It was as different then as to pretty much not be comparable.GPAs were not what they are today. These 4.5 GPAs really didn’t exist. SATs overall were lower. It’s hard to gauge as standardized tests have changed over the years. The plethora of APs didn’t exist to the level today, the Internet, the number of kids going to 4 year colleges, over inflated GPAs
I've been a BGO since the early 90's and have seen the numbers change more by how they defined (applicant) and less about the actual number of serious applicants. I don't want to be more definitive here but some of the applicants that we "count" have done VERY little toward actually applying.For the most part far fewer people applied to the academies back in the day. Only about 7200 +/- people applied for Annapolis in 1980. Of the 2100 that were qualified medically and academically, 1500 or so were offered admission. So pretty good odds there. I do know from friends that attended way back when (and via admissions). That it may have been easier to gain admission back then, but it was harder to stay in once you were there. Retention rates are way higher than they used to be. Also if interest, only about 5% of the class of 1980 were reapplicants…that’s a really big difference.
I thought I saw a report that listed number of applications started, completed, qualified, etc.I've been a BGO since the early 90's and have seen the numbers change more by how they defined (applicant) and less about the actual number of serious applicants. I don't want to be more definitive here but some of the applicants that we "count" have done VERY little toward actually applying.
Lets just say that the official definition/recognition of "application started" has varied significantly over the years.I thought I saw a report that listed number of applications started, completed, qualified, etc.
If you're referring to what I think you are, the cat is out of the bag on that one. Apparently anyone who fills out the Summer Seminar interest form is considered an applicant, or at least used to be. This forum's favorite professor, Bruce Fleming, wrote about it in one of his colorful op-eds citing a FOIA request. Something like 70% of what were counted as applications were not complete. This made the admissions rate appear to be 7% when it actually floated around one in four (Which obviously is still quite selective).Lets just say that the official definition/recognition of "application started" has varied significantly over the years.
I was referring to more than just the summer seminar interest form. There have been other things that started getting used used over the years that have also been counted but were hardly any real attempt to apply. I do know that one of these measures was later discontinued but certainly made the numbers bigger for some time.If you're referring to what I think you are, the cat is out of the bag on that one. Apparently anyone who fills out the Summer Seminar interest form is considered an applicant, or at least used to be. This forum's favorite professor, Bruce Fleming, wrote about it in one of his colorful op-eds citing a FOIA request. Something like 70% of what were counted as applications were not complete. This made the admissions rate appear to be 7% when it actually floated around one in four (Which obviously is still quite selective).
Quite a few applicants/potential applicants come on here and ask for us to help them write THEIR personal statement.and services that write--*ahem*, I mean, "tailor" your personal statement.
Insightful. With regard to “tailoring” a personal statement, these days I do contract work for a firm focused on clients in career transition requiring assistance with senior executive resumes and federal Senior Executive Service Executive Core Qualifications narratives, a 10-page document. I appreciate the firm draws a line at actually writing things from scratch that are expected to be the product of the person’s own mind and ability to express their thoughts in writing. They don’t do writing samples, for example. I edit the heck out of things and make specific suggestions related to what the writer has failed to address or is not expressing clearly, but I don’t write it or offer examples to be used. Recently, the project coordinator asked me if I would consider a project related to service academy application and nominations essays, an unusual request, and I said “sure, if we are talking about basic editorial review and comment on an already-written document, but not if they want it completely written from a blank sheet.” The coordinator has not heard back from the prospective client.If you're referring to what I think you are, the cat is out of the bag on that one. Apparently anyone who fills out the Summer Seminar interest form is considered an applicant, or at least used to be. This forum's favorite professor, Bruce Fleming, wrote about it in one of his colorful op-eds citing a FOIA request. Something like 70% of what were counted as applications were not complete. This made the admissions rate appear to be 7% when it actually floated around one in four (Which obviously is still quite selective).
Top universities in general are way more completive these days. In 1970 Stanford had an acceptance rate of 22% while today it is 4%, and the trend at the Ivy schools were similar. The number of seats in top universities' classes has not scaled in proportion to the increase in the number of smart kids applying to college, exacerbated by immigration from cultures that place a high value on academic achievement. Then you also have the modern arms race that is the admissions industry: SAT prep, "leadership camps" (whatever those are) and all sorts of extracurricular padding, AP going from meaning "Advanced Placement" to "All People can try it", and services that write--*ahem*, I mean, "tailor" your personal statement. Plus, it's now easier than ever to apply to a college. Other than the academies they almost all use the Common App. Just click a button and your application will be reviewed. That's much easier than handwriting a different paper application for each school and mailing them out, so why not apply everywhere? I wonder how the situation will further evolve over the next few decades.
This seems to be happening in Intermediate Leadership Education (ILE ie new O-4s). In the Army, CGSC is trying to mirror civilian institutions. It does not matter if the Major in front of you is a stone-cold killer who would vanquish his foe. That is not evaluated because the Army has no metric for that and instead focuses on accreditation and the idea that at cocktail parties in DC the civilian who went Ivy and regularly used psychedelic drugs will somehow have more respect and kinship with an ILE grad because measures of performance in ILE are becoming more like civilian grad school.Along with this change in academic qualification is an increased emphasis on becoming a premier educational institution, some will say at the expense of being a premier military leadership institution.
I think at one time this was somewhat true, but as someone who has several recent college graduates in the family (and all of them went to relatively prestigious universities) critical thinking and being open minded are not exactly ideals that many universities embrace anymore. I am also not sure that paying six figures for life lessons is a good return on investment. I am probably the last generation that could truly work their way through most colleges. Once that became impossible, I think the lines have definitely started to blur on the value proposition, especially considering that many jobs don't really need a degree to be qualified...it's just an HR gateway that you have to pass.What alarms me about society in general is the fact that a lot of people are coming out and saying that "I went to college, but I think it is a waste." I think the college experience is not just about academics. It is about life lessons. It teaches you to think critically about the world, how to be open-minded, and how to deal with the consequences that stem from the decisions you makes, among others things.
Do you really think that 33 rich parents involved in an admissions scandal that unfolded over many years “shows educations current place in American society” ?I think the recent college admissions scandal WRT fraudulent athletic recruiting shows higher education's current place in American society. It has become an industry as pointed out already. I think it will continue in that direction. Look at NIL. Do I think players should get compensated if their NIL is used in a game or in an ad? Yes, absolutely. However, I don't really like the fact that athletic recruiting sometimes comes down how big of an NIL deal a school can offer. Obviously, the SAs don't fall into that.
What alarms me about society in general is the fact that a lot of people are coming out and saying that "I went to college, but I think it is a waste." I think the college experience is not just about academics. It is about life lessons. It teaches you to think critically about the world, how to be open-minded, and how to deal with the consequences that stem from the decisions you makes, among others things.
I will say one thing I love about being in the military is that it gives you a global view. Most daily events that occur in the US don't really affect the military, but actions/news in other nations certainly do. It also makes you understand the role the US plays in the international arena.