Understanding the Common Application

Understanding the Common Application The following piece was written by Rachel Korn. Rachel has been featured in ourAdmissions Expert seriesand is a former University of Pennsylvaniaadmissions officer, as well as the founder of her own admissions consulting firm. Your parents applied to colleges on paper: writing individual applications to each school, filling out the same kinds of forms over and over again, and then finally sending them by postal mail. Today, close to 500 schools use the Common Application, the online application that students can fill out just once and then send to multiple universities. Benefits: One of the primary goals of the Common Application is to assist with access schools want to help reduce environmental and emotional barriers that might prevent you from being able to apply. Therefore, they streamline the process for all, enabling the widest range of students to apply. A basic, easy application that can be sent to multiple schools at the click of a mouse encourages students with a smoother, faster process.It can feel a bit less intimidating. As a result, one of the achievements of the Common Application is that diversity, in every measurable way, has increased and that is a great thing. Moreover, application numbers have significantly risen for the schools, so they now have broader and larger applicant pools from which to select their incoming classes. Increasing the numbers and strength of these pools is a very top priority at every university. Challenges:On the other hand, that very rise in applications also makes it harder for the schools to predict if the students genuinely want to attend there. Admissions staffs want students who can potentially be recruited to attend. Therefore, schools may ask for additional supplemental essays to assess how much you have really researched them as well as to get to know you better. You see several versions of a why us? question in many supplemental essays, and it can be critical for you to answer it thoroughly in order to gain admission. The Common Application has also driven a more extensive use of waitlists. Schools waitlist more students these days since their old formulas of predicting how many admitted students would likely attend are no longer as accurate. Schools hold on to more students to make sure they can craft the classes they want with minimum offers of admission. You should also beware of the trap that you face of over-applying dont feel the need to apply to too many schools just because it is easy. A well-chosen, reasoned list of 5-8 schools should be plenty. You should have a strong passion for every application and complete each supplement with care. The Common Application is a terrific tool that has enabled wider, easier access to schools and in return, has helped the schools expand and enrich their applicant pools and student bodies. Overall, it is a strongwin-win. Visit RachelsAdmissions Consultingsite. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views of Varsity Tutors.

The Disappearance Of Small Classes

The Disappearance Of Small Classes Most schools boast small, effective student to faculty ratios. Smaller classes give students more one-on-one time with faculty members, increasing the value of their education. But, the economic downturn is dramatically increasing the size of classes at all levels. Justin Snider, an undergraduate professor of writing at Columbia University, wrote a guest column in The Washington Post stating that schools can no longer afford small classes. Snider cited Californias 1996 decision to launch a state-wide, class-size reduction program that planned to reward districts and schools for capping classes in grades k-3 at 20 students. The measure is estimated to have cost the state at least $20 billion. California was not the only state to spend billions on decreasing class sizes. Funds were mostly irrelevant in the late 90s, only school improvements seemed to matter. States and districts could continually show small student improvement through these efforts. However, current students are beginning to pay the price for these hasty decisions. These efforts were based on the Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) project conducted in Tennessee. It compared low-income students achievement in classes of 13-17 students with similar students in classes of 22-25 students. This study showed miniscule academic achievements for low-income students in smaller classes. Politicians ran with this study, claiming that this could reduce the gap between low-income students and wealthy students. However, they could not mimic the exact circumstances of the Tennessee study. States most notably California went to desperate measures to decrease class sizes. The state hired nearly 21,000 teachers overnight, pulling teachers from wherever they could find them. California hired what they could get, and most of these teachers did not have the appropriate credentials. The number of uncertified teachers in the mid to late 90s dramatically increased from 1 in 50 to 1 in 7. Then, low-income students were much more likely to be taught by uncertified teachers than middle-class or affluent students were. Florida has experienced similar circumstances. It has spent an estimated $16 billion on class-size reduction since 2002. To continue this measure, Floridas taxpayers will have to pay an extra $353 million this year. Money is slowly fading from states budgets, and class sizes are beginning to slowly increase. Parents and administrators are still calling for smaller classes, but politicians are running out of options. Snider argues that teacher quality is much more important than class size. He states that class size can affect students learning at the extremes, but slight decreases of five students or so do not matter. Snider concludes his argument by stating that politicians need to invest more money in teacher quality than class size. Snider used Zeke Vanderhoek, the founder of The Equity Project Charter School in New York City, as an example. Vanderhoeks teachers are the highest paid public educators in the country, earning at least $125,000 per year. Vanderhoek is able to pay his teachers so well because he decided that it would be more beneficial for the students to have the best educators with 30-student class sizes instead of 20.