FUTUREMID2015
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
- Messages
- 78
Can someone please explain this,I've been hearing that the academies next few class sizes will be significantly smaller sue to various reasons? Is this true?
By sending them to NAPS for a year, it's a blatant admission that THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO ATTEND THE USNA.
... but the 19k or 17k APPLICANTS includes those who fill out preliminary applications, in which they may or might not be CANDIDATES (i.e. who have the minimal SAT/ACT scores to qualify for a candidate number) or those who never finished their applications. Essentially, IMHO, you are competing against those who have nominations because without one there is no chance of appointment.
It seems you are implying that the application numbers are inflated to make it appear that the Naval Academy is more selective than it really is.
It's true that the preliminary applications are included. I think it's fair to say that anybody who takes the time to complete the preliminary application has an interest in attending the Naval Academy. So, I think it's fair that they are included.
If that individual ends up not receiving a candidate number - essentially, they have been rejected for admission. The only difference between them and those who get candidate numbers and ultimately fail in gaining an appointment is that their rejection simply comes sooner rather than later. But it's a rejection, nonetheless.
The Naval Academy is rather unique in this regard. They pre-screen applicants because they don't want to waste time creating a file and processing data on somebody who clearly does not have the credentials to be competitive.
Memphis,
Good point and most schools only publish that stat. However, in USNA's case, those applying who don't even have a chance in front of an Admissions Board means that they weren't even considered. I think it would be interesting to see a stat on designated candidates -- that to me would be the real competition and selectivity factor.
This is the last post I am going to make on this point because it seems like we are hijacking the thread.
(See how I deftly unhijacked the thread?)
I wonder if the need to downsize will result in a "one strike you're out" attitude wrt honor violations or academics?
Obviously each situation is different, but in general, you must assume that this is for good reason more than anything. The academy is taking young, successful men and women and molding them into LEADERS OF CHARACTER above all else. Can you honestly put the administration at fault for letting those go who have failed to follow the honor code?