What’s New in College Admission Trends
The National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), an association of school counselors and college admission officers, released a report, the 2019 State of College Admission, revealing insider trends about the state of college admissions today. Two major findings are below:
1. College applications are up
The volume of college applications continues to increase. The number of applications from first-time freshmen increased by 6 percent and international student applications increased by 7 percent between the fall 2017 and fall 2018 admission cycles. Transfer applications were up 2 percent overall, put public colleges experienced an average 1.7 percent decline in transfer applications while private colleges had a 4.7 percent increase.
2. The college acceptance rate is also up
The national average college acceptance rate for first-time freshmen across all four-year higher education institutions was 66.7 percent in fall 2017, up from a low of 63.9 percent in fall 2012, according to data collected by the U.S. Department of Education, which NACAC included in its report. The average acceptance rate at private institutions was approximately 6 percentage points lower than the average rate at public institutions (64.9 percent versus 70.3 percent).
On average, colleges accept two-thirds of first-time freshmen applicants: The percentage of applicants offered admission at four-year colleges and universities in the United States—referred to as the average selectivity rate—was 66.7 percent for Fall 2017. The national average acceptance rate has increased from a low of 63.9 percent in Fall 2012.
Survey respondents of the NACAC 2018–19 Admission Trends Survey reported that the average acceptance rate for transfer applicants was slightly lower than for the first-time freshmen population (61 percent compared to 66 percent). First-time international students are accepted at a lower rate (52 percent) than both transfer students and first-time freshmen. The report also noted that higher education institutions are broadening their recruitment efforts to attract more transfer and international students. To find the full report, visit www.nacacnet.org.
Some College– But No Degree
The National Student Clearing-House Research Center released a study at the end of October discussing students with “some college, no degree,” meaning they attended college but never earned a credential. The study—Some College, No Degree—focused on 36 million Americans from the Center’s database who went to college but never completed their degree. Of these 36 million, 3.8 million returned to college in the last five years, and 1 million of these students completed their degree. This study focuses on who this group is and how to ensure that more of this group completes their degrees going forward.
Most students who left before completing their degree are nearing middle age now and were in their twenties or younger when they left school. Fifty-one percent of this group were women. According to an October 31 article by Inside Higher Ed, colleges are starting to try and go back and find the people who earned credits but never completed their degree. People who went to school for at least two years full time are the most likely to return to school and earn a degree. Most of this demographic are under the age of 30. To find the full report, visit www.nscresearchcenter.org.
New Rules on Accreditation and State Authorization for Online Programs
On October 31, the U.S. Department of Education announced its finalization of the federal regulations surrounding accreditation and state approval of online education programs to take effect in July 2020. These new regulations are “designed to expand education options for students, holistically lower the cost of education post-high school, and ensure occupationally focused education meets current workforce needs,” according to a statement. Department of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos commented that the regulations “are necessary to bring higher education into the current century, to be more responsive to the needs of students, and to reduce the skyrocketing cost of higher education.”
These new rules will speed up the time it takes for colleges to be approved for new programs and will allow the feds to speed up the time it takes to approve new accreditors, according to an Inside Higher Ed article from November 1. Speeding the pace of accreditation up is not favorable for everyone involved.
Some groups and politicians oppose these new regulations. The U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education Labor, and Pensions released a statement on October 31 announcing Senator Patty Murray of Washington’s view that, “Secretary DeVos’ latest rule undermines quality assurance and oversight of higher education and gives predatory for-profit colleges a free pass to take advantage of students and taxpayers.” The Institute for College Access and Success released a response statement saying, “The rules released today also undermine accreditation as a reliable guide to college quality.”
Trump Signs FUTURE Act for Funding for HBCUs and MSIs
President Trump signed the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for Education (FUTURE) Act into law on December 19, 2019. The bill, which had bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress, restores major funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and other Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs). This funding program expired in September 2019, and the higher education community, including AGB, sent several letters expressing the critical value of these programs and the need for House and Senate leaders to reauthorize them. In addition to funding for HBCUs and MSIs, the bill included a provision to help facilitate the transfer of income data from the IRS to the U.S. Department of Education to simplify the process of applying for and enrolling in student financial-aid programs. This victory particularly benefits low- and middle-income families who have struggled to apply and receive student aid due to procedural issues. Finally, the bill also includes additional funding for the Pell Grant program, the bedrock legislation that allows many low-income students to afford college.
Stop College Closures Act Introduced
U.S. Representatives Sean Casten of Illinois, Donna Shalala of Florida, and Peter King of New York introduced the Stop College Closures Act of 2019 on October 4. This bill would, according to the press release from Casten’s office, “require accrediting agencies for institutions of higher education do more to prevent and protect students from falling victim to sudden school closures.”
The ways that accreditors will be required to help is through responding to complaints and submitting them to the state agency, monitoring the institutions that seem to be experiencing decline, and ensuring that the accreditors go over institutions’ teach-out plans when they seem in danger of closure.
Sweeping Changes Ahead in College Athletics
The NCAA will start allowing student athletes to profit from their fame. This includes making money from use of their name and image. This decision comes after pressure from various lawmakers around the country.
California became the first state to allow college athletes to be paid when Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law in September 2019. The bill prohibits the NCAA from barring a university from competition if its athletes are compensated for the use of their name, image, or likeness beginning January 1, 2023.
Other states began following suit.
The NCAA tried to placate these pushes for change by releasing a statement on October 29 allowing for student athletes to benefit from use of “their name, image, and likeness in a manner consistent with
the collegiate model.” This statement asserted that student athletes should not be paid for their athletic performance and that there is “a clear distinction between collegiate and professional opportunities.”
Fifteen states had proposed legislation and two federal bills were being drafted as of October 31. According to Mark Emmert, president of the NCAA, nearly 30 states are considering bills regarding college athlete compensation, as reported by the Washington Post on December 17.
Many lawmakers want more than just vague language on the issue. On October 30, Wisconsin lawmakers announced through a press release that they are “preparing a bill that would allow college athletes to hire agents and profit from their names starting in 2023.” The bill would not only allow the athletes to be paid for their image but it would also allow schools to pay their athletes without facing consequences from the NCAA.
An NCAA committee was formed in May 2019 in response to the California bill. According to the New York Times on October 29, so far, “guidelines for the committee have included: affirming that athletes are not employees; treating financial opportunities for athletes the same as those for non-athletes unless there is ‘a compelling reason’ not to do so; ensuring that new rules be transparent and enforceable; and prohibiting inducements to recruits beyond the cost of attendance.”
On October 29, the New York Times also reported that “the committee will issue another report at the NCAA’s annual convention in January in Anaheim, California, and then final recommendations at a board of governors meeting in April. The board directed each of the three NCAA divisions to have a plan in place by January 2021.”
On November 6, Trey Johnson, a former Villanova football player sued the NCAA for not paying student athletes. A New York Times article from November 6 explains Johnson’s suit. This suit is based on the argument that by not paying student athletes, the NCAA is breaking minimum wage laws. To win the suit, they must convince the judges that student athletes should be considered employees.
Because it would be very difficult for the NCAA to be able to follow guidelines of many different states regarding college athlete compensation, the NCAA has now opened the door for the federal government to get involved. According to the Washington Post, NCCA President Emmert met with Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Mitt Romney (R-Utah) on December 17. The same day, Emmert attended an event at the Aspen Institute, “The Future of College Sports: Government’s Role in Athlete Pay” where he said: “I feel very strongly, as do all the universities, that college sports shouldn’t be run out of the federal government, and so far I haven’t met a legislator that [who] disagrees. . . . But in terms of addressing these issues and creating a legally valid model in which the schools can provide more than they do now—whatever that might look like has to be created at a national level,” according to the Washington Post.
Share on LinkedIn
