<p>Agreed...no need for reach schools. AND the student should be happy with all the match and safety schools on the application list. NO ONE should bother applying to a school that they would not want to attend.</p>
<p>No one NEEDS reach schools. What usually happens when kids who are looking beyond local schools are putting together a school list is that they tend to put those schools on their list that they hear mentioned. Parents, friends, press, lists all tend to point to the selective schools if a student is up there in stats. Fpr kids who go to Catholic schools, there are the usual nominees like ND, BC, GT. Many public schools with a well known flagship will have kids lusting to go there. That is the easy part of college listmaking. Just taking the top schools and putting them on the list. They tend to be reaches.</p>
<p>For those who have other factors in mind. Particularly more personal factors, the list may look quite different. It may not have any reaches. My son's initial list really had no reaches. He then found some schools that had good merit opportunities and lower sticker prices that fit in the list, and happened to be reaches as well. They were not his top choices. Reaches are not necessarily the top choices of the student.</p>
<p>I'll chime in with everyone else. Reaches are not needed, only matches/safeties (which you are willing to attend).</p>
<p>At S's schools, the majority of kids only apply to one school. If accepted, it's game over for them. They apply ED or EA. Most of the time that school is a reach, but I know last year, some of those schools were good strong matches. My close friend's son, thought about giving a very selective reach school a chance ED, but came to the wise conclusion that he would just as soon go to another school that was not a reach, but a good match. His strategy made the college app process very easy. He was not settling for a school he did not prefer. However, if he was applying to a bunch of schools, he would have included the reach because it was among his top choices.</p>
<p>Do you need a lot of reaches? No. Do you need ANY reaches? Well that kind of depends on your personality IMHO.</p>
<p>Hold on now. The question of whether you "need" a lot of reaches depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Do you need a lot, or any, reaches to get a good college education? No. Do you need multiple reaches if your goal is to obtain an educational experience that is provided at those reach schools? For many students, the answer to this is yes. I mean, I don't "need" cruise control on my car in order to get from place to place, but I did want a car with cruise control, and I was willing to pay for it.</p>
<p>The problem is that a student is more likely to end up attending a match or safety school than a reach school.</p>
<p>So if the student feels s/he needs to attend a reach school in order to attain the education s/he requires, there is a big chance of disappointment, as the student is faced with the necessity of attending a school s/he feels is not up to standard.</p>
<p>It is the frustration of feeling the need for cruise control but not being able to get a car with it.</p>
<p>Maybe a sports analogy; if your kid wants to play club soccer at a high level, he might try out for several top teams--if he's not a super-top player, he might try out for more in hopes of snagging a spot. He might not get on any of them, and might have to play for a less competitive team. How he approaches this will depend on his motivation. If he just wants to play at a reasonable level (and maybe have a better chance of being a team star), he might primarily look at "match" teams. But if he wants to compete at the highest level he can, he'll try out for those "reach" teams, even if there is a real risk he won't get into any of them.</p>
<p>Oh, I love a sports analogy! </p>
<p>And I would say that's a good one. If he got a spot on a premier soccer club that always pushes him to be his best, that'd be great, but he'd probably be happiest being a team player on a really good squad where he'll see some action, improve his skills and be part of something bigger than himself (team chemistry is important to him). While he'd like the idea, for a while, of being a superstar on a lesser team, I think it would lose its appeal after awhile.</p>
<p>Looks like he needs to be in a high match? :)</p>
<p>To continue the soccer team analogy -- as long as the player will be happy to play on any team he tries out for, you are set.</p>
<p>If he won't want to play at all if he doesn't make the premier team, you are in for some rocky times.</p>
<p>FWIW, the guidance counselors at our HS suggest to incoming freshmen that they should plan on applying to six schools: 2 safeties, 2 matches, and 2 reaches. I wonder where they came up with that formula? (I know they do love to brag about how many kids from our school are accepted to Ivies, whether the kids go or not!)</p>
<p>This 2-2-2 advice is, in my opinion, outdated with respect to anybody who really wants to get into one of the highly selective reaches--i.e., Ivies and several other schools that are essentially reaches for everybody. I suppose if everybody followed that advice, it would be OK, but they don't.</p>