sigh.
- Automatic
- Everything else
- Lottery
Notes:
Automatic: best ones are rolling admissions – no muss, no fuss, no wait. UPickem, they don’t PickU.
Everything else: look for a good fit, strut your stuff
Lottery: Anything with <10% acceptance rate
@RightCoaster wins, and @prezbucky gets an honorable mention for the snowballs. And @2muchquan , which is which? Personally, I guess Curly would be the tops, but Moe’s haircut wins every time. Larry is a little forgettable, so is he the sure bet? And poor old Shemp, everyone forgets him! So is he the “forget it, ain’t gonna happen?” category? Haha!
My contribution:
Canned Tuna
Salmon
Lobster
Oyster w/ pearl
@Dolemite I guess, although the finances should be already taken into consideration when applying places, right? I just don’t understand applying places that you “hate”, even if they’re affordable. If a kid can’t find anything they like that is both affordable, and will let them in, then methinks an attitude adjustment may be what’s really needed.
Especially those with high budget and high stats, who should have a much greater range of college choices than those with low budget and/or low stats.
Sometimes we hem and haw over rep and selectivity but when you step back and look at just our top 150ish universities and top 100ish LACs, there’s so much quality that to only view the top 25 U’s or 25 LACs (however you want to rank them) as desirable really puts undue pressure on kids, can lead to poor results in acceptances, and can lead to poor fit (if all they care about is rank/rep).
The overall depth of quality in this nation’s higher ed is outstanding and – combined with the fact that there is such a variety of academic/curricular styles, academic program strengths, class sizes, anonymity and support levels, activities offered, surrounding environment, climate, social mores and vibe, and housing styles/options, and affordability levels – there’s really no reason a student can’t apply to a group of reaches, matches and safeties and like them all and be able to afford them all with either no debt or a fairly manageable amount. They just need to put in the time figuring out which variables are most important and then researching schools and judging them on those variables.
If more kids (and parents) did that, we’d see less heartbreak come acceptance and decision time, and more kids with only awesome options… because they thoroughly pre-screened the schools prior to applying – not according to rank/rep, but based on fit variables and affordability.
There will still be hard decisions to make when they are deciding from among their acceptances. But at least all of those options will be acceptable to them; they won’t be stuck with schools they don’t really like and/or can’t afford.
@Lindagaf Are there prizes? I would have put more detail if there were prizes! But, yes, your ordering is the way I envisioned it.
Don’t forget Zeppo! 
Love this one @prezbucky
Solid
Liquid
Gas
We didn’t use the safety, match and reach vernacular. Instead, my daughter only applied to schools we/she thought were a “fit” for her. But then we broke it down to 1) “this is a fit and you are very likely going to be admitted and we can afford it”; 2) “this is a fit but you may or may not be admitted and we will have to look at the costs”; 3) “this is a fit but they accept so few people, we will have to see what happens.” This way, she saw all the colleges as good places to attend. They were all “fits.”
However, no matter how we talked about it, she understood that the third group was the more desirable. Changing the language didn’t change the perception.
Hear, hear @prezbucky
And, I’m not sure we need a category for “Out of Reach”, since one would not be applying to such a school. I have enough lists, I don’t need that one!
@ucbalumnus Right. This should not be a one-dimensional three-category system. Since affordability is a key dimension to most applicants, I can see a 3 x 3 table or chart. (Really the scales are continuous on each dimension, not simply categorical or ordinal.)
Financial dimension: Free ride----full pay.
Competitiveness dimension: Automatic----lottery.
I know with #1, he could have had a free ride and auto-admit, but only if he stayed near home. Two universities (to which he applied and was admitted) came close to this.
With #2, financial aid was going to be hard to come by (stand-alone art school), so the search became one of a combination of fit (student’s preferred type of college, location, program) and difficulty of admission. The choice of colleges to apply to was complicated in part because we had no experience with art schools.
The cost aspect is personal and subjective more than it’s sometimes described here. It’s a matter of how much the parent are willing to spend, not simply how much they could spend. Since we had put together enough money to finance both kids without aid from the colleges, the search was effectively only one-dimensional.
Oooo, we need more rating dimensions? Something along these lines for financial and competitive and something else (climate?) safety?
http://www.weneedsigns.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/nfpa_diamond_panel.jpg
Financial dimension would need to be changed to green, though.
@Lindagaf Shemp would be the school mom suggests that the kid makes a gagging noise in response to.
Like:
Me: Rice looks nice
Her: cccchhhaaaawwwffffffggggahhh NOT Texas.
So Rice became Shemp. Boo.
I think my kids would be even smarter and more analytic than they are if they lived with any one of you guys.
2001 - A Space Odyssey
Spaceballs
Plan 9 From Outer Space
@Wien2NC , I think I am a little in love with that answer.
Wait, Spaceballs wouldn’t be first?
After “Solid, Liquid, Gas,” super reach would be Plasma.
(Planet) Earth
Moon (shot) - we can get there, right?
Comet (Halley) - when can we see it again? once in a lifetime
Supernova
Financial black hole (all money gets sucked in)
Big Mac, Pot roast, Filet mignon