<p>hmom5 may be right. The statistics do seem to back her up in this case. </p>
<p>However, xiggi is right also. Your S isn’t a statistic and LACs tend to take a holistic look. There are a number of posters on college confidential who have ignored hmom5’s typical naysayer advice and gotten into their dream schools anyway. When that happens it’s even more gratifying! Tell him to work hard and go for it!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I love it! </p>
<p>Only on CC is overwhelming statistical probability viewed as nay-saying, and usually by someone or their parent who believe they will defy all odds. They then put their energy into focusing on schools they have little chance at while blowing their chance at schools where strong effort might actually get them in.</p>
<p>It never hurts to throw in an application to a dream school, but reality is probably a healthy thing to help your kid with.</p>
<p>The OP might be interested in the ‘under 3.6’ thread on the parent’s board.</p>
<p>I tend to dream big when I could still influence the outcome. Application time is not the best time to dream big.</p>
<p>Dadwantshelp, I’m sorry, but the counselor is right. UC’s heavily, and I mean heavily, weigh GPA. He may be able to get into a few lower UC’s, though. The Claremonts and Stanford are out of the question. Nevertheless, he does sound very bright from what you have said, so I strongly recommend sending him to a community college and having him transfer through the TAG program. Of course, this is only if he becomes motivated to do some brainless work for the sake of his grades. </p>
<p>Even if he doesn’t go to a name-brand college, he sounds like an intelligent kid who will get far in life.</p>
<p>1) OP’s kid has two more terms of grades to improve. It’s NOT application time yet. </p>
<p>2) ds143, Cornell Class of 2014, got in there despite having taken no APs before senior year, despite being given little chance by hmom5 and others. I love it. </p>
<p>3) From Naviance, I see that kids with similar stats have gotten into Pitzer from D’s school. Granted that we’re east coast, but nonetheless, they do seem to look at individuals. </p>
<p>4) I got into MIT a long time ago after my GC told me not to “waste an application”. </p>
<p>Sure, be wise, have him apply to carefully selected safeties, matches and reaches, have him do his homework, but don’t ever tell him to stop dreaming!</p>
<p>And only on CC would the choice be presented as either Stanford and CMC or a community college!! The advice to look at the LACs is spot on. There are plenty, plenty of options for your son to have an interesting college life. Two keys to how your son will be looked at by colleges will be how his GPA compares to his classmates at his school, and how his teachers present him in their recs. If they say he’s a slacker, that’s not good, but if they highlight his insightful contributions to class discussions and his intellectual promise, that’s another thing all together.</p>
<p>Dreaming is fine, of course. “Never try anything you don’t stand a good shot of succeeding at” is the wrong message to take away from this thread. But the people telling him not to get his hopes up are still completely right.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why you think it’s so interesting that someone beat the odds on getting into Cornell. Did all the people who DIDN’T get in simply not dream hard enough?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is OP’s son a soph or a junior? (Sophs often take the PSAT, which is why I ask.) But if he’s a junior, the 3 previous semesters and this coming spring semester will form his UC gpa. The senior year anticipated program can be a positive indicator, but will not be calculated. His freshman program + grades will be factored in after-the-fact (and add points), but similarly not be as critical as all of sophomore + all of junior year.</p>
<p>I often think its’ “not fair,” but it is true for the majority of U’s that the student will be lucky to have even his first semester (or quarter) of senior grades included, at the outside. Just the problem with oodles of college applications coming through admissions offices and the advance time needed for review of all those.</p>
<p>I believe that hmom is thinking of the likelihood, not trying to be a nay-sayer. In that respect I agree with oldfort: put the vast majority of the effort into likely schools, adding a reach (“dream”) or two among those more probable.</p>
<p>As a single student, there’s nothing that precludes the OP’s son from being added to any mix. The problem is that there will be 2100, 2200, 2300, and 2400-scoring students who chose not to slack, and who will be applying to “big dream” or even small dream schools. </p>
<p>They don’t admit by CT-scan, or by parents’ private knowledge of potential, but by what’s on the paper there in black and white. (Scores yes, but grades too)</p>
<p>I would look at USC: scores much more important than grades. Know a girl with a 3.2 UW and about a 2300+ SAT who got into USC, and with merit money. She was in the sciences. Plenty of other CC parents know similar cases. Good luck.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did miss something? Did this new member ever write that he planned to have his son apply to one reach school? Since when is this board worried about “wasting” one application to a dream school? Is he not entitled to a list that contains safeties, matches, and reaches? </p>
<p>Was I wrong to read that the student might have a 1550/1600 SAT, a 3.7 GPA and seems to enjoy advanced economics and collecting 5s on the APs? Would you opinion change if the 3.1 UW GPA was a result of a catastrophic 9th grade? Fwiw, are there highly selective schools that “ignore” the freshman grades? </p>
<p>Isn’t there a huge pool of applicants that fall between being a shoo-in and being an automatic reject?</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone has a magic ball to predict if someone could be admitted to a college for certain. If hmom5 or anyone had that ability then she could quit her day job (maybe she did already). We could only come up with a likelihood based on past admittance data.</p>
<p>It is a disservice when people on this board tell applicants to dream big and shoot for the moon when applying to schools. It is even worse when parents have no clue and are telling their B/B+ kid to apply to HYPS. No one here is trying to shoot anyone down. We just don’t want to see unrealistic expectation which could translate into no acceptance. I for one love it when something unexpected good happens to someone.</p>
<p>Kenyon, BU, and U of Rochester are also possibilities.</p>
<p>I know someone who got into BU a couple of years ago. An UW 3.4 and a weighted about 3.5. (Not much in the way of accelerated classes.) The key to her getting in was a dynamite and very focused application, which underscored all the ways in which her current and previous activities, combined with her intent, made her an excellent candidate for the major being chosen at that school, in that environment. The high school she attended was known for rigor, but she didn’t take the most rigorous classes, except possibly those in her area of interest.</p>
<p>So it still can happen, but almost everything worth attaining requires work, and mundane details (such as time put into college applications). :eek:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most posters don’t give us a fraction of the info we need to truly assess chances. I would bet a lot there are factors that are unique if what you say about the above poster is true. </p>
<p>As I said above, it’s just fine to throw in a dream school. But there are a lot of parents and kids who believe colleges will see their brilliance because of a high score, and it’s better for them to understand the realities in time to construct a realistic list than to get hit over the head with a bunch of thin envelopes in the Spring.</p>
<p>Lots, probably most, parents have no idea what it takes to get into Stanford and CMC today. I think that’s why they look for sites where they can ask. They can go to the chances board where every kid sharing these issues will assure them they’ll get in. But hopefully there are some posters who post the real odds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And, perhaps, just perhaps, there are posters who might have good reasons to believe that not everyone who pretends to have a better handle on exact odds to get into Stanford and CMC happens to be right. Of course, short of having missed the CC posts of either of the two most famous Richard in admissions.</p>
<p>Also --and the OP may already realize this-- the GC may simply be offering as a starting point, a realistic and not too geographically distant, guaranteed rolling admissions school for those with a 3.0+ and are OOS. (Which is what No.Ariz. U does.) Always good to include, and often start with, a rolling admissions school, particularly one with such a guarantee, when so little is guaranteed in admissions any more! I felt really good about suggesting a RA school in my second daughter’s list; calmed her nerves during admissions season, especially during the high-profile ED and EA rounds.</p>
<p>Any candidate’s college list should be as selective (in the sense of strategic) as the selective colleges to which that candidate is applying.</p>
<p>Last I looked, numbers don’t lie, so the common data set is a much better predictor than any of us.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hmom, what is so extraordinary about numbers and common data sets? Every August, and for less than 10 bucks, can anyone become an instant expert on admissions after walking to the nearest Barnes and Noble? Statistics report aggregate and general numbers; admissions and rejections are the result of personal evaluations of … an individual file. </p>
<p>If numbers were all that mattered, admissions could be processed by a cheap computer and the results sent immediately. Every thousands of valedictorians and hundreds of 2400 SATers are rejected, despite better odds than the common mortals. </p>
<p>The reality is that none of us can do more than offering idle speculation about the chances of anyone to be accepted. Simply stated, we do NOT know what causes a particular student to be accepted or rejected. The only persons who know are the readers and the adcoms who mark the folders with a R or A. </p>
<p>People DO overcome poor odds. Everyday and even at places such as CMC and Stanford.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Statistics are helpful to assess chances, but outlier individuals can get outlier results.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Xiggi, I think you’re mischaracterizing her remarks. I think the point was not to begin from, or focus too much, on clearly reach schools at this moment in terms of current gpa per se. One does need to start from data – CDS, current Admitted Student Profiles, candidate’s stats. The OP’s family does have some time, but mostly (which is why I asked the question) one additional semester (spring 2010), unless he has already made huge gpa gains for fall of '09. I think she just means that it’s not wise to put too much into top 25 schools and instead concentrate on some excellent schools suggested by several of us here. (As well as posted results in this thread.) One or two reaches? Sure. But in the meantime, the focus should probably be on the best bang for the buck, because he may indeed be building toward scores that are in merit money territory.</p>
<p>I also think he’ll get a lot of realistic & hopeful info in the B+ parents threads --already suggested. (There are several.)</p>
<p>Footnote: the recent USC admit I mentioned earlier had a course list similar to the OP’s son.</p>
<p>
Did he realize that not doing homework would change his admissions outlook? I dislike most HS homework assignments myself but don’t suddenly expect college HW assignments to be dramatically less mundane. The fact is if your son hasn’t demonstrated this commitment to tedious work then an elite college will be disinclined to admit your son.</p>
<p>With that said, he can definitely get into a few UCs and yes, I would agree that his best shot at a top school is applying to quirkier LACs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Statistics are helpful to assess chances, but outlier individuals can get outlier results.
[quote]
</p>
<p>Certainly, and the fact that one is characterized as an outlier means that for kids like him, it does not happen in most cases.</p>
<p>So I just scratch my head when folks want to convince new posters to throw caution to the wind and chase that dream! I’ve said all along the OP’s DS should thrown in applications to his dream school. But with a 3.1 and a propensity not to do work he doesn’t find interesting, I’d personally rather see him start loving and focusing on schools where he’s not an extreme outlier.</p>