Do you think my son has the qualifications for ivy league?

Parent Cafe
141

<p>Well, I must defer to those who know about premed and the like, because I have no clue--you could hardly find a profession that I would like to have less, than to be a doctor. I am a very tentative math major, but beyond that my interests are history, english, and economics--for me, it actually would have been a big step down to attend my state school. For some of my classmates, who are engineering majors, it is becomes much harder to justify leaving the state when you can get an engineering degree at U of I to rival that of nearly any school of the country. </p>

<p>I think that it is important to know yourself. Some people could be happy at a wide variety of colleges, and view having an excellent premed, or whatever, program at an excellent college as more than enough incentive to attend. Me, personally? I'm a picky person, bordering on slightly OCD. I need to pick a place that I would be happy to live at for 4 years...I think that I probably would have had an okay shot at MIT, but would absolutely hate it there. Wellesley, on the other hand, has an absolutely beautiful campus...and I can still cross-register at MIT and take advantage of the math opportunities there, without having to go to there. I'm not saying that my way is right or that your way is wrong--but you have to know what kind of person you are, or else risk a very unhappy college experience.</p>

<p>PS: I absolutely agree with you about the benefits of a top university even over an excellent state university program. Personally, I never understood why my engineering crazy classmates wouldn't consider Princeton or Columbia or even CMU for the prospective CS majors, but they considered it a waste of money (although they almost certainly would receive finaid, were they admitted). Different strokes for different folks.</p>

142

<p>advant: Maybe they did not like them. My S despite prodding did not want to consider Princeton or Cornell or CMU for engineering. Got accepted to Stanford, did not like it after a visit. Prefers places like Rice or Michigan (Heaven forbid. I know there is just no way he could ever learn as much there as at HYPS.) I wonder how it is I know so many great physcians that went to so many crummy undergrad schools? If you look at opportunities for engineers coming out of U of I then why would one spend the money to go OOS? Also, there are a bunch of research facilities, everything else to do, and a football team that might win a game or two. And lots of corn!</p>

143

<p>advantagious:</p>

<p>I guess every choice involves some trade-off. My D. loved the Wellesley campus, the intellectual feel but hated the isolation. She feels more comfortable in a slightly more urban environment. She had a number of misconceptions about MIT until she spent a day shadowing some biology students. She now thinks it is cool to have all these different buildings designed by famous architects and incredible resources for undergrads. She like the low pressure or P/F for the first year and the fact that science majors are not some small minority relegated to some remote "Science" building or hill as at many liberal arts colleges. At least at MIT, she feels part of the "mainstream" whatever that means at a diverse place like MIT. She does miss the neogothic (or college gothic) feel of a Princeton or Yale but plans to spend junior year at Cambridge in the UK to get the real Harry Potter experience.</p>

144

<p>Oldolddad, Just curious - what didn't your son like about Stanford?</p>

145

<p>probably should not go there but D had no interest either. Had to do with meetings with profs, some of the kids there, and some of the kids they know who got in and went and maybe the campus and Palo Alto. Aside from that a perfect fit! (For all I know S will change his mind now and go! "I'll show you dad what you think you know about me!") After leaving there he visited Berkeley and loved it. Weird kid. Takes after his mother. There is more but I do not want to get into a thread fight. It is a good school though IMHO.</p>

146

<p>OK, I wasn't trying to start anything controversial - I was just curious. My son loved it the minute he set foot on the campus (after he was accepted), but we are from the Northeast and I think it seemed very "exotic" and different from anyplace else he had ever visited. He didn't know anyone else who went there or was planning to go there, except two kids from a summer program he had attended. Every kid is different. When my son visited Princeton (about half an hour from our home), he said, "It doesn't feel like I went anywhere. The dirt here smells the same as where we live, and they even have the same annoying geese!" Old gothic buildings did not impress him!
EDIT - It was in the summer and they were doing a lot of digging and construction, so that was where the smell of the dirt came into play.</p>

147

<p>Oh, I should clarify: these kids really did not research and certainly visit those schools I outlined. They refused to consider them (and, in some cases, made slightly insulting comments to me about the kinds of students who aspire to/go to the top schools, but that's a whole other discussion). It is certainly possible that a student might actually <em>like</em> U of I, an excellent school in and of itself with lots to offer, including exciting sports/social/great networking opportunities within the state. My response was obviously colored by my own bias--as you can mostly see from the schools that I am choosing from, U of I is totally wrong for me. </p>

<p>And you do not have to justify Rice to me or my family. My father is from Texas, and he received his MArch from Rice and has only good things to say about it. Woe unto the person that badmouths Rice to us! No question here either that UMich is a fantastic school, as well (way back in the day, my father would probably have gone there had he not gotten into Princeton). In fact, my father encouraged me to look into Rice (not least of which because of their generous merit aid policies--his Master's was free), but I am very unhappy in any sort of heat and humidity and Houston has both in abundance. Cool campus though...just way too hot for me (and I visited in late March!).</p>

148

<p>Advant: Aha , so your dad chased the elite school! Just kidding, I love Princeton but for some reason after I thought both kids woulds have it as one of their top choices they took a major turn after the second or third visit. Who knows why? Hey, they are kids right?</p>

149

<p>
[quote]
OK, I wasn't trying to start anything controversial - I was just curious.

[/quote]
I think it's quite possible to dislike Stanford. I don't care for it myself, but I still encouraged my son to apply. He'd have been perfectly happy there. Personally I far prefer Caltech and Berkeley. And Princeton? I just hate those Halloween colors!</p>

150

<p>Hee! Actually, my parents were really poorly advised in HS and likely would have made totally different decisions. My mother was a first generation college student (like, first person in her entire extended family period to ever go to college), and went to UPenn and totally hated it. She transferred to Princeton, way back in the day when you could actually do so. My father was a bit less worse off, but his college list would have made a lot here cringe. He applied to HYP, UMich, and Michigan State (because he was NMF and they accepted him like, before he sent in an app). Perhaps now is the time to mention that my father grew up in Texas, went to HS in New York, and to my knowledge never visited Michigan. He was rejected at Harvard and waitlisted at Yale. With the same app today, I seriously doubt he would have been admitted to Princeton, either, and he also applied there in a landmark competitive year (the year of coeducation). My parents can't believe how crazy admissions are now. </p>

<p>I've mentioned it elsewhere, but as much as my father loved Princeton (and he really does), he has admitted to me that were he to do it all over again, he would really have a tough choice between Princeton and the excellent Midwestern LAC's that he has come to know through his work (as an Architect). He would tell you that he simply had no clue that these smaller, cool, less crazy places existed back when he applied to college. So, as much as it may seem that he chased the name, the reality is never quite so simple!</p>

151

<p>Advant: i was just kidding! Mathmom: That's it! My kids didn't like the halloween colors. For four years I have been trying to figure it out.</p>

152

<p>Oh, I know that, oldolddad....I was just sayin' :).</p>

153

<p>I think it's quite possible to dislike Stanford, too. I know that a lot of people don't like the campus architecture, the location in a "bubble", and many other things about it.</p>

154

<p>Cellardweller still hasn't addressed my earlier critiques of his analysis, which lead me to believe (a) he is considerably understating the number of "academically elite" kids -- not by a factor of five, certainly (100,000 vs. 20,000), but maybe by 50-100%, and (b) he is considerably overstating the number of kids accepted at the Ivies from that group. So, although I don't disagree fundamentally with the conclusions of his analysis -- and, indeed, I have advised my own kids and those of our friends accordingly -- I think it is meaningfully over-sanguine.</p>

<p>The main issues:</p>

<p>On the number of "academically elite" kids:</p>

<p>-- There may be only 20,000 NMFs, but NMFs are determined on the basis of a single test, on a definite date, and almost all of the colleges consider and report SAT scores based on either (a) the best individual component scores of multiple tests (the overwhelming majority rule) or (b) the best single test date out of what may be multiple tests. I have never seen anyone provide real data on what this means, but since it's a one-way ratchet, and since scores do improve some with repeated testing, I think it's clear that, even if the population were limited to the population that took the PSAT, the number of seniors with NMF-equivalent SAT scores as reported by the colleges is considerably greater than 20,000.</p>

<p>-- Also, because the practice and additional maturity actually mean something, some kids may just improve. One of my kids was an NMF and had 2300 SATs, taking them twice. The other wasn't even close to being an NMF and had 2340 SATs, taking them once. And one of my daughter's impressive friends, now at Harvard, didn't come close to NMF status because, after only two years in this country, her English wasn't good enough in the fall of 11th grade. By the fall of 12th grade, her English was good enough for NMF-equivalent SATs.</p>

<p>-- I don't think taking the PSAT is universal at all. The pool of applicants is not limited to kids who were part of the pool that produced 20,000 NMFs. This absolutely includes international kids, who represent as much as 10% or more of some elite admissions.</p>

<p>-- Some kids do better on the ACT than the SAT. Colleges will report the SAT-equivalence of their ACT scores. Presumably, their PSAT scores were not as high as if they had taken a "PACT". This is just another ratchet that means that the single-test data reported by the testing services, or represented by the NMF population, understates the number of kids whose applications have those numbers.</p>

<p>-- Going the other direction, some significant number of kids with those stats take themselves out of the Ivy applicant pool voluntarily.</p>

<p>On the admission side:</p>

<p>-- Only half of the enrolled classes at HYPS etc. -- less, actually -- has NMF-equivalent SAT scores. Since the number of kids with NMF-quality SAT scores is clearly big enough to fill more spaces, that means that the colleges are accepting about half their classes (maybe a little less) from pools of kids without those score levels. </p>

<p>-- Some kids clearly get multiple admissions to elite colleges. So there aren't 16,000 kids being admitted to Ivies; it's something meaningfully less than that.</p>

<p>So, the bottom line is that there may be 30,000 "academically elite" kids, and at the Ivies they are chasing maybe 6-7,000 admission slots. I rate the chances there at 20-25%, not 50%. However, if you add Stanford, MIT, SWAMP, Chicago, Duke, etc., I think you move into 50%+ territory. </p>

<p>In other words, cellardweller's basic point -- that there is a home at elite institutions for the population of elite students -- is basically right. But you have to define "elite institutions" much, much more broadly than "the Ivies" to make it right. (It really helps if you toss Berkeley, Michigan, UVa, etc. in there, too.) And guess what? That's what the world actually looks like, as far as I can tell.</p>

155

<p>I went to law school at Stanford. Had I made the mistake of visiting it before showing up to register, I would never have chosen it in a million years. I did not at all like the "look and feel" of the campus; I was intensely upset and disappointed. It took me about six weeks to fall in love with the university. It was and is one of the wonders of the world. But I have never loved the way it looks -- more like a golf course than a university.</p>

156

<p>JHS: Nice addition to the analysis. Not unreasonable.
(I wish I had not mentioned the S word)</p>

157

<p>


</p>

<p>The numbers for the SAT I scores of class of 2006 seniors have been published by College Board. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/highered/ra/sat/SATPercentileRanksCompositeCR_M_W.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/highered/ra/sat/SATPercentileRanksCompositeCR_M_W.pdf&lt;/a> </p>

<p>I'd appreciate you looking at the numbers and seeing how they fit into your analysis. I'd appreciate anyone pointing to a distinct statement from the College Board about what is being counted in that table: distinct sittings for the SAT I by members of class of 2006, at whatever age and after however many previous sittings, or distinct individuals in class of 2006 who took the SAT I (at whatever age), with only one set of scores reported for each individual? If this data table reports only one set of scores for each individual test-taker, even for test-takers who took the SAT I more than once, is what is reported here a </p>

<p>a) most recent score (last score), </p>

<p>b) highest single-sitting score, </p>

<p>or </p>

<p>c) highest section-by-section score (which some people call a "superscore") </p>

<p>for each individual? </p>

<p>Perhaps there is already another College Board Web page that removes all doubt on those points, which I have seen interpreted different ways in different CC threads. </p>

<p>Looking at the data table, it looks like an SAT I score on the new three-section version of SAT I of 2200 is comfortably at the "top 20,000" level nationally, subject to the informational questions I have raised. </p>

<p>I also invite comments from other participants about this issue.</p>

158

<p>Okay, ACRONYM police: I'll give you SWAP; I got no problem with SWAP. But SWAMP? Sorry, no -- unless you tell me M means Mudd (as in Harvey Mudd), not Middlebury, in which case I can live with that. But there is no justification for the other M -- without B,C,H,W (some of those being multiples).</p>

159

<p>


</p>

<p>The local examples I know of young people with high SAT I scores at middle-school age (including a couple of double-qualifiers for the Study of Exceptional Talent) don't necessarily look out of state for college opportunities. Some families think, based on their investigation of the possibilities, that the state university honors program is an adequately challenging program for such a child, and the child sometimes submits no application to any out-of-state privately operated colleges.</p>

160

<p>tokenadult: Says in the report. Only one score per student. Latest score only.</p>