<p>“RPI…are they known for having a strong computer science/computer engineering program by any chance??”</p>
<p>If I answered that question humbly it would still sound like bragging. If your S is interested in CS it’s highly unlikely he’ll be disappointed with the educational opportunities at RPI.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I really, really doubt that this expert has used a No 2 pencil to bubble an answer sheet of the SAT or ACT in … years. He simply repeats the same trite argument used by te people who show their profound lack of knowledge of both tests. The reality is that, except for the poorly labeled “science” test, the “differences” between the ACT and the SAT are mostly cosmetic. Pretending that one tricks you while the other is a “subject” test only shows how superficial the expert’s true experience is.</p>
<p>On this question, the expert gets a D-, or an I if you want to be generous!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now, the expert completely redeemed himself! Here goes an A+. :D</p>
<p>Financial aid considerations:</p>
<p>Our admittedly limited experience verifies that need-blind admissions really are need-blind. I know that there are plenty of musings at CC about the wall that is supposed to exist between FA and admissions at these institutions, But i am pretty darn sure that our son’s financial situation didn’t impact his admissions.</p>
<p>For the institutions that are not need blind: it is the student’s job to make them really want him/her. Truly excellent essays and recs will help. It may mean applying to schools in which he/she will be statistically in the upper reaches of the admitted students. It may mean that the orchestra conductor is excited about his/her English horn playing, or the crew team needs and experienced coxswain.You get the idea.</p>
<p>Thanks again, NewHope! Son also says he likes writing, so not sure if a straight tech school would be a good fit though (although, as a former writer, I just want to tell him: ‘go w/the math/science skills since you’ve got them! much more $$!!’). He’s gotten tons of RPI material since the PSAT…we’ll have to look into it further. Just thinking he might need some more latitude re: other (non-science/math) fields.</p>
<p>
I find this interesting. The students in our area who decide to take CC classes in place of hs classes do so because the CC classes are easier and allows for a much shorter school day and/or earlier graduation date. These are not students applying to our top state U or a selective private U.</p>
<p>Jolynne, my computer nerd applied to MIT,Stanford, Carnegie-Mellon, Harvard (mostly because he was a legacy), Caltech, Harvey Mudd, RPI and Worcester Polytechnic Institute. (That’s approximately the order of how hard they are to get into.) If we lived in CA he would have applied to Berkeley. Schools we eliminated only for geography: were Case Western, Rose-Hulman, Georgia Tech, Rice. Olin was eliminated because it seemed too small and more geared to engineering than programming. Many of the tech schools still require some non-tech courses. Carnegie-Mellon’s computer science school requires a minor, and while many kids minor in other techie things, one recent grad notably minored in bagpipe performance.</p>
<p>It is concerning that this former adcom confirms many of our fears… that there’s no “equal opportunity” when it comes to financial aid - your chances are less if you need aid. Sad.</p>
<p>And I think his SAT vs. ACT comments are spot-on. They echo a recent [NYT</a> article](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/education/edlife/guidance.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2]NYT”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/education/edlife/guidance.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2) in which several school GC’s were asked about the difference. The bottom line? The SAT is better for “bright, bored underacheivers”, because it is more “nuanced, puzzlelike, trickier”, whereas the ACT is more “knowledge-based and straightforward”, ideal for students “who dont have the intellectual flash of the really tippy-top kids but who work really hard in school”.</p>
<p>I agree with Xiggi that this distinction between the two tests is not meaningful. A good friend of mine was a VP at College Board. She scored 1570 on the old SAT and was recruited in HS to write questions. Worked for them for years until she quit to have kids and now does SAT tutoring.</p>
<p>She said many verbal questions are written by kids of execs. I have a PhD in English, and I can tell you that many are so poorly worded that getting the correct answer is a test of eliminating the fuzzy thinking of the test.</p>
<p>You are giving the SAT way too much credit. And this is not sour grapes because my kids scored extremely well on SAT and are at excellent schools.</p>
<p>A kid who thinks too much will not fare well on the SAT verbal because the questions/answers are often not well conceived and over thinking will reveal their flaws.</p>
<p>
Please reread my posts #13 and #15 – the US News Q&A is pretty short, and written by a journalist to talked to the guy, not Van Buskirk himself. I attended 2 of VB’s workshops and also read his book. I’d suggest that you go back to the US News site at [An</a> Admissions Dean’s Tips for Getting In - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/2007/11/07/an-admissions-deans-tips-for-getting-in.html]An”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/2007/11/07/an-admissions-deans-tips-for-getting-in.html) and watch the video on which the article is based; you will see that the answer is a lot more nuanced than the written summary suggests. </p>
<p>It’s not good to be “on the cusp” at a school that is need aware, and it is not good to fail to think strategically in terms of college admissions. The latter point is the one that is more important – for competitive admissions it is the college’s agenda that counts, not the student’s – that is, the more a student can demonstrate that he or she has something that the college wants, or that the college ought to want – the greater the chances of getting in. This is true whatever the financial situation, but at a need aware college that is one more negative in admissions file needing to be overcome. </p>
<p>My kids both needed a lot of financial aid to attend private colleges, somewhat less for public schools. Both were very successful with college apps. Van Buskirk’s advice helped me and it helped my daughter – a lot</p>
<p>You have to think strategically, and you have to recognize that colleges pick the students they want to fill their needs – it is not some sort of beauty contest where they simply pick the best ones. Each student also represents a $ value in terms of income to the college, ranging from Pell grant level on up to full pay. </p>
<p>It is not a matter of stats. My daughter applied to reach colleges, needing financial aid, and got into her reaches – she targeted well. She had something that some, but not all, colleges value and she found the colleges where that something would get her across the threshold.</p>
<p>The much, much, much bigger problem for students needing financial aid is the problem of getting enough money. Both of my kids wanted to attend colleges that did not guaranteed to meet full need; both were accepted; and both had to turn down those colleges because of grossly inadequate financial aid awards. Both my kids ended up with surprisingly strong financial aid awards from their 2nd choice colleges, much better than we ever expected to see. </p>
<p>So I would say that the ‘ding’ you get in admissions from needing financial aid is a minor inconvenience compared to the bigger problem of needing money to attend. The problem isn’t getting in, it’s with getting a package that makes it workable. And in the private realm, the kid either needs to be at a 100% need college which is going to treat all its financial aid applicants equally, or else they need to be a very strong or desirable candidate at another college, because the vast majority of colleges leverage their aid, giving more generous packages to the students they want the most. And if you truly need aid, then you also need the best financial aid package possible.</p>
<p>Thanks, mathmom! Appreciate your insights!</p>
<p>Calmom–without revealing too much of your personal info – is there anything you could share about what your daughter had that made her such a good fit for the schools she selected/got into? </p>
<p>Trying to figure out the puzzle of my son (very bright kid (high test scores)…but gpa doesn’t reflect that because of lack of effort in 9/10th grade…won science & math awards early but now interested in computer science…). </p>
<p>So glad it worked out for your daughter!</p>
<p>Well, ninth grade can be overlooked; tenth not so much.</p>
<p>Georgia Tech has the fifth or sixth ranked computer science program in the country, is not hyper-competitive in admissions and is reasonable, even for out of staters. Atlanta is a great city with great music.</p>
<p>I think my comment about financial aid was accurate. This is from the original interview:</p>
<p>USNWR interviewer:
Van Buskirk’s response:
</p>
<p>SarahsDad…
I think you are right, but not at the Swarthmores and Pomonas of the world, or the Dartmouths and Princetons.
At a certain level of endowment, financial need lends a certain “cachet”.
I think you and I are riding on our kids’ accomplishments. We are lucky dogs, aren’t we?</p>
<p>Hm … are you suggesting there is the possibility that applying for financial aid can actually be a positive factor for schools like Swarthmore and Dartmouth, because they seek bragging rights on the percentage of students on financial aid?</p>
<p>I don’t think this is exactly true. I think Swarthmore in particular would rather have URM’s on financial aid than other folk. </p>
<p>Many of the deciding factors of elite admissions come more easily to folks with money: great SAT scores (prep classes, tutoring), great GPA’s (tutoring) and great EC’s (traveling, coaching, training.) Then URM’s can show exceptional tenacity and grit, so they get a leg up.</p>
<p>It is certainly not impossible for an ordinary, middle class kid who needs financial aid to be accepted at the most elite schools as many parents on CC have demonstrated, but I don’t think it’s true that requiring FA is a plus. It certainly is a detriment at elite schools that are not need blind and there are plenty of these – Cornell and Tufts to name just two.</p>
<p>I will say that my first two kids both made sure that they got in their applications that they needed substantial financial aid. They are not URMs. I think that the schools I mentioned are uncomfortable with their images of being for the advantaged, or are LACs that have a history of being known to the families of kids in private prep schools or affluent families.
I don’t think that it is an accident that Princeton, Amherst and Williams are among the first to do away with loans in their aid packages.</p>
<p>Haha. I knew Williams would once Amherst did; I was just waiting. Hmm. Now for Dartmouth, don’t ya think?</p>
<p>Too bad it wasn’t retroactive for this year. Wouldn’t that be fun!</p>
<p>Jolynne, actually I would recommend that you get Van Buskirk’s book – I think that it would give you a better strategy than focusing on what my d. had, which of course is very different than the profile your son will present. </p>
<p>The basic story is that my d. had some big strengths and some big weaknesses, so we looked for colleges that would appreciate the strengths and not get too hung up over the weaknesses. Her strengths were that she she had intensively studied a language that is highly valued but tends to be under-enrolled at many colleges (Russian), including spending time abroad, that she is a talented dancer with a strong background, that she could expect strong letters of recommendation and that she writes well; also a very strong GPA. Weaknesses were test scores and minimal high school study of math and sciences. So basically I looked for schools that would value the language, the dance, and the personal qualities. So, for example, when my d. became interested in NYU, I encouraged her to look at Gallatin (the school for individualized studies) rather than Arts & Sciences, knowing that the larger A&S school would be more focused on the numbers. </p>
<p>So start by having your son make an honest list of strengths and weaknesses (no excuses!) and see where that gets you. With a weaker GPA I’d say to avoid the very most competitive math/science-oriented schools, and instead focus on colleges where your son’s strong test scores will stand out. Look for a college that has a shortage of males (there are plenty among the LACs) and which wants to build up math & sciences. Your son will want a decent computer science department, of course - but it doesn’t have to be “the best”. Check out Bard, for example – I know they have been pushing for students with a stronger science focus over the past several years, and they seem to have a good core of computer science offerings (See: [Bard</a> | Computer Science | Courses | Descriptions](<a href=“http://computer.bard.edu/courses/descriptions/]Bard”>http://computer.bard.edu/courses/descriptions/) )</p>
<p>Sarahsdad, re your post #33 – Van Buskirk went on in the interview to qualify and explain what he was saying. As did I.</p>
<p>But if you are only interested in the general statement and not in the explanation or qualifications, yes - its probably a disadvantage to need financial aid.</p>
<p>On the other hand, for those who think more strategically, I think its kind of nice when a kid who needs aid ends up attending a college for a substantially reduced cost. The need for financial aid may lead to families exploring educational options that they would otherwise not be aware of.</p>
<p>So I still prefer to look at it as just one factor in the equation. It certainly didn’t stop my kids from applying to or getting into their top choices – though, as noted – the lack of adequate aid packages certainly was a primary reason that they turned down many colleges after having been admitted.</p>
<p>Since there really is no practical difference between getting waitlisted or rejected, and getting accepted but not being able to afford to attend – I think it is going to make sense to think strategically in any case. Either way, the the kid needs to get into a college that values him or her enough to offer a substantial amount of aid dollars.</p>