|
Post by somedaycamesuddenly on Aug 7, 2017 6:28:08 GMT -5
Think we are talking past each other. I am not a fan of our admissions decisions at all, but yield rate, combined with other numbers, does matter beyond planning for how many beds will be needed for the next year. Not doubt it can be gamed. Lots of rankings can be gamed (including US News). Years ago Chicago had a relatively high acceptance rate compared to its peer schools but then decided to change its approach to drive their rate down. Quite a few top-end schools encourage students with zero chance of getting accepted to apply. For these reasons and more, I've become more of a fan of composite rankings (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/10/20/heres-a-new-college-ranking-based-entirely-on-other-college-rankings/) and others. What annoyed me was someone from BU patronizing HC on our board. Until our BOT wakes up nothing will change in admissions. I think that's a pretty low bar to consider my comments patronizing. In summation: I largely agreed with what other poster's were saying that BU is not a great fit for the Patriot League. I stated that I didn't think BU really competed with HC for student's though HCPride corrected me on this. Turns out we do compete apparently. I agreed that Holy Cross will, basically always, have a higher yield than BU though I explained some reasons why I think BU's is considered low. I posted some statistics about how BU has done recently in rankings and the common data set in relation to Holy Cross. I can see why that may have touched a nerve but posters were already talking about BU's statistics related to Holy Cross's. Regardless, I think Holy Cross being viewed as a measuring stick as a fellow Patriot League school that BU was trying to emulate in some ways by joining the league should be viewed as a compliment. At the end of the day, student's will make the choice they want to and will have lots of information to both justify and rationalize whichever decision they make. Hopefully 10 years from now both institutions have improved and you are showing me the Top 15 liberal arts ranking versus our top 30 national ranking and we can debate the merits of each.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Aug 7, 2017 19:18:19 GMT -5
One has to be careful with respect to the yield rate for HC for two reasons. 1.) The relatively high percentage admitted early decision. 1. a.) The high percentage of recruited athletes in each enrolling class. If between 20-25 percent of the entering class is recruited athletes, who have a yield rate of 100 percent, the yield rate for the remainder of the class drops significantly. (Recruited athletes would be a subset of early decision.) Never hurts to remind folks that 'yield' can be a bit tricky (and strategically managed). IMHO it is one of our better stats (relative to our selectivity and our ['test score optional'] board scores, for example) on its face but, upon the further examination you provide, perhaps not so much. (I remember the Tufts Syndrome several years back wherein a few colleges were accused of rejecting overqualified students [believing they would be accepted into more selective colleges and go elsewhere] to build their yield statistic. Yet another way to 'manage' yield. Probably still happens at a few places.) I hadn't heard of the practice of rejecting overqualified students until it happened to may daughter. She was accepted at Dartmouth, Cornell, William and Mary, Wake, Bowdoin, and Bucknell among others. But was rejected outright by Lehigh, presumably because she hadn't shown much interest and was overqualified.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Aug 7, 2017 19:26:41 GMT -5
If it's not too personal, where did she go ?
|
|
|
Post by realism on Aug 8, 2017 14:06:21 GMT -5
FOLLOWING THE FACTS IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.
The purpose here is not to denigrate the selectivity of any one P.L. school. Acceptance rate and geographical diversification are two metrics from a smorgasbord of important characteristics that contribute to the unique character of the P.L. today. But, size or “tradition” in isolation, should not be criteria for determining a school's “entitlement” to P.L. membership. You can conclude from the facts on this thread that Boston University has as much claim on legitimacy in the Patriot League as any other school: And, imho, it significantly benefits the league.
1. The original 5 football schools ( Holy Cross, Colgate, Lehigh, Lafayette and Bucknell ) were bound together more by Division 1 membership/tradition and enrollment size than other institutional characteristics. Many of today's metrics for evaluating schools didn't exist then. 2. Indeed, Lehigh and Bucknell are universities that offer engineering and business as majors. Lafayette is mostly a liberal arts college which uniquely also offers diverse engineering majors. Colgate and Holy Cross are liberal arts colleges, but the Sader's strong Jesuit tradition distinguishes it from the rest.. 3. As pointed out in this thread, HC ( 39% acceptance rate ) doesn't currently participare in the applicant overlap that the other 4 original schools share with each other today. Nor does HC applicants overlap that much with other east coast "national LAC's." It has more overlap with other groups. 4. Boston University ( 25% acceptance rate ) does share in an application overlap to some degree with each of these original 5 schools. .Perhaps this is because of its sheer size.and breadth of offerings. 5. Indeed, the acceptance rates of the other 4 “originals“ have progressively become more selective ( 3 of the 4 are at 25 %, with the other at 28.7 %.) This in turn partially reflects that the other 4 have diversified nationally and internationally and have enhanced their brands since the original agreement to create a league for football,This group of 4 also have reasonable applicant overlap with other "national easR coast LAC's." 6. A strong argument can be made that the adherence to the Academic Index trumps whatever enrollment advantage a school like Boston University presents to the league. 7. Diversification of institution characteristics has been a gradual and successful experiment for the P.L. since the original five schools created a football league. Army West Point ( 10 % acceptance rate ) and Navy ( 9% ) and Georgetown ( FB only-16,4% ) are great examples. Each has enjoyed significant brand growth and geographical diversification in institutionally appropriate ways.. 8. American University ( 25 % ), originally may have been a controversial league addition because it broke the size and academic mold of the P.L.. However, we've witnessed how both the P.L. and American have benefited from this relationship.
In contrast,, Holy Cross ( 39 % ) Fordham ( FB only 44% ) and Loyola Maryland ( 61% ) appear to represent a range of enrollment and geographical diversification as well as being outliers in the league acceptance rate trends.. Make no mistake about it...these are merely stats, which may or may not matter, in the long haul. Despite the difference in enrollment and other variables, each institution contributes to and enhances the league reputation in their own unique way.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Aug 8, 2017 14:30:40 GMT -5
I agree. IMHO the closer we at Holy Cross are associated with Boston University (given BU's excellent reputation among parents/prospective students) the better it is for HC.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Aug 8, 2017 14:38:49 GMT -5
And, unlike the others, they all happen to be Roman Catholic. Think that has anything to do with anything?
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Aug 8, 2017 14:44:18 GMT -5
No one has mentioned it, but I think that one of the barriers we face with many students, is our name itself. Other Jesuit institutions bear the name of a person or geographic identifier. I think that one reason that BU and BC are so popular is their name, which includes Boston. Holy Cross contains no clue about the college, except that it has a religious identification. As Catholic high schools go away, as people react to the scandals of pedophilia by religious individuals and as our general society becomes a bit more secular, our religious identification becomes less of an asset, and may even turn some prospective students off. I am not saying we should change it, but just that this is a factor.
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Aug 8, 2017 14:45:19 GMT -5
And, unlike the others, they all happen to be Roman Catholic. Think that has anything to do with anything? Just saw your comment, after posting mine. I think maybe it does.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Aug 8, 2017 14:53:00 GMT -5
Chu, I agree with your observations and also agree we should not change the name. If we stay a niche school for students unafraid of a Jesuit/Catholic background, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by realism on Aug 8, 2017 15:12:12 GMT -5
Let's not overlook the challenge of the "liberal-arts-private-school-$ticker-$hock-career-relevance" variable. This one is not shared equally by each P.L. institution. Perhaps this is one other explanations for B.U.'s ascendance ? Each P.L.institution is addressing this one in its own way.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Aug 10, 2017 7:52:53 GMT -5
Although our greatest competitors for students are not fellow Patriot members, having the lowest board scores for accepted students in the Patriot League doesn't help attract high quality students either.
(Note, all the prospective students/parents/guidance counselors look at Naviance nowadays and see right through any 'test score optional' distortions).
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Aug 10, 2017 9:21:35 GMT -5
How many students and even parents focus on schools with the highest SAT/ACT scores rather than look for the "best fit" for their kid? While admittedly a skewed sampling, I can tell you from personal experience over the last 4-5 years helping out on "Move-In" day that a lot of my duties were in Hogan figuratively holding the hands of the parents, often their first kid going away to college. Without fail, almost every parent and/or student told me that when they visited the campus, they "knew" that Holy Cross was right for them. I also have gone to the alumni-senior receptions and talked to kids who were going to graduate from Holy Cross later that week or the following week and they all think that the 4 years they spent were well worth it and are better people for coming to Holy Cross.
Now the case has been made numerous times here that SAT optional makes our numbers look better and I don't doubt that. In fact, I was a very vocal opponent of that move for the reasons many have already given. However, Holy Cross' position is that they want to admit students on a broader spectrum of experiences than doing well on the SAT/ACT and claim they were doing that all along. As such, there were undoubtedly students who Holy Cross would have liked who would not have applied with a mandatory SAT, assuming they would not get in. Of course, for student-athletes, the NCAA requires submission of SATs and that makes up a quarter or more of the students and we can be pretty confident that they are not all the highest SATs scorers admitted. No, I don't like the slippage in USN&WR rankings when we were routinely in the top 25 of LACs. But part of that slippage is the addition of the service academies into that category. The big thing with that rating service always seemed to be "reputation." Sorry to say but a clearly Catholic school is going to have some negative baggage there. The biggest thing is we need is to recruit more aggressively for greater geographic diversity.
Bottom line: I no longer fret about the SAT optional philosophy of the College. When I talk to these students, I can't tell who did or did not submit SATs scores to Holy Cross. These are quality people and by that measure, Holy Cross is fulfilling its mission.
|
|
|
Post by realism on Aug 10, 2017 10:37:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Aug 10, 2017 12:26:39 GMT -5
How many students and even parents focus on schools with the highest SAT/ACT scores rather than look for the "best fit" for their kid? While admittedly a skewed sampling, I can tell you from personal experience over the last 4-5 years helping out on "Move-In" day that a lot of my duties were in Hogan figuratively holding the hands of the parents, often their first kid going away to college. Without fail, almost every parent and/or student told me that when they visited the campus, they "knew" that Holy Cross was right for them. I also have gone to the alumni-senior receptions and talked to kids who were going to graduate from Holy Cross later that week or the following week and they all think that the 4 years they spent were well worth it and are better people for coming to Holy Cross. Now the case has been made numerous times here that SAT optional makes our numbers look better and I don't doubt that. In fact, I was a very vocal opponent of that move for the reasons many have already given. However, Holy Cross' position is that they want to admit students on a broader spectrum of experiences than doing well on the SAT/ACT and claim they were doing that all along. As such, there were undoubtedly students who Holy Cross would have liked who would not have applied with a mandatory SAT, assuming they would not get in. Of course, for student-athletes, the NCAA requires submission of SATs and that makes up a quarter or more of the students and we can be pretty confident that they are not all the highest SATs scorers admitted. No, I don't like the slippage in USN&WR rankings when we were routinely in the top 25 of LACs. But part of that slippage is the addition of the service academies into that category. The big thing with that rating service always seemed to be "reputation." Sorry to say but a clearly Catholic school is going to have some negative baggage there. The biggest thing is we need is to recruit more aggressively for greater geographic diversity. Bottom line: I no longer fret about the SAT optional philosophy of the College. When I talk to these students, I can't tell who did or did not submit SATs scores to Holy Cross. These are quality people and by that measure, Holy Cross is fulfilling its mission. There are no doubtlessly many rational and irrational (and shifting) factors in college application/selection (including student profile - often, but not limited to, a subset of 'fit"). There are kids (and their parents and guidance counselors) with higher scores/grades who see on Naviance that they don't really fit the academic profile at HC. And HC is infamous for its lack of academic merit aid. And famous for its generous athletic merit aid. That sends a message. Unfortunately there is an inertia to student/parent/guidance counselor data-based perceptions. No doubt (and I mean this respectfully) a large swath of students/parents at a large swath of colleges 'just knew' that particular college was right for them and are subsequently grateful they attended that particular college. A funny thing about the USNWR slippage, the service academies did not neatly occupy places 1, 2, and 3 when they were included in national liberal arts colleges. Sure, some colleges were displaced a full three places (like HC), but many other liberal arts colleges (like Colgate, etc) have not been displaced a full three places or any places at all. (This year, FWIW, HC is tied at 32 with Air Force Academy and trails the other two) My concern about the "test score optional" scheme is that it has harmed our academic reputation. In my experience. Obviously it has greatly increased the quantity of applications (41% increase in the first year alone according to HC) but in my experience it has decreased the quality. As some readers are aware, this (decrease in quality and subsequent damage to academic reputation, notwithstanding an increase in applications) was the precise reason why Lafayette ended their 'test score optional' experiment. (Even those of us who bemoan the negative impact - as we see it - of 'test score optional' generally agree that without it our selection rate would be abysmal.)
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Aug 12, 2017 18:13:52 GMT -5
I am going to draw a comparison between what HC did with respect to athletics, and admissions.
After HC brought in ADNP, the fact that an applicant for an athletics-related position was an alumnus of HC, or had ties to the Greater Worcester area, was not a plus on the resume. In fact, perhaps just the opposite.
Yet even more home-grown and insular than the old AD is HC admissions, and which remains that way. This tends to simply reinforce Ann's world-view and strategic approaches. The result is an admissions department that is slow at the switch, and does what is comfortable, rather than what is challenging.
Wellesley's class of 2020 enrolled more students from California than from Massachusetts. _________________
With respect to the surge in comparative competitiveness between Boston institutions and HC, don't overlook the fact that the Boston institutions, (BostonU, BC, and Northeastern) have responded to city edicts and built new residence halls for many thousands of students. If one is not from Massachusetts, the notion of annually having to find new lodging for most of your undergraduate years is not particularly appealing. Emerson, which is not a competitor to HC, was planning to move out of Boston not that many years ago. It stayed, built new residence halls, and seems to be thriving.
On the other hand, Tufts, not in Boston, has built little in the way of new student housing and seems, IMO, to be almost as moribund as HC.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Aug 12, 2017 20:32:24 GMT -5
DR and Anne moribund? True. Our curriculum? More so. Get a biz skool.
|
|