Skip to main content

How Selective Might Elite Universities Be in 2050?

One trend that is often discussed among both academics and parents is how much more difficult it has become to gain undergraduate admission at the nation's most selective colleges and universities.

While it is a myth that it is overall more difficult for our kids to get into college, it is true that entry into the most highly ranked institutions has become less likely.

A fun, if admittedly dubious, exercise is to project future acceptance rates based on past trends. Few social indicators change linearly, a caution that is particularly applicable to anything having to do with higher education. Still, if we suspend our disbelief for just a little bit, we can perhaps get a bit of a glimpse into the future of the most selective institutions by looking at the past.

The table below shows the undergraduate acceptance rate of a handful of highly selective institutions in 1992 and 2021. I have then projected the potential acceptance rate in 2050, applying each institution's rate of change from 1992 to 2021.

School

1992 Acceptance Rate

2021 Acceptance Rate

2050 Potential Acceptance Rate

Brown

23%

8.3%

3.0%

Columbia

28%

5.8%

1.2%

Cornell

31%

8.7%

2.4%

Dartmouth

26%

6.0%

1.4%

Harvard

16%

5.2%

1.7%

Northwestern

42%

6.8%

1.1%

Penn

40%

6.7%

1.1%

Princeton

16%

4.0%

1.0%

Stanford

22%

4.0%

0.7%

Yale

22%

4.6%

1.0%

Mean

27%

6.0%

1.5%

In 1992, the average probability of gaining undergraduate admission to a highly selective institution was more than one in four (27%). By 2021, just over one in twenty (6%) applicants got into these same schools. This change is a remarkable shift in the demand for elite education across a single generation.

Is it possible that this steep trend towards an ever-widening mismatch between the demand for an elite education and the supply of available spots will continue into the next 30 years? If the next three decades are like the past three decades in terms of elite admissions, then the acceptance rate to the hardest to get into universities could drop to less than 1 percent for some schools and 1.5 percent on average.

There are (at least) two reasons why we think that these projections of 2050 acceptance rates to highly selective institutions are at least plausible. The first reason is that scarcity drives demand. The lower a school's acceptance rate, the higher the value of admission to that school will be judged.

This perceived admittance value will encourage more applicants to apply, further unbalancing supply and demand. As elite schools are slow to grow their enrollments in proportion to demand, the acceptance rate will likely continue to go down.

A second reason to expect that highly selective schools will become more selective between now and 2050 is wealth. Admissions selectivity and institutional wealth are highly correlated -- likely causally so. As endowments increase for an already wealthy set of colleges, these schools have the financial flexibility to raise the amount of no-loan financial aid they can provide.

At Stanford, students from families that earn less than $75K a year pay no tuition, room, or board. For students living on campus whose parents earn less than $150K a year, Stanford covers the full cost of tuition. The specific amounts of no-loan financial aid for low and middle-income students vary across elite institutions. But the trend over time is to offer more generous financial terms to admitted students unable to afford to published (and rising) tuition at these schools. 

There is no reason to expect that this strategy of high-tuition/high-scholarship (by family income) pricing will not continue among these schools. The higher the family income ceiling in which costs are covered, the more the demand for available admission slots will grow. 

In a world of 2050 where the US's already wealthy schools are unimaginably more affluent, it is entirely imaginable that most students at elite schools will be attending for free.

Under this scenario, an acceptance rate of 1 percent seems eminently plausible for the elite university of 2050.

Show on Jobs site: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 
Advice Newsletter publication dates: 
Sunday, January 30, 2022
Diversity Newsletter publication date: 
Sunday, January 30, 2022


Udimi - Buy Solo Ads from Inside Higher Ed https://ift.tt/PMLHdhJ7t
via IFTTT

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Author discusses book on grad school

Graduate school is a great mystery to students, and to some faculty members, says Jessica McCrory Calarco, the author of A Field Guide to Grad School: Uncovering the Hidden Curriculum (Princeton University Press). Calarco is an associate professor of sociology at Indiana University. She believes many faculty members (as well as graduate students, of course) will benefit from her book. She responded to questions via email. Q: How did you get the idea to write this book? Why did the issue speak to you? A: This book started as a tweet . Or, rather, as a series of tweets about the hidden curriculum of higher ed. Ph.D. student Kristen K. Smith had tweeted about the need to better educate undergrads about grad school opportunities, and it made me think about how opportunities in academe are often hidden from grad students, as well. Reflecting on my own experiences in grad school, I thought about the many times I'd found myself embarrassed because of what I didn't know -- the

Guest Blog: Where Does the Bizarre Hysteria About “Critical Race Theory” Come From?—Follow the Money!

Blog:  Just Visiting Guest Blog: Where Does the Bizarre Hysteria About “Critical Race Theory” Come From?—Follow the Money! By Isaac Kamola Trinity College Hartford, CT There are now numerous well-documented examples of wealthy right-wing and libertarian donors using that wealth to transform higher education in their own image. Between 2005 and 2019, for example, the Charles Koch Foundation has spent over  $485 million  at more than 550 universities. As demonstrated by Douglas Beets and others, many of these grants include considerable  donor influence  over what gets taught, researched, and even who gets hired. It should therefore come as no surprise that conservative megadonor, Walter Hussman Jr.,  lobbied hard  to deny the Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones a tenured professorship at the UNC journalism school that bears his name. Nor that her offer of tenure, awarded through the normal channels of faculty governance, was ultimately  revoked   by a far-

Live Updates: Latest News on COVID-19 and Higher Education

Image:  Woman Charged With Faking Positive COVID-19 Test From U of Iowa   Nov. 5, 6:14 a.m. A lawyer in Colorado has been charged with faking a positive COVID-19 test from the University of Iowa to get out of a court appearance, The Gazette reported.   Emily Elizabeth Cohen was booked Tuesday on a detainer from the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, shortly after she tweeted that the Colorado court system “just had me arrested alleging I lied about having COVID. Tweeting from cop car.”   The Boulder Daily Camera reported that Cohen is scheduled for a 10-day trial in Boulder County in Colorado starting Dec. 6 for 11 felony counts stemming from allegations she collected fees from immigrant families before losing contact with them without producing visas or work permits.   -- Scott Jaschik Judge Permits Suit Against Montana State to Go to Trial Nov. 3, 6:18 a.m. A Montana judge has ruled that a suit against Montana State University over the shift to online education