Chances for a not so top candidate?

<p>Just want to add that a few other match schools the OP might want to check out in addition to Bennington are Goucher, Lewis & Clark, Earlham, Beloit, and Clark. All have solid language programs, and are great for international studies as well. All of these have some similarities in the types of students they attract and the overall quirky feel you seem to be looking for. Goucher, L&C, Earlham and Beloit also offer non-binding early action, so you can get an early answer and lock in a match or two. Since you'll be visiting Reed next week, you may want to stop in and visit L&C -- it's just 15 minutes from Reed.</p>

<p>You wll probably still need some safe bets in the mix as none of those four are really "guarantees" for someone with a 3.4 GPA/lower test scores. I'd consider them more match schools from the little you have indicated. Since you don't yet know what your final SAT scores will be, I would build lots of match and safety schools into the list for now. You can always drop one or two later on if your test scores and grades do go up.</p>

<p>Vassar, Reed, Hamilton and Middlebury will be very high reaches for someone with a 3.4 GPA and lackluster test scores. Bard, Sarah Lawrence, and Skidmore might be realistic reaches, but still a bit of reach or at least a reachy match. Doesn't mean you shouldn't give these schools a try, but I can't stress enough the importance of making sure you also have some more solid matches and safe bets in the mix. Sure, Vassar or Reed or Middlebury or Bard might take a risk on someone with a lower GPA who is "individualistic" but they also get tons of applications from students with high GPAs/high test scores who are ALSO "individualistic" so the chances of getting in on that alone without the whole package are not high. Take any comments about your admissions chances from admissions officers who have not seen your actual transcript, grades, recommendations, and essays with a very large grain of salt. </p>

<p>So, do be cautious at this point. Think of building your college list like building a house. You don't start from the roof and work your way down. The house won't stand. You start from the foundation -- the schools your grades and test scores are great for -- then add in the structure -- the schools your grades and test scores are pretty good for -- and then you add the roof - the schools where you may not have the grades/test scores but want to give a shot anyhow. But, always, always, put the structure and foundation in place first. That way, no matter what happens with the reach schools, you'll still have plenty of good choices next spring. The best way to avoid stress in the process is to build in a safety net you can live with. :)</p>

<p>really nicely put Carolyn, and very true!</p>

<p>The thing about these chances threads is they're never truly accurate. I was rejected from safeties but got into reaches. I was misled on this site and I took the advice to heart and was then disappointed (and later happily suprised.) The truth is you really just don't know until you hear from the schools. I know how annoying it is to wait, but speculation will drive you to insanity. No one really knows your chances except the admissions officers</p>

<p>Actually, sig the rejected at safties and accepted at reaches is not uncommon (a factor in admissions is how likely the student is to matriculate . . . and many "safety" schools can tell from your list that they're the "worst case senario" school, while reaches know that if admitted you are VERY likely to attend) </p>

<p>Your advice about how this is really just all reading tea leaves is good for applicants to keep in mind though . . . its definitely not scientific</p>

<p>Truly, there are no "safeties" anymore - esp. among the schools you named.
Schools were absolutely SWMAPED with strong candidates this past year - many of my students who no doubt would have gotten into the "usual suspects" (ie Vassar, Skidmore, Hamilton, Colgate, Haverford etc.) 203 years ago got rejected this past year.</p>

<p>Your stats certainly won't DISqualify you - but emphasize those characteristics/experiences which QUALIFY you as an interesting candidate. Certainly, being from Arizona helps a lot - not perhaps as much as being from Wyoming :) but its still a good hook!</p>