YesLetter: Applications: The Total Package: Articles

Macroapplicationing

by Louis

For qualified students applying to ivies and ivy-equivalent schools, acceptance doesn’t lie only in the way you set up specific applications; it often depends on the overall application strategy, or what I like to call, “macroapplicationing.”

Take “John” as an example. John had top SAT and AP scores, held many leadership positions, and was an accomplished musician/athlete/artist. As per his guidance counselor’s advice, John applied to three schools: one “reach” school, one school “appropriate to John’s qualifications”, and one “safety” school. His applications were correct in every way – they were inventive, straightforward, and very impressive. Unfortunately, the three schools John most wanted to attend were Princeton, Harvard and Stanford, in that order. So, Princeton became his reach school, Harvard his middle school, and Stanford his “safety,” although it’s obvious that there is little safety in this setup. By the time he was rejected from Princeton and Harvard and wait-listed at Stanford, John had to scramble to achieve acceptance to his local state school. He should have gotten into any or all of the schools. What went wrong?

The answer is in the numbers. There is a great deal of statistical proof that details the qualities of the most acceptance-worthy student. But when thousands of students attempt to attain these qualities, the formula backfires. In today’s application pool, most Ivy applicants are academic and extracurricular equals, creating a significant group of candidates who are all acceptance-worthy. A quirky essay here or a particularly good track time there might give one person an edge. There is also the question of niches that specific schools need filled. Princeton may need a bassoonist, while Harvard may need a water polo player. Unfortunately, there’s no way of knowing this, and that’s why we see people who get into Harvard, but get rejected from Princeton and Yale. Here is where macroapplicationing becomes crucial.

First, if the probability of getting accepted to a top school is lowered by the number of qualified people, then we must use the law of large numbers to our advantage. By applying to a multitude of schools (at least five, at best seven to ten), we increase the chance that we’ll get into one or more of them. Of course, this strategy brings protests from all effected parties – parents complain about the rising cost of applications, and students complain about the sheer volume of essays, recommendation letters, and so on. Ultimately, however, the benefits of applying in bulk outweigh the inconvenience and extra expense. As my own parents put it,” peace of mind is worth much more” than the $250 it takes to apply to five schools.

Second, despite the added inconvenience of applying to a greater amount of schools, it is important to get all applications in as early as possible, and that doesn’t mean a week before the deadline. The most horrible applicationing stories involve students who got their Early Decision or Early Action application(s) in and proceeded to await a result without further effort. Then, they had to scramble to complete a number of applications when their ED or EA choices failed to accept them. While it may be difficult to complete five or more applications before December of senior year, it is very nearly impossible to assemble three or four high quality applications within days of the deadline. Thus, it’s better to try to get everything done early. If you succeed in getting applications in early, you’ll also show admissions officers that you’re organized and highly motivated.

So, if you’re reading this and it’s not already December of your senior year, make applicationing a priority. End your college visits before September of your senior year. Apply often, apply early, and then sit back and hope that your prospective alma mater applies its best judgment and admits you.