<p>I don’t think it’s good to be too confident that any student who was admitted to a school is capable of doing the work there.</p>
<p>There are exceptions.</p>
<p>One exception is the student whom the college really, really wants – because of URM status, perhaps, or geographic origin or a special talent – but who is not quite qualified to be there. My kids have told me of URM friends at college who struggled academically because they had gotten poor educations at poor high schools and really weren’t qualified for the college where they ended up. </p>
<p>Another is a student who has always gotten a lot of help. Perhaps the student’s parents helped the student to plan projects and organize study time because the student didn’t have the skills to do this alone. Or perhaps the student has always had difficulty with certain subjects and has worked with tutors. The transition to a very independent academic life in college may not work out well for such a student because the supports that the student always had in the past are no longer there.</p>
<p>Post #41. I agree I’m not confident that just because one is admitted one is capable of doing work there either.
And I don’t think this problem is URM specific, 2 of my kid’s friends are both white. One was smart in math/science, smart enough that the teacher requested her to be in his class but due to work ethics(which I’ve always suspected all along) she barely made it in some courses, had below a B average for scholarship. Granted she was accepted with much lower grade from her high school than my daughter but she had a hook, female in engineering and got in. The other friend must came from a weak high school, he had sky high GPA(4.6+) received scholarships from top UCs and her university, but didn’t do so well and lost the trustee scholarship.</p>
<p>Don’t flame me, but I am reading that book Admission, it is a fiction, but has a lot of “true facts” as known to the author (it is a fun book to read). In it she did say that sometimes they have admitted some below standard students (500 SAT) due to their other outstanding qualities, and their track records have not been great. But I don’t think that happens often, and of course we know our kids and we would know if our kid got lucky.</p>
<p>Marian - Good points, but I can also see that a student who is used to asking for help when they run into trouble might fare better than one who has always breezed through classes, but has been learning because classes have been small and teachers aware of the needs of their students.</p>
<p>We have actually walked this walk twice, with one student choosing the “less rigorous” school and another choosing an “elite” school. No easy answer, especially if a student is not sure whether or not they want to go pre-professional, whether they want to major in STEM, humanities, or social science, or even whether they hope to concentrate only in an area in which they have considerable talent and experience or dabble in higher-level classes outside of their major.</p>
<p>We have noticed (as others upthread have pointed out) that difficulty of intro classes can vary widely (freshman gen chem at some schools mirrors junior year physical chemistry at other less rigorous schools, for example), that some majors at “less rigorous” schools are viable only for the most talented students at these schools, and that rigor of classes in languages such as Mandarin, Arabic, or Japanese can be extremely variable, such that it is even possible to emerge after four years of study and a sky-high GPA in a less rigorous program with less proficiency than the average student who has taken only two years (or even less) in a more rigorous program.</p>
<p>I do not think there is any easy answer to this question. To throw another wrench into the mix, at less rigorous schools the student who had hoped for time for a more active social or EC experience may find that compatible companions are lacking, or students who choose the more rigorous school for academic challenge might find that they are distracted by the option of having an active social life.</p>
<p>Each option has its advanatges and disadvantages, and it is best to take a close look at the student.</p>
<p>I know those conclusions are clear to you as evidenced in other threads you post that top kids will get equal educations no matter where they go. I beg to differ for many of the reasons listed in Sop14 Mom’s “evidence”. No way am I going to believe that two years in a local community college followed by two years at a competitive state U. are going to lead to the same kind of personal and academic growth that same kid would get at a top 50 public or private. Sure you can probably meet basic academic prerequisites to enter the job market with either just like I can fill my belly at McDonald’s or Morton’s but the content and experience is not the same. This is true to a lesser extent even when a kid (or parent) chooses to drop a tier or more to obtain merit scholarships. Now some parents are saying their kid needs to be at the top emotionally and for them that would be a wise choice. Others have to make too many financial sacrifices to meet the costs of a match institution and it makes sense to get a full ride to be the big fish in a small pond to bolster the institution’s stats and reputation. You seem to think otherwise with your oft quoted studies but all these decisions require trade-off.</p>
<p>Our family may be considering this question next spring also. It will be left up to the student to ultimately decide, and I hope visits to the schools this fall to sit in on classes and talk with current students will help. Someone mentioned Swarthmore a few posts ago, and that is one of the schools that concerns me. None of the schools on D’s list are not rigorous, just variations on perceived level of intensity/laid back atmosphere and students. I feel strongly that college is more than studying all the time and want her to be involved in other activities.</p>
<p>“Choosing the right school is a tough. The more the student knows about him/herself, the better the fit.”</p>
<p>I completely agree with this comment.</p>
<p>Some students thrive in an academically challenging environment. Others need a less demanding setting. And I also agree that some kids are smart enough that they don’t have to work that hard. Not every kid is a “high achiever.” Some just grasp the information easily. Either way, kids need to figure out where they will thrive. And in many situations, the choice will ultimately come down to finances anyway!</p>
<p>Much more common examples can be found at open admission community colleges and low selectivity state universities, whose mission often includes “giving everyone a chance”, even if the chance is statistically not all that great (e.g. some students who got 2.5 GPAs in high school will succeed, but others will not).</p>
<p>The specially desired but academically risky students at private schools crafting “diverse classes of unique individuals” are a small minority of students in a small minority of schools in this respect.</p>
<p>I also completely agree with you. There is a huge difference in the quality of education. It is ridiculous to think otherwise. And profs have to tailor their teaching to the population at lower tier schools. </p>
<p>For example, since tenure often rests on student evaluations as part of the package, profs are well aware that they need to obtain good evals from students. At lower tier schools, students often expect a much slower pace, extensive review and outlines before each test, etc., or will submit poor evaluations. Profs often expect less from students. I know of one dept. chair who stopped giving any term papers or essay tests in a humanities class because he couldn’t tolerate reading papers due to the poor writing skills of the students. </p>
<p>An academically talented student would be miserable in a school like this.</p>
<p>I do believe in finding a comfortable fit with the other students in terms of academic level. My D went to a scholarship competition weekend at one of her safeties. It’s a school that has solid programs. She could have had many opportunities to shine. They don’t offer grants, but she was offered the largest merit scholarship of any of her choices (27k out of the gate + 3k for IB diploma). The scholarship day started with presentations by admissions, the President and faculty members. Everyone was interesting and engaging, etc. However, what struck her was that the speakers continued on the theme of how the students in the room were the best and the brightest. By the end of the day, having taken the 2 part exam that they said would be difficult and having interacted with the other students, she came away thinking, “If these student are the best and the brightest who are the other 90%?”</p>
<p>When she visited other schools she attended at least one science class and one humanities discussion based class. She was looking at science facilities and class size along with the level and interest of the students in the discussion classes. Being towards the top nets better merit aid, but she didn’t want to be at the very top of the student body in most study areas. She was really attuned to the seeming level of academic engagement of the students in the classes she attended. She didn’t want opportunity by default where others just weren’t that interested.</p>
<p>p.s. I would add that she self-selected by omission from the schools with pressure cooker environments by just not submitting apps.</p>
<p>annasdad- I have some beachfront property in Arizona to sell you. You have really backed yourself into a corner. I am waiting for the foot stamping!</p>
<p>I have a tangential question. I don’t know if this question impacts the OP, who sounds like their decision is a year off, but I’ve always wondered about this.</p>
<p>It seems to me that trimesters vs. semesters pose a big difference in rigor–think 9 or 10 weeks to learn Biochem vs. 15 weeks. Do trimester courses cover less material? If a class is meant to be a full-year sequence, I understand how the material is spread out over 2 semesters or 3 trimesters. But when a class is only intended to be a semester long, how is that handled at a trimester institution? For lab courses, the trimester cannot pack a full semester’s amount of work in; there aren’t enough hours!
IMO, trimesters would be way more rigorous than semesters, with the extra set of midterms and finals thrown in for “bonus”.</p>
<p>DS is a HS Junior. Smart kid, has a research internship this summer usually reserved for college level…no, I’m not confusing this with the ‘bragging thread’. The reason I mention this is…in a conversation with his research mentor… someone with a gaggle of Phd’s working for him, someone with alphabet soup after their own name…I asked the very same question and the answer stunned me. Mentor said …‘go where you can have a life, somewhere that if you wanted to go away for a weekend, if you wanted to explore other areas, if you wanted some downtime, you could do so. Especially for STEM types, if you spend your 4 years of UG locked in a lab 24/7 you have a high chance of burnout at the end. Go somewhere where you can get good grades which matters for grad school.’ </p>
<p>This conversation took place on a weekday, mentor was working a tractor with his own younger son, preparing a lot for future building. Start with balance, lead a life with balance and have enough time and ‘soul space’ to watch clouds on occasion.</p>
<p>Ok, lets take the top 10 schools, say, on average, they turn away 25,000 students, all qualified to attend there just didn’t get in, luck of the draw. Those 250,000 students go elsewhere. Do you REALLY think an education at Yale is really any better because the handful of kids that got in there by the luck of the draw vs a school like say Grinnell or Carleton, which is also full of students admitted to various Ivy’s or similar but opted for a different school.</p>
<p>Mods should sticky this thread…great conversation; has always interested me…</p>
<p>I believe it totally depends on personality…I kept my opinions to myself with D1; she chose the #2 option; and has been very successful during her college experience…</p>
<p>I acknowledge that for a few people, “a life” is completely and totally a life of the mind. Those kids who thrive with rigor and challenge, who are always looking for more, for challenge, for depth… those kids would be unhappy at any place that couldn’t offer the most challenging academic atmosphere.</p>
<p>But there are not many kids or adults like that. I know a lot of parents who claim that their child would be miserable anywhere but at the most challenging academic situation possible. Their children, however, just want to be allowed to take a date to homecoming. </p>
<p>Most of us need balance in our lives.</p>
<p>I think that if your child needs a “school with greatest academic challenge” you already know it. Those kids don’t leave any doubt in anyone’s minds where they need to be.</p>