Search News


Browse Archives

News

Competition vs. Learning

August 25, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Another admissions season is revving up, with the annual avalanche of rankings, the release of data on standardized test scores -- and colleges and high school seniors working to court one another. These days, each year brings reports of an increasing frenzy in admissions -- with more stress for students and their families.

Three scholars of education and economics on Monday released a study designed to get at some of the key issues related to that competition. Using a range of data, they show first that the increased competitiveness isn't imaginary and that it is indeed more difficult to get in (at least at some institutions) these days than it was in previous generations.

But they go on to explore whether or not this is a good thing in terms of learning. After all, high school students could respond to the pressure by taking more rigorous courses and studying more -- or they could focus their attentions on gaming the system and trying to impress.

The study found some evidence of the former, with more high schoolers -- during the time period in which admissions became much more competitive -- taking calculus or Advanced Placement courses. But the analysis found considerable evidence of the latter -- with more students taking multiple standardized tests, more students taking test-prep courses, more students (in states where admissions frenzy is highest) seeking special accommodations when they take standardized tests. Given that many of those behaviors relate to test taking as opposed to learning, the authors question whether the admissions frenzy is encouraging learning.

The study -- released by the National Bureau of Economic Research -- is by John Bound and Brad Hershbein of the University of Michigan and Bridget Terry Long of Harvard University. (An abstract and ordering information may be found here.)

On the issue of how competitive it is to get into college, the scholars say that it's important to distinguish among institutions and students. The most competitive colleges, which generally have not increased their size significantly, have seen dramatic increases in applications, meaning that they are much more difficult to get into. But this trend doesn't apply in the same way to most colleges. Further, the scholars note that -- if one goes back to the '70s and compares applications then to now -- the period covered starts when top colleges still had a deficit of female applicants. So the reality that women who can get into top colleges now apply in greater numbers shouldn't be viewed as a bad thing or a sign of admissions frenzy, the authors suggest.

With those caveats of perspective, however, the authors use College Board data to show that the percentage of students accepted by top private and public universities has indeed declined. The private figures in the following table come from both universities and liberal arts colleges (a pool of 20 each), while the public figures come from universities (a pool of 20).

Acceptance Rate of Top Colleges and Universities

Year Private Public
1986 38.58% 63.15%
1991 38.39% 56.78%
1996 37.55% 58.98%
2001 31.49% 50.55%
2002 30.72% 48.81%
2003 29.85% 47.72%

Faced with those odds, are students doing more to prepare themselves for college -- or for the admissions process?

The authors, using data from the National Center for Education Statistics and elsewhere, find a mixed verdict. In terms of academics, they note significant gains from 1992 to 2004 -- generally a period when admissions frenzy is believed to have heightened -- in the percentage of high school students who took calculus (to 15.2 percent, from 10.3 percent), and in the percentage who took at least one Advanced Placement exam (to 30.9 percent, from 16.5 percent). But on average, the percentage of high schoolers who did at least 10 hours a week of homework fell during that period, from 26.7 percent to 20.4 percent.

Among those students applying to selective colleges, a greater proportion took calculus and AP, and a greater proportion did more than 10 hours of homework a week, but the trend lines are the same.

Studying and Course Taking Among High School Students Applying to Selective Colleges

  Applying to Selective Private Applying to Selective Public
Took calculus, 1992 43.6% 29.4%
Took calculus, 2004 52.3% 36.8%
Took an AP exam, 1992 60.0% 39.7%
Took an AP exam, 2004 77.9% 60.8%
Spent at least 10 hours a week on homework, 1992 49.5% 40.0%
Spent at least 10 hours a week on homework, 2004 45.2% 33.7%

The authors call the decline in homework time "somewhat mystifying," given that the focus on college acceptance and the more rigorous courses would presumably require more study time. Further, they note that some of the positive educational trends, such as more students taking an AP course, were most pronounced outside the Northeast (where admissions frenzy is strongest) and for students outside the top academic ranks (for whom Ivy applications aren't likely).

What are students spending more time on? Testing. For instance, one way to improve one's chances of getting into college might be to take both the SAT and the ACT and to submit the score that makes you look best -- a strategy that may take some time as such students are probably those who will prepare extensively for each test. The scholars found that from 1972 to 2004, the percentage of students who took both tests increased from one in eight to one in five. Among those applying to selective private colleges, the jump was from 15 to 35 percent.

Another strategy is for students to request "special accommodations" (such as extra time) on the SAT, an approach that has increased since such scores are no longer "flagged" for colleges. The scholars note that in states where more students are applying to highly competitive colleges, the percentage of students taking the SAT under such conditions is about 5 percent, more than twice the percentage in states where smaller shares of students apply to competitive colleges.

Other data in the paper suggest that more of students' time in high school is being spent with test-prep coaches. Some test preparation is the norm for students now and increasing shares, especially of those applying to competitive colleges, have private tutors or private classes.

Shifts in Percentage of High School Students Using Test-Prep

  Private classes/tutoring Test-prep in any form
National average, 1992 14.1% 59.7%
National average, 2004 18.1% 62.6%
Applying to selective privates, 1992 32.8% 80.4%
Applying to selective privates, 2004 36.4% 83.0%
Applying to selective publics, 1992 18.0% 74.0%
Applying to selective publics, 2004 27.0% 76.8%

The authors acknowledge that some educational value is possible from test prep, as students may learn words or concepts. By and large, however, the authors are dubious, and note not only that lots of time is going into non-educational activities, but that all of the approaches that are taking up the time of college applicants are more readily available to the wealthy (test-prep services and so forth cost money) than to other applicants.

"The increased competition that currently exists for admission to a more selective college might have real benefits if it were to increase learning amongst high school students," the authors write. "However, our analysis suggests that there are reasons to be suspicious that this congenial outcome might not hold true. Moreover, the increased resources parents and students are able to use to improve their odds of admission at top colleges put low-income students at a disadvantage."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Competition vs. Learning

  • No Surprise
  • Posted by Philogenes , Professor at Community College on August 25, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • So students are taking more impressive courses, but they're also learning a lot more about test taking from elementary school forward. That sounds like gaming the system to me. But that shouldn't surprise anyone; many of the universities to which they apply also try to game the various rankings systems.

  • Harder to get into top schools? Really?
  • Posted by Gus03PhD , Higher Ed Researcher on August 25, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • Just because the acceptance rate is down doesn't mean it's harder to get in. HS graduates have increased, but have quality HS graduates increased, or are they simply applying to more and more schools? The "frenzy" schools are experiencing is dealing with students who have multiple acceptances (something we've seen at our graduate admissions level for the past couple years). Students aren't just gaming the system: they're making it work to their advantage. In short, good students want more options, and they're getting more options.

  • tests everywhere
  • Posted by math prof on August 25, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • The high schools, the elementary schools -- it's all testing, all the time. Fourth graders prepare for the multiple-choice test that will determine whether their school is "failing" or "improving." Proposals abound for evaluating teachers just on the basis of the test scores of their students. (The fourth-grade teacher whose students come from the class of a great third-grade teacher has a better chance to be rated "very effective.")

    "What is honored in a country will be cultivated there." (Plato) Or, if you prefer a more modern quotation, “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision making,” the social psychologist Donald Campbell concluded in 1975, “the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”

    And you wonder that students applying to college are doing lots of test prep?

  • Acceptance rate and mean number of schools applied to
  • Posted by Eaton Lattman , CEO at Hauptman-Wooodward Institute on August 25, 2009 at 12:00pm EDT
  • The drop in percent acceptance at top colleges can also be accounted for if the number of schools applied to by the average applicant has increased. The Common Application has made the submission of larger numbers of applications much more straightforward. Many schools are added to the Common Application roster each year. So the weight to be assigned to the various factors in percent acceptance is quite unclear.

  • I agree, Math Prof
  • Posted by DFS on August 25, 2009 at 12:45pm EDT
  • And as another math prof, I am constantly amazed by the entire focus of the educational establishment on the use of calculators.

    If someone doesn't know how to calculate, then of course they must be taught how to use some electronic device.

    Why, we even now have some new disorder/condition/excuse called "discalculate." I wonder when we will have the analogous affliction of "disspelling," and then must offer the young student access to spellcheck software for the remainder of their lives.

    Or, pick your poison: it's just too hard to do anything, so we must just "teach to the test," since the bureaucracy will arbitrarily hold us all to only those arbitrary standards.

    Where has all of the education gone?

  • Activities
  • Posted by Daniel L. Bennett on August 25, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • The authors might mention this in the NBER paper, but high school students also partake in a vast array of activities outside the classroom --in part to build their resume for college applications. This also detracts from the amount of time that they can spend studying, as observed in the data.

  • Wait a minute...
  • Posted by Justin Snider at Columbia University on August 25, 2009 at 7:00pm EDT
  • Not so fast. As two other people posting have suggested, there are some tremendous leaps in logic being made here. More specifically, I write in reference to this sentence:

    "The most competitive colleges, which generally have not increased their size significantly, have seen dramatic increases in applications, meaning that they are much more difficult to get into."

    A dramatic increase in applications does NOT automatically mean a college is more difficult to get into. Yes, the acceptance rate will be lower, but a lower acceptance rate is not the best measure of difficulty of admission or "competitiveness." Rather, the quality of the applicant pool is. If the acceptance rate decreases while the quality of the applicant pool increases, then, yes, I'd agree that admission to a given college is becoming more difficult or competitive. But there's another scenario whereby the total number of applicants increases without any detectable increase in the quality of those applicants, in which case I'd hesitate to say admission has become more competitive.

    Remember that students today typically apply to many more colleges than did their predecessors just one or two decades ago. The student who applies to 10-12 colleges today is the type who applied to 5-6 colleges ten years ago. This fact alone accounts for much of the dramatic drops in admissions rates. Whether applicant pool quality has increased is a separate question.

  • The study's authors did account for applications
  • Posted by mkt on August 26, 2009 at 5:00am EDT
  • I agree with the comments about how changes in schools' admit rates are a poor indicator of whether it is getting more difficult to get admitted -- we have to also account for how many schools students are applying to, and to the quality of the applicant pool. However the authors of the study are aware of this, and had additional tables (not described in this IHE article) in which they attempt to estimate, for a given level of academic qualifications, what a student's chances were of getting admitted to a school of a given type (selective private, selective public, etc.).

    I didn't look closely at their methodology so I don't know how reliable their estimates are, but they did detect a substantial decrease in a given student's probability of getting admitted to a selective institution over time.

  • More pernicious implications
  • Posted by Steve on August 26, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • Behind the obvious problems of the hyper-competitive nature of the application process is the way the determining factors of highly-selective college admission are affecting and shaping student and family life, at least in upper-middle-class communities around the country. More parents are dictating their kids' choices (taking an AP at the expense of a more interesting non-AP course, hours spent in test prep, organizing activities around potential for admissibility rather than student interest) because of their perceptions of what will "look good" for a college application. To be sure, throughout human history there have been "gamers" who do whatever it takes to gain social prestige for themselves or their children. But, working at a prep school a long way from the Northeast, I increasingly see distrubing signs of what this study only suggests. For instance, a parent recently said to me, "We had our older daughter do Crew because it's a niche sport, but it turned out not to be. [Read: she's not being recruited.] Our younger daughter we're turning into a pole vaulter." No kidding.

  • Welcome to NCLB Trickledown
  • Posted by Teachercontact , Instructor at Public HS and Private Colleges on August 26, 2009 at 2:00pm EDT
  • Welcome to the world of NCLB Trickdown thinking. I teach for both a public high school and as an adjunct in two colleges. In the data driven world created by NCLB, High School students equate testing with thinking. Students are taught to respond to test content and how to test in order to get the scores that will keep their schools off of the NCLB lists. It is no small wonder they approach college entrance in the same fashion. Competition is the name of the game. Schools are evaluated on their graduation rates, Teachers are evaluated based on how many students passed the tests and passed their class. Yes, some education goes on but it is on the lower levels of knowledge. There is not enough time to challenge and encourage students to think, synthesize and evaluate on the levels that should be required by colleges. Honors and AP level courses can sometimes hurt a student's GPA, and many high school students do not see a significant reason to work harder to achieve a lower GPA. They and their parents like seeing A grades. As for special accomodations - 25 percent of adult learners have a learning disability of some type. Colleges need to carefully evaluate transcripts for IEP courses, in the high school that can mean that the learning objectives and standards for successful completion were adapted. Colleges are not under the same laws that public high schools are. Colleges must make reasonable accomodations for people with disabilities but are NOT to lower or modify standards. Students who have had 12 years of having special accomodations and lower standards are often frustrated and amazed when that does not happen on the college level.

  • I still agree, Math Prof,
  • Posted by DFS on August 27, 2009 at 4:00pm EDT
  • And notice how in no subsequent posts did anyone address these issues.

    Enough said, there. The 'collective' world awaits our eventual oblivion.

  • Ph.D. student
  • Posted by Min , ELMP at College of Education on September 1, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • It should be no surprise that the number of students seriously preparing for standard tests keeps growing, at a moment when competition to prestigious institutions is unprecedentedly tense, and standard tests are serving as a comparatively tangible criterion at convenience both to students and to higher institutions.
    Well, it may not be a bad thing that more students are concerning about tests, so long as tests are scientificly designed to reflect curriculum and claim their justice in assessing students' academic performance. Or we may develop a better way, as clear and direct as the national tests are, to assess and enroll the students?
    This is not to applaud or blame this increasingly ardent efforts in test preparation; the point here is that schools and educatators should be aware of this new trend and try some measures to lead the trend to a positive direction.