. Stanford
5. MIT
6. Yale
7. Princeton
8. U. Pennsylvania
9. Yeshiva
10. U. Florida

This is silly. Here are just a sample of the myriad reasons why a college can have a high yield, for reasons having nothing to do with popularity:

1. A pool of applicants that didn't apply to lots of colleges. Applications are expensive-- each application carries a fee, and while waivers are available, many students don't know about them.

2. A pool of less-qualified applicants-- those that manage to get in have fewer options at other places.

3. Location. Is the college located near lots of other colleges, or in an area where a place-bound applicant pool would have few alternatives? (notice the presence of University of Nebraska, Lincoln for example)

4. Admissions criteria. Desire to attend a college, a sense of "match", if used in deciding who to admit, will maximize yield. This doesn't mean the school is more popular, only that it admits students who like it more. (this is probably contributing to the ranking of the Ivies- above-- these schools are inclined to admit those students who express a preference for their school over others- maybe because their parents are alums?)

5. Specialties of the college. If the college is among the only that offers a certain mission, it automatically makes it the school of choice for those that want that mission. That's not popularity, it's a niche. (witness Brigham Young and Yeshiva)

Instead of yield, how about considering the use of "revealed preference rankings" such as those proposed by Carolyn Hoxby and Christopher Avery?

Or, better yet-- how about simply deciding that "popularity" isn't a good reason to choose a college? Stop drinking the KoolAid folks....

You have read this article admissions yield / Carolyn Hoxby / Christopher Avery / college admissions / higher education / research / U.S. News and World Report with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/02/higher-ed-cop-out-4.html. Thanks!

Need-Sensitive Admissions: A Follow-up

Yesterday's New York Times has a "data" piece in the Education Life section titled "How Sensitive Are They?" It lists private schools with need-blind and need-sensitive policies, and statistics on the % of incoming freshmen who have their need fully met by an aid package, and the average % of need met (across all incoming freshmen with any need as determined by the college). In most cases, it looks like need-sensitive schools meet close to 100% of the need of incoming freshmen, and in turn most of their students have their need fully met. In contrast, schools that are need-blind meet a smaller % of demonstrated need and have lower proportions of their freshmen with need fully met.

Ok... again, duh: With fewer low-income kids to serve, you can meet more of their need. Why, oh why, didn't the Times include a column indicating the % of incoming freshmen receiving Pell grants, and the graduation rates of their minority (proxy for Pell in absence of another) students??? Talk about taking a one-sided approach to the story...

You have read this article college admissions / financial aid / low income / New York Times / Pell Grant / students with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2009/01/need-sensitive-admissions-follow-up.html. Thanks!

Palin's College Choices

Here's a quick post that follows up on Sara's recent post ("Palin Is A Swirling Student!") about Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin's college education.

Yesterday, the Los Angeles Times ran a story ("Sarah Palin's college years left no lasting impression") that suggests that few professors and classmates can recall Palin from her college years. Even more interesting is the insight it provides into how Palin selected some of the colleges she attended. My guess is that Palin's is not an atypical approach. One of the reasons given in the article is that her family couldn't afford -- especially from Alaska -- to make the campus visits that often are a normal luxury available to students from wealthier families.

Palin's parents -- a high school science teacher and school secretary -- could not afford the college tours so common today. Their four children were expected to, and did, work their way through college.

"We didn't have the luxury of spending a week driving around visiting universities to see what they're like," said Kim "Tilly" Ketchum, a high school friend. "We were looking at pictures of campuses."

Palin and Ketchum picked the University of Hawaii at Hilo from a brochure.

Only after arriving in Hawaii did they realize that Hilo had rainfall approaching 100 inches a year. "The rain," Ketchum said, "was disturbing."

They attended orientation but never even enrolled.

The Wasilla girls soon moved to sunny Honolulu and enrolled in Hawaii Pacific University, a small private liberal arts school. They lived in an apartment in the Waikiki Banyan and took a bus to school.

Palin, a school spokeswoman said, attended full time as a business student.

The girls studied on the beach, tried surfing and pulled straight A's, Ketchum said. "We took the basic classes -- chemistry and biology, this and that."

But there was a problem. "When you're used to having some cooler weather, you get tired of the heat," Ketchum said. "We went one semester there before we realized we needed to go someplace else."

They transferred to tiny North Idaho College, on the shore of Lake Coeur d'Alene. Palin's older brother, Chuck Jr., had gone there before transferring to their father's alma mater, the University of Idaho in Moscow.

At North Idaho, Palin and Ketchum found what they had missed in Honolulu. They lived on campus before moving to separate apartments their second semester. "It was all very quaint," Ketchum said. "You kind of felt safe."

You have read this article 2008 election / college / college admissions / Education / Los Angeles Times / Sarah Palin / students with the title college admissions. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/10/palin-college-choices.html. Thanks!