Though record-setting acceptance rates have become the norm at Harvard and several of its peer institutions, this year’s new low was surprising. For the first time in five years, the College had received fewer applicants than it had the previous year—and yet it still accepted a smaller portion of them.

The caution in the admissions office was the result of the revived early action policy, and it paid off—the 81 percent yield this year was the best turnout Harvard has seen since 1971. But regardless of the reason behind the paucity of acceptance letters, the seemingly ceaseless plummet in the admission rate may be alarming to would-be applicants.

Pundits have cried out about the frustration and seeming arbitrariness of the process. This year, just after Ivy League schools announced their acceptance rates, a professor penned an editorial in the Chronicle of Higher Education called “Harvard by Lottery,” stating that a truly random system would cause less stress for students and indeed be more fair.

Others worry that talented prospective students might decide not to risk the $75 application fee if they believe their chances of acceptance are too minuscule.

But Susan Case, a former faculty member at the Harvard Summer Institute on College Admissions, a program organized annually by the College Board and Harvard, said that she has not seen low admissions rates deter her clients in her educational consulting business.

“They see it a bit like buying a lottery ticket. It is worth a try,” she wrote in an email. “But I serve, for the most part, a fairly sophisticated population who can afford to take a risk. I worry that those students Harvard is trying to attract from different parts of this country and from the larger world will be put off by the odds and not even consider applying.”

Eller agreed that even in light of extremely low acceptance rates, the chance to attend a top-ranked university will always appeal to high-achieving students. “Very small admission rates will not deter such students. Low rates of admission to Harvard and other top schools are here to stay,” she said.

BEHIND THE NUMBERS

Fitzsimmons attributes the perenially falling admission rate to several factors, starting with Harvard’s focus on recruiting talent from communities around the world.

“Students coming into Harvard today come from a much wider range of economic backgrounds,” Fitzsimmons said. “Harvard is much more of a national institution and much more of an international institution. The Harvard I attended had very few students of color and very few international students.”

The Class of 2016, drawn from a pool of 34,302 applicants, indeed reflects Harvard’s commitment to diversity. In the incoming freshman class, 10.2 percent of the students are black and 11.2 percent are Latino. Ten percent come from outside the United States.

Fitzsimmons emphasized Harvard’s very generous financial aid as a factor driving students from all backgrounds to apply.

“There may be some people who are discouraged by the lower admissions rate, but the reality is that the reason for the lower admission rate is that people all over America and all over the world now see Harvard as accessible and affordable,” he said.

Increased use of the Common Application, which allows students to apply to multiple schools from one website, has also contributed to lower admission rates at schools nationwide over the past several years, Eller added.

“With the push of a button, students can apply to additional schools. This can dramatically account for the surge in applications year after year,” she said.

Though dauntingly low acceptance rates may worry students, the admissions office is focused on the bigger picture—the fact that students are applying at all.

“People now see Harvard as possible, and people are applying, and this is a very, very good thing,” Fitzsimmons said.

—Staff writer Quinn D. Hatoff can be reached at quinnhatoff@college.harvard.edu.