<p>The quality of the application, the quality of the recommendations, and the relationship of the school GC with colleges are all factors that cannot be accounted for in these computer-generated lists. Also, as with all such tools, garbage in, garbage out. Not being totally honest will skew these lists.</p>
<p>ohio_mom - I credit your son for recognizing bad advice! Not always the case with teens...</p>
<p>I think PR's Counselor-O-Matic is a good starting point, but obviously not the "gospel truth." Actually, several months ago I'd plugged in my son's stats and came up with pretty realistic lists for safeties, matches & reaches... however, the last 2 weeks, with the same stats, I'm getting reaches as matches now, and matches as safties... </p>
<p>It's a good starting point, but it has to be backed up with research and info from the college websites, US News & World Reports stats, etc.</p>
<p>lelalellen,
I've noticed that, too. I think it might be a little bipolar ...</p>
<p>Mr. B,
"The more prestigious a school the more likely a match is to be rejected. "</p>
<p>Good way of putting it.</p>
<p>Ohio Mom, It does seem schizo. I just reentered all of my daughter's stats and got schools like Dartmouth, Emory Amherst and Rice as "matches" --- If I didn't know any better, I might be thrilled to see those kind of schools listed as matches. But I do know better and I know that her test scores and GPA aren't even in the lowest range for those types of schools. She's not hooked in any way. Those schools are NOT matches for her. Worse, they're not even realistic reaches for her.</p>
<p>Interestingly, all of the schools on her list came up as "safeties." I consider none of them safeties. Some are matches and some of them reaches for her. So, please, take these sites with a shaker of salt.</p>
<p>I have to say again...for approximately 1 year, up until about 2 weeks ago, Counselor-O-Matic was much more realistic! True, there were some unrealistic safeties, matches and reaches, but one could take them with a grain of salt. NOW, they are way off - (many of the schools that were once considered reaches for my son now come up as matches, the ones that were matches are now coming up as safeties) and one would need a mountain of salt as opposed to a grain :-)</p>
<p>As I'd said before, looking at each school's stats in all of the books or on PR's (the factual info for each school, not via the COM), or CB's sites should give a person a pretty good sense of where they stand.</p>
<p>I just ran through it and the schools my son is applying to showed up, but there was no accuracy as to whether it was a reach, match or safety. It seemed that some schools did show up in the right category, but most did not.</p>
<p>After using counselor o matic for 2 children who are now in college I would suggest you take what ever it says and take it down a notch. It once said Harvard was a match for D. It seemed to be ok if you considered a match to actually be a reach, and a safety to be a match. As others have said it doesn't seem to adjust appropriately for selectivity, especially if your kid is a hookless suburban kid.</p>
<p>"My son believed his GC until he saw just how bad the advice she gave regarding 'take the SAT cold' and 'three years of a FL are plenty' ..."</p>
<p>I'm always amazed by how absolutely clueless some high school guidance counselors can be. Students often rely on their counselors to steer them in the right direction when it comes to college applications, and indeed, GCs SHOULD be better informed about the whole college admissions process. When they assure a student interested in applying to a highly selective school that "three years of a foreign language is plenty", or that they needn't prepare for the SAT, they do that student a terrible mis-service. I don't suppose it's realistic to sue a counselor for really bad advice. But if they knew they could be held responsible for the quality of their work, maybe they would actually bother to become informed about college admissions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm always amazed by how absolutely clueless some high school guidance counselors can be.
[/quote]
it all depends on where you live and what the expectations of the community are for the HS kids. In some school districts in affluent areas such as Palo Alto (or schools within a larger district such as LA Unified) the GC are very savvy. But in most districts the majority of GC's went to average-state, almost all the kids who are college-bound are going to state, and that's all they know. They are unlikely to steer kids to elite colleges, nor do they know much about them.</p>
<p>As for "people"s kid who got WL from all schools listed as matches, a few things could have happened. Of course the auto-counselor could have been way off base. But another thing we've seen is when an academically strong kid applies to schools that are safeties or solid matches but doesn't show the school any interest (visits, alumni interviews, skewing essays towards that school, etc) then the school figures the kid isn't that interested and will do the WL thing. Even at that point it could be rescued by a GC calling and saying the kid really IS interested in the school. I'm not saying that's what happened here, just want to point this out so parents make sure the kids show interest to the colleges that care instead of wasting time trying to impress the Stanford's and Harvard's that don't even bother to track demonstrated interest.</p>
<p>"But in most districts the majority of GC's went to average-state, almost all the kids who are college-bound are going to state, and that's all they know. They are unlikely to steer kids to elite colleges, nor do they know much about them."</p>
<p>That's pretty much the case in our district. To make matters more difficult, if a GC suggests a reach school and the kid doesn't get in, parents whine about the disappointed kid and app fees. If he or she does get in, it may well cost more than the public alternative, and parents may whine even more. </p>
<p>However, more kids are getting fast tracked in math in our district, which puts them in a competitve position ... and some of these kids and their parents know it. So our GC's are getting an education in schools beyond the state border! We typically send one kid a year to an elite. Next year its looking like 2 or 3.</p>
<p>Unless the adcoms are using the same algorithm, the online counselor programs are just taking historical data, plugging in your data, and making an 'educated' guess.
As another poster indicated a 50% chance means 50% chance of rejection. S1 had his eye on a UC for which he fell in the 50/50 chance range. When he was rejected, we both just looked at each other and said, well I guess it was the 50% that said 'no' that won out. Ultimately, he was accepted to a UC for which his GPA fell into the bucket whereby only 8% of applicants in that range are accepted.
The best insurance is a safety that you will be fine attending (ideally one with rolling apps)</p>
<p>I think what it comes down to is that admissions is much more than just a numbers game - Hooks, perceived interested, essays, class rank, number of AP's , legacy, geographics and more all add to the pot that's evaluated. A crap shoot, to be sure! Fortunately, there's a school for everyone, if you're realistic.</p>
<p>Seems that with the larger schools SAT, GPA, and class rank are the initial "weeding out" factors. You've got to make it past that for any of the other stuff to count.</p>
<p>Poetsheart, the last thing we need to see are more lawsuits directed against guidance counselors. Our nation is a mess because of this "I'm going to sue" mentality. we have way too many lawyers in this country. if this teaches everyone one rule it should be, rely upon someone else's advice to your own detriment. guidance counselor is free and remember that free advice is worth nothing.</p>
<p>I am looking forward to my S guidance counselor this year. Two years ago my D's counselor came up with such way out schools I wondered if she was getting a kickback from schools.</p>
<p>Nothing is better than your own due diligence.</p>
<p>Use these tools only to jog your thinking, not to pick reaches, matches, and safeties. You might use them a lot like you use one of those lists of baby names -- just to stretch your mind and have some fun -- but in the end you have to figure out the fit to the kid based on a variety of factors.</p>
<p>I am already 99.9% sure where I want to go, so when my GC recommended the counselor-o-matic, I decided to try it just for fun, you know, why not?</p>
<p>I filled out all the preferences as biased as I could toward my number 1 school (University of Oklahoma), and when I was finished....</p>
<p>BYU. ???? So, I wouldn't give too much weight to sites, especially counselor-o-matic.</p>
<p>However, I have nothing but good things to say for the Princeton Review publications. The books helped me VERY much in preparing for the SAT, ACT, and PSAT.</p>