Research on undermatching

[8filltheheart]

Here is an article
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/04/07/new-analysis-sees-mixed-results-undermatching

Here is the actual paper
http://www.aera.net/Portals/38/Newsroom%20-%20Recent%20Research/UPDATED%20Selectivity%20and%20the%20college%20experience.pdf

I haven't read the paper yet. The article discusses the negatives which are significant.

Off to read the research.

[Jenny in Florida]

I thought this quote from the article was especially interesting:

 

During the question-and-answer period after the presentation, Fosnacht said that his results made him skeptical of the idea that everyone should go to the most competitive college that will admit them. "I think there are lots of personal situations" that could lead someone to go to a less competitive college, he said, with benefits in faculty interaction as a desirable outcome for the undermatched. "If you want to go to a less selective school, but there is a great music program or another program, that's a reasonable choice," he said.

 

This more or less describes the choice my son made to look primarily at smaller, less selective LACs. He knows he really wants lots of opportunity to be involved in projects and productions. He wants personal attention and opportunities to shine, which we had read would be less available at larger, more competitive schools. And he is concerned mostly with the performing arts programs. His strategy has been to focus on smaller, less selective LACs with good performance training that also offer some kind of honors program to provide enough academic challenge to keep him from getting bored.
 

[Okra]

That was interesting.  It didn't seem to talk about financial reasons.  It seems to me that would be a main reason for undermatching.  

 

A school that offers merit scholarships could seem like a better idea then going to a school that is a better "academic match" and having huge student loans.  

 

 

[8filltheheart]

Okra, I agree. I think a single sentence on page 20 sums up my thoughts on the paper---it lacks data on the college selection process. Those "most likely under matched students" that live within 20 miles are most probably unable to afford to live on campus and are commuter students.

Sigh.....I think the research was completely unenlightening. It seems like common sense to me EXCEPT for the constant suggestion that all students needed was more information about college choice in order to not make the mistake of under matching. That may acct for some undermatching, but economics, not ability, has got to play a factor in huge number of middle class students' choices.

It seems like common sense to me EXCEPT for the constant suggestion that all students needed was more information about college choice in order to not make the mistake of under matching.

 

Between the Internet in general, and sites like college confidential and social media, I'm struck by how _MUCH_ information today's students have about colleges.  So much more than we had.  I don't know that being awash in all this information makes the choice any easier.  And I don't know that throwing even more information at them will help them make "better" choices, whatever "better" may be.

[Barbara H]

To me this seems like a good example of the limitations of trying to apply general research to homeschool students.  The real risk I see from "undermatching" at large institutions is that students may not have a peer group or structure that pushes them to really take advantage of their education (take challenging classes, get to know professors, seek out opportunities). Academic advising is not great at a lot of schools, so students may not get great support.

 

What I often see with homeschool students who "overmatch" is that they are a very specific kind of kid - high ability, middle class, highly motivated, and goal directed. They are "big fish" kids who are primed for college and ready to be highly successful in college. If they are at big schools they may be on large merit scholarships or in honors programs that provide better advising. They may have opportunities right from the beginning of college that are different than the typical student at their institution. And, they may not be carrying the baggage (burnout, expectation they get extra credit and extensions, etc.) that a lot of kids do coming out of traditional brick and mortar schools.

 

That's not to say "undermatching" is without concern. But, particularly for students who are choosing state flagships and decent liberal arts colleges, I do not see a big risk. In fact with the right motivation, I can see a strong case for "undermatching" for students who want particular career paths.

[8filltheheart]

Between the Internet in general, and sites like college confidential and social media, I'm struck by how _MUCH_ information today's students have about colleges.  So much more than we had.  I don't know that being awash in all this information makes the choice any easier.  And I don't know that throwing even more information at them will help them make "better" choices, whatever "better" may be.

 

I agree.   I think the claim that students don't have enough information to understand college decisions is not universal.    But, more importantly, HAVING the INFORMATION does NOT directly correlate to making the decision to attend a better match school.   That is where I think the huge disconnect with reality is.

 

To me this seems like a good example of the limitations of trying to apply general research to homeschool students.

 

I don't think it is a matter of limiting the application to homeschool students.   Our oldest went to a university where there were only a handful of homeschooled students on campus.  BUT, the vast majority of the students were commuter students.   Ditto to the university we lived near when he went away to that university.   I think the idea that commuting students make the decision b/c they are uniformed is rather short-sighted.   I would suspect most students make the decision b/c of $$.

[regentrude]

Sigh.....I think the research was completely unenlightening. It seems like common sense to me EXCEPT for the constant suggestion that all students needed was more information about college choice in order to not make the mistake of under matching. That may acct for some undermatching, but economics, not ability, has got to play a factor in huge number of middle class students' choices.

 

Agreed. I found the paper underwhelming and common sense, too. I was also under the impression that he mainly investigated the college selection, but barely what happens to the undermatched students and why. THAT would have been the really interesting aspect: those who do not fare well, what factors contribute.

 

Speaking merely from anecdotal evidence: as an instructor at a public university, I regularly encounter students who are very high performing and would have been (or in some cases actually have been)  admitted to a more selective school, but have chosen this school, usually for financial considerations. Generally, those students tend to be doing extremely well. They take advantage of being the "big fish" by taking double majors/several minors and freeing up time for undergraduate research or involvement in extracurricular activities. The brilliant, high performing students I met seem to be at peace with their decision and are determined to get the best possible education this school offers. One young man for example double majors in physics and chemistry with minors in philosophy and French and plans to go to medical school. Another majors in math and comp sci and gets a minor in music and participates in all three vocal ensembles on campus. Yet another student I had a few years ago started dual enrollment at age 16, volunteered as a tutor before he even was a real college student (just like my DD), and ended up with a double major and research and teaching experience.

I am inclined to think that the most important factor is the student's attitude. Being "undermatched" does not doom a student to failure and dropping out (the latter was an aspect the author of the study just mentioned, but I did not see him fully explore this - maybe the students ended up attending a different institution?). I see every semester how "undermatched" students take advantage of all the opportunities they have because they are "big fish". It all depends on the student. nothing in the study convinced me otherwise.

[8filltheheart]

Agreed. I found the paper underwhelming and common sense, too. I was also under the impression that he mainly investigated the college selection, but barely what happens to the undermatched students and why. THAT would have been the really interesting aspect: those who do not fare well, what factors contribute.

 

Speaking merely from anecdotal evidence: as an instructor at a public university, I regularly encounter students who are very high performing and would have been (or in some cases actually have been)  admitted to a more selective school, but have chosen this school, usually for financial considerations. Generally, those students tend to be doing extremely well. They take advantage of being the "big fish" by taking double majors/several minors and freeing up time for undergraduate research or involvement in extracurricular activities. The brilliant, high performing students I met seem to be at peace with their decision and are determined to get the best possible education this school offers. One young man for example double majors in physics and chemistry with minors in philosophy and French and plans to go to medical school. Another majors in math and comp sci and gets a minor in music and participates in all three vocal ensembles on campus. Yet another student I had a few years ago started dual enrollment at age 16, volunteered as a tutor before he even was a real college student (just like my DD), and ended up with a double major and research and teaching experience.

I am inclined to think that the most important factor is the student's attitude. Being "undermatched" does not doom a student to failure and dropping out (the latter was an aspect the author of the study just mentioned, but I did not see him fully explore this - maybe the students ended up attending a different institution?). I see every semester how "undermatched" students take advantage of all the opportunities they have because they are "big fish". It all depends on the student. nothing in the study convinced me otherwise.

 

Thank you for posting this Regentrude.   I honestly believe that what you describe will be our ds's experience and I think it is what his professors here see.   The part of the article that talked about professors seeking out the strong students definitely has been ds's experience.   He has been offered opportunities as a DE student that even some of their own majors haven't been offered.   Whether or not that is the best policy for the university is beside the pt.   I think it really means they see something in him that they want to encourage.   I hope that that is the case amg the majority of college professors.

[regentrude]

Thank you for posting this Regentrude.   I honestly believe that what you describe will be our ds's experience and I think it is what his professors here see.   The part of the article that talked about professors seeking out the strong students definitely has been ds's experience.   He has been offered opportunities as a DE student that even some of their own majors haven't been offered.   Whether or not that is the best policy for the university is beside the pt.   I think it really means they see something in him that they want to encourage.   I hope that that is the case amg the majority of college professors.

 

From my personal experience and that of my colleagues: nothing is more rewarding to a college professor than mentoring and working with a  promising, talented, hard working student. The professors I know are teaching at a college because they enjoy teaching and working with young people. Encountering a student of your son's caliber is a highlight for an instructor, and I am sure his future professors will continue to present him with opportunities - because they want to see him succeed and go as far as possible.

 

Btw, I actually think, offering these opportunities to him as a DE students is a smart move by the university, because they were clearly trying to attract him to their school. Definitely in the school's best interest.

 

Good luck to your son.

[Catherine]

I don't want to seem like I'm bragging but this has been my ds's experience. After turning in a somewhat lackluster, undermotivated performance for some of his HS courses, he applied to too many reaches and ended up at a good school, but based on his stats, a relative safety for him. After a disaster last spring (I posted here about his friend's suicide), he picked up the pieces and has done quite well this year and is on track to complete a double major in math(honors track) and physics, double minor in German and computer science, and has already gotten some opportunities to do research. He too has made contact with several receptive professors and found a really wonderful advisor who is a relatively young, energetic math professor that I think he identifies with.

I don't think he is "undermatched"-but I do think it has been a great ego boost for him to find he is able to do well while still feeling challenged, and being able to find challenges for himself. My mommy ego wishes he hadn't wasted so much potential in high school, but I also think that for kids who are not go-getters, leaders, assertive about getting themselves noticed, being a big fish is very gratifying. And ds is none of the above.

And I agree with Regentrude-professors love to work with eager, hard working students who seek them out. My dh is a professor and the highlights of his professional career have been the students he's been able to personally mentor through medical school and residency that have sought his guidance and advice.

[creekland]

 

I am inclined to think that the most important factor is the student's attitude. Being "undermatched" does not doom a student to failure and dropping out (the latter was an aspect the author of the study just mentioned, but I did not see him fully explore this - maybe the students ended up attending a different institution?). I see every semester how "undermatched" students take advantage of all the opportunities they have because they are "big fish". It all depends on the student. nothing in the study convinced me otherwise.

 

The key also is to make sure one is at a school WITH opportunities.  The students I've heard back from who were overmatched and disappointed were that way because they were at schools with limited opportunities - something that can easily happen at lower level schools.  They were doing great with what they had, but when what they have does not match the student's interest (research opps or in depth course opportunities), one wonders about the value of it all.

 

We have purposely overmatched all three of ours.  They are comfortably in the top 25% (perhaps 10%) of students at their respective colleges if one is looking at stats.  We did this for merit aid and so they would have the chance to be "the big fish" if they held up to their end of it all.  We also carefully selected schools for their desires/opportunities.  So far, we have not been disappointed.  My guys have enjoyed their schools and the opportunities they've had.  I'm hoping youngest will complete the trifecta.  Time will tell.

 

I would not want mine going to a school where they were in the bottom 50% of incoming students.

[FaithManor]

I agree.   I think the claim that students don't have enough information to understand college decisions is not universal.    But, more importantly, HAVING the INFORMATION does NOT directly correlate to making the decision to attend a better match school.   That is where I think the huge disconnect with reality is.

 

 

I don't think it is a matter of limiting the application to homeschool students.   Our oldest went to a university where there were only a handful of homeschooled students on campus.  BUT, the vast majority of the students were commuter students.   Ditto to the university we lived near when he went away to that university.   I think the idea that commuting students make the decision b/c they are uniformed is rather short-sighted.   I would suspect most students make the decision b/c of $$.

I completely agree, and in my area economics is the number one issue. U of M Flint has a HUGE array of offerings, but is a regional campus of that big top 30 school. Kids take a LOT of flak for going there, but the reality is the school is generous with merit aid, has small class sizes, lots of internship opportunities with area companies like GM, Ford, Chrysler, local banks, Dow Chemical, Ethanol industries, DTE's green energy initiatives, you name it, costs only $10,000.00 a year in tuition, students can live at home and save the dorm costs, and if at the end of two years they need coursework not provided there, transfer to U of M Ann Arbor - the process is not hard - and oft times with transfer scholarships. For the kids living on the south side of Flint, though a long commute, students can still commute to the main campus, graduate from a stellar university, and never pay for dorms. It's not ideal because yes, a lot of other valuable experiences are lost when not living on campus. But, with the economic crisis in this state, money comes first and since U of M and MSU are stingy with merit aid that covers room and board, this is one way to get around. An awful lot of kids are after merit and pell grant only paying $2000.00 a year for those first two years, and many are simply getting their entire bachelor's degree at that price and going on to excellent jobs and grad schools. It used to be a smaller campus....much more community college ish, but in recent years has expanded so much that there are many degree options available. The nursing department is top notch as are a number of other medical degrees and the med programs on campus are expanding...doubling in size and scope in the next five years.

 

So, while there are definitely students "undermatched" by the author's definition, the reality is that these students are making decisions based on "best bang for the buck" and especially when those bucks are rather limited.

[regentrude]

The key also is to make sure one is at a school WITH opportunities.  The students I've heard back from who were overmatched and disappointed were that way because they were at schools with limited opportunities - something that can easily happen at lower level schools.  They were doing great with what they had, but when what they have does not match the student's interest (research opps or in depth course opportunities), one wonders about the value of it all.

 

Oh, of course. There is some level that is too low to offer a very strong student an adequate education and opportunities. But I would think, typically the stronger state universities that have graduate programs should be OK - while still admitting a large percentage of applicants and less expensive (for in state students)

[dirty ethel rackham]

When my oldest son was beginning high school, I planned for him to be able to attend a highly selective university and geared much our high school plans toward that aim.  We knew he had high stats and I knew he was a smart kid.  But, over time I became concerned that he would not thrive at this kind of place - he is not a competitive person by nature.  A friend turned me on to the book "Colleges that Changed Lives."  It gave me a new perspective on what to look for in a school.  Academic prestige was not the holy grail to be pursued at all cost.  Fit was much more important.  It was so freeing.  I realized that good academic opportunities can happen at less selective schools if it is a good fit.  

 

I don't think he is "undermatched"-but I do think it has been a great ego boost for him to find he is able to do well while still feeling challenged, and being able to find challenges for himself. My mommy ego wishes he hadn't wasted so much potential in high school, but I also think that for kids who are not go-getters, leaders, assertive about getting themselves noticed, being a big fish is very gratifying. And ds is none of the above.

This is key.  If you have a shy student who is not aggressive about seeking opportunities, being a small fish in a big pond can be a disaster, no matter how bright the student is.  Although my oldest could have gained admittance to several higher caliber schools based upon his stats, I know that he would have floundered and been bored, not because he wasn't bright enough, but because he would have been a number and would have just been too shy to get noticed.  We had to place a geographical limit for some health and financial reasons (a school farther away would have added several thousand dollars to the cost of attendance just to get him there and back.)  We chose a school where he was the in the top 25% to maximize his merit scholarship opportunities. 

 

I went to our state's flagship university and I was just a number.  Not a single professor knew my name when I left.  Had I gone on to grad school, I would not have had a single person to write a letter of recommendation.  I was a shy kid who was not the type to elbow my way to the front of the line.  While there were benefits to this school otherwise, I do think I would have flourished and possibly gone on to higher learning if I had gone to a smaller school where I would have gotten to know my professors.   

 

Oh, of course. There is some level that is too low to offer a very strong student an adequate education and opportunities. But I would think, typically the stronger state universities that have graduate programs should be OK - while still admitting a large percentage of applicants and less expensive (for in state students)

But, many of those state universities are very large institutions where a student is just a number.  The good opportunities happen for those grad students.  If you are one of the tip-top students AND you are aggressive and obnoxious about getting noticed, then you may be one of the few to make those opportunities happen.  We purposely chose schools for my son that didn't have grad school so that he could have research opportunities as an undergrad and could have relationships with professors.

 

 

[regentrude]

I went to our state's flagship university and I was just a number.  Not a single professor knew my name when I left.  Had I gone on to grad school, I would not have had a single person to write a letter of recommendation.  I was a shy kid who was not the type to elbow my way to the front of the line.  While there were benefits to this school otherwise, I do think I would have flourished and possibly gone on to higher learning if I had gone to a smaller school where I would have gotten to know my professors.   

 

But, many of those state universities are very large institutions where a student is just a number.  The good opportunities happen for those grad students.  If you are one of the tip-top students AND you are aggressive and obnoxious about getting noticed, then you may be one of the few to make those opportunities happen.  We purposely chose schools for my son that didn't have grad school so that he could have research opportunities as an undergrad and could have relationships with professors.

 

I think a lot depends on the major and on the exact kind of institution.

In some schools without a graduate program the professors just teach and do not themselves carry out an active research program, which would mean very limited opportunities for undergraduate research and a different atmosphere; under no circumstances would we have encouraged DD to attend such a school.

 

I teach at our state's public STEM university and am happy to say that I know all 140 of my students by name by the 3rd week of class, know who has small kids, is a single parent, works night shifts, double majors, has health issues... And that's not just me. My DD knows all her professors well and interacts with them outside of class; the faculty advisors of campus organizations are very involved and form personal relationships with their students.

At our school, any undergraduates who want to be involved in research have the opportunity to do so (if they are capable and reliable); this is a big priority not just in our department but across campus.

I am just mentioning that to point out that state university does not have to equal anonymity; there are smaller state schools, and professors who care. As always, students should do their research.

[FaithManor]

 

I went to our state's flagship university and I was just a number.  Not a single professor knew my name when I left.  Had I gone on to grad school, I would not have had a single person to write a letter of recommendation.  I was a shy kid who was not the type to elbow my way to the front of the line.  While there were benefits to this school otherwise, I do think I would have flourished and possibly gone on to higher learning if I had gone to a smaller school where I would have gotten to know my professors.   

 

 

That's a key statement right there! My middle boy would THRIVE on a huge, busy, flagship campus. But, he wants to go into this very niche field within Biology/Environmental Science and my cousin who is a Ph.D researcher in it is adamant that this could hurt his chances in grad school because the research positions are so limited that they are very, very picky. She has sat on 8 different top 20 university grad school admission's committees and she said that the key is very often the letter of reference. So for us, that is definitely something to consider.

[Jenny in Florida]

This is key.  If you have a shy student who is not aggressive about seeking opportunities, being a small fish in a big pond can be a disaster, no matter how bright the student is. 

 

Interestingly, my son is the exact opposite of shy. (When he was little, I always used to say we needed to do something about his shyness problem . . . like get him some!) However, both he and I still feel absolutely certain that being a big fish in the smaller pond of a less competitive school will be best for him.

 

In his case, he thrives on personal attention and the opportunity to influence the direction of his own education. He is full of enthusiasm and ideas and likes to make things happen, which is often more possible in a smaller space.

 

For example, a few years ago, he left the large, pre-professional (ballet-centered) dance school here after a couple of years of feeling like he was stagnating. He floated for about a year and a half, taking occasional drop-in classes with an instructor he had met at the school and trying some classes at a smaller studio before finding and falling in love with his current dance school. It's a small, family-owned studio. He's the only guy other than the owners' son (who is six years old). They welcomed him with open arms and immediately made places for him in their oldest, most advanced groups. In his second year there, he returned to ballet and was soon taking two classes a week.. Last year, he began assisting in a couple of classes. This year, he co-teaches and/or teaches under minimal supervision four classes a week and is doing all of the recital choreography for one group. He is one of their two most successful competitive dancers.

 

In his three years there, he has thrived as a dancer, become a much happier person and remembered that he loves to dance. In the larger, more established and institutional pre-professional school, he would never have had these opportunities.

[Mom2boys]

I think another consideration is the size of the program they want to major in at the university. We are looking at some larger state schools where ds would earn merit scholarships and be eligible for the honors program. He is currently planning to major in geography, and these schools have small geography programs (between 20 and 80 undergrads). So we think that between the smaller honors classes, and few students in his major, he will not be an anonymous number. 

[JennyD]

I think a lot depends on the major and on the exact kind of institution.

In some schools without a graduate program the professors just teach and do not themselves carry out an active research program, 

 

Are there really that many schools out there these days where you can get and keep a tenure track job without a pretty energetic research agenda?  I imagine it varies by field, but I have friends from graduate school who are at very small, not especially well-known liberal arts colleges and they are ALL publishing like crazy.  The expectations have just gone way up over the last couple of decades.  

[Butler]

Oh, of course. There is some level that is too low to offer a very strong student an adequate education and opportunities. But I would think, typically the stronger state universities that have graduate programs should be OK - while still admitting a large percentage of applicants and less expensive (for in state students)

The availability of a graduate program in his major is what ultimately made my son's decision on which college to choose. He was really interested in a selective LAC but was going into college having completed the undergraduate math curricula through dual enrollment in high school. The LAC would have tried to work with him I'm sure, and did talk about independent topics courses, but he would have needed those from the very beginning. And for four years. It just made more sense to go to the big university that had a thriving graduate program with numerous graduate level math courses and a huge faculty with backgrounds in many specialties.

[G5052]

Agreed. I found the paper underwhelming and common sense, too. I was also under the impression that he mainly investigated the college selection, but barely what happens to the undermatched students and why. THAT would have been the really interesting aspect: those who do not fare well, what factors contribute.

 

Speaking merely from anecdotal evidence: as an instructor at a public university, I regularly encounter students who are very high performing and would have been (or in some cases actually have been)  admitted to a more selective school, but have chosen this school, usually for financial considerations. Generally, those students tend to be doing extremely well. They take advantage of being the "big fish" by taking double majors/several minors and freeing up time for undergraduate research or involvement in extracurricular activities. The brilliant, high performing students I met seem to be at peace with their decision and are determined to get the best possible education this school offers. 

 

I see this here and there at the community college as well.  It gives me hope because we have high aspirations with a community college budget.

 

At the college where I teach, you can get honors credit in any transfer course by completing certain extra assignments.  Only a few do these, and in my fifteen years there, I've only had a handful approach me, and only one actually did it.  

 

Well, then there's "Mary."  She has been doing the honors credit assignments in ALL of her classes from the beginning.  When she approached me, I had to dig around to find the assignment for that course because none of the full-time professors had done it in maybe 5-7 years.  When I found it, it needed rewriting, so I did that and got it approved for her.  And she showed me her draft last night.  So very, very well done.  She is graduating in May with straight A's, all honors completed, and has a full-tuition scholarship and work study job lined up at a 4-year school.  Her family had no money for college, and she has attended largely on scholarships and grants.  I have no doubt that she will do wonderfully.  She comes early to class to ask questions, reads the textbook, and completes her work on time.  She's an officer in several organizations.

 

So yes, there's hope, even if you can't afford the school that really "fits."