Can anybody rank these schools (selectivity-wise)?

<p>I know which ones fall high and low, but I'm kind of having trouble with the ones in the middle and how they rank against eachother... </p>

<p>Also: if anyone could tell me ANYTHING about these schools I'd be grateful. Individual perception, experiences, rumors, whatever! </p>

<p>Univeristy of Illinois Urbana
Macalester
Northwestern
UChicago
Denison
Augustana (IL)
Illinois Wesleyan
Carleton
Wash U
Grinnell
Kenyon
Beloit
Knox</p>

<p>Yep. That's my list so far. Half of them don't have the Geography major. So I'll be chopping down the list soon into 2 reaches, 3 matches, and 2 safeties. Or atleast that's the plan right now. I just kind of think that for me the VAST majority of them are reaches (26 ACT, 3.4 GPA (unweighted), top 25%.... strong ECs and community service, though...) so if you could suggest schools similiar to the ones I have listed more in my range that'd be great, too....</p>

<p>Northwestern
WashU
Chicago
Carleton
--------- I think this is the realistic cutoff point (above=super reach)-----
Macalester
Grinnell
Kenyon
Denison
UIUC (though it's very stats-based)
Beloit
Knox
IL Wesleyan
Augustana</p>

<p>i would say Chicago and WashU switch, yes WashU has a lower acceptance rate, but i would say the overall average applicant for Chicago is stronger than WashU</p>

<p>If you are interested in a geography major, you might want to think about the University of Wisconsin (Madison)--I believe it has an outstanding and highly regarded geography department' Your numbers may be a bit low for an out of state applicant. Still, worth a look.</p>

<p>Honestly, I'm looking for a small school (preferably under 5,000). The only reason U of I is on my list at all is because it's in-state and I've heard from numerous people that my chances are pretty good because of that. Also, the price is amazing compared to some other schools. </p>

<p>I don't really even know why I put Wash U on the list... it just keeps popping up in all my searches. UChicago and Northwestern are my super-reaches, obviously. Then most of the other schools just plain reaches. Gah. </p>

<p>I do have to say, though -- the reason my GPA is so low is because I slacked off as an underclassman. I went from straight B's, no honors -- to -- straight A's, majority of classes AP. There is an obvious upward trend on my transcript, but I still need to work at bringing ACT up. And the reason THAT is mediocre is because I have a mental blockade in the Science Reasoning section. So hopefully my SAT scores are higher, though that's not a promise.</p>

<p>As for Carleton: Your statistics are low for Carleton. If you decide to apply, early decision would give you your best shot at it. Otherwise, I agree with the above poster who described it as a super reach. Good luck.</p>

<p>Realistically, I think the only super reach I'll go for is Chicago... </p>

<p>But still not 100% sure on that. Maybe Northwestern, instead.. </p>

<p>Gah.</p>

<p>applying early to Wash U would also give you a huge boost, since they value the applicant's interest a lot.</p>

<p>Chicago
Carelton
Wash U
Northwestern</p>

<p>Carleton is more selective than Northwestern?</p>

<p>no chance that carleton is more selective than NU. </p>

<p>you said you want a small-school feel.. chicago has a great small school feel (only 4,000 undergrads) and a lower student-faculty ratio than any of those LACs (4:1)</p>

<p>I actually ended up choosing between NU, UofC, and a couple LACs (reed and oberlin) myself. I ended up choosing NU cus i realized on teh visits that i really wanted a larger school atmosphere.. plus the people there are friendlier and more social than UofC. </p>

<p>Grinnell is pretty selective... they have a high admit rate because not many people want to go to iowa.. but all of their applicants are strong, so the student profile is nearly as impressive as Carleton's.</p>

<p>according to College Board, carleton & northwestern are about the same (NU - 30%, Carleton - 29%).</p>

<p>actually, here's the rest of College Board's info:</p>

<p>Wash U - 22%
Carleton - 29%
NU - 30%
Chicago - 46%</p>

<p>i thought Chicago was really tough to get into...?</p>

<p>chicago has a very self selecting admissions pool so that explains the high rate. It actually is very tough to get into</p>

<p>right... if you assume that the only variable that affects the % of applicants admitted is the quality of the applicants.. then WUSTL would look most competitive.
However, there are other key variables.
For example,
WUSTL advertises much, much, much more than any of those schools.
U. of Chicago is only appealing to a certain kind of student.. one with high gpa and sats and such.. but also very very intellectual/"geeky"
Of these schools, Northwestern probably has the highest cross-app rate with ivies.. which drives down the yield, so they have to accept a higher percentage. </p>

<p>WUSTL does all that advertising to accept 4,000, carleton to draw accept 1500
NU accepted close to 5000, given that name recognition among top students is roughly the same, smaller schools are going to admit less people because they have lesser spots. When a somewhat equal number of people apply, obviously this puts small schools at an advantage. </p>

<p>When you're trying to figure out how hard it will be for any individual to get into UofC... its Hard. </p>

<p>Basing dificulty of acceptance just on what percent they admit is flawed because you would need to assume all applicants have an equal chance of being accepted at any school... its not a roll of the die. </p>

<p>The strongest example is</p>