<p>I second jym's request to move the safety thread , perhaps to the "important" list on the parents forum AND on the college admissions forum. I didn't see it either, again cause son wasn't interested in applying to H.[ and because it wasn't created until 2007]</p>
<p>Oute from a message to the class of 09 by a student in the college admissions forum: </p>
<p>"I was so arrogant come ED season, I thought I would get into my ED school despite my lame (and I mean lame) test scores. I thought I was so special and that the adcom would ignore my scores since everything else was good. I ignored the CC'ers advice on retaking my SATs. After all, back then I thought I was the queen of the world... oh, how I needed to come down from that arrogant and bleak world. "</p>
<p>She was brought down when she was rejected but she rallied and applied RD to several more schools. Was accepted to only her safeties and now reports that she is in love with the one she will be attending. Happy ending :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I never saw that "favorite safety college" thread (which, IMO is a GREAT idea for a thread) because it was in the Harvard forum.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I will open up a new thread on the College Search & Selection Forum and on this Parents Forum, and sticky those. You are all very welcome to contribute replies to help the next class of high school students build broader college application lists, so that they don't end up with no offers of admission at all. Thanks for the suggestion.</p>
<p>Reporting another ray of hope:</p>
<p>Another good point, epiphany. I was just talking to a friend of mine 2 days ago whose H went to an ivy and was hoping their oldest s would too. Instead, his son chose a state school half way across the country.</p>
<p>Our very wise GC told me and S2 at our first serious pick-a-college conference: "The Ivies are a reach for everyone." We both got it loud and clear.</p>
<p>More GCs need to speak up and make this point.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think that a number of parents take the stand that if they are going to pay $50k a year for college, it %$#@ well better be an Ivy. Most of S's friends apply to the state flagship (an excellent school, gives great $$, generous accelerated placement -- we are very fortunate to have this resource) and then pitch the rest of their applications at the top tier.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is actually a sensible strategy for kids who don't object to large universities. It was my daughter's plan, although she also applied to her first-choice school ED and then withdrew her other applications after the ED school admitted her. Roughly half her friends are now at the state flagship, most of them paying little or nothing for the privilege.</p>
<p>However, students had better be sure that they can get into the flagship. In some states (including ours, Counting Down, but I was thinking even more in terms of Virginia or North Carolina), acceptance at the state flagship is by no means a sure thing. I think this is why so many people apply to Penn State very early in the year. It has rolling admissions and doesn't discriminate against out-of-staters, so kids know that they're in before Christmas. They may not intend to go there, but at least they have one acceptance, which is reassuring.</p>
<p>I am glad you started this thread, epiphany, but like so many other things in life, you are preaching to the choir.</p>
<p>Both my kids had very balanced lists that S did not use after two attractive EA acceptances so he used the RD round for reaches.</p>
<p>People are looking at college admission as a beauty contest and everyone wants to be Heidi Klum or Tyra Banks. </p>
<p>It's sad that kids think their life is invalidated if they aren't or that parents think this.</p>
<p>If life were not worthwhile unless we looked like those two gals (thinking of the women only here) there wouldn't be very many people around.</p>
<p>And it's sad that parents/kids think the school is more important than the student. A dear, brilliant friend of mine said it was too bad that my kids, as LI'ers, were competing against such a competitive applicant pool. I felt differently. Being around these achieving kids inspired them, and I was grateful for that no matter which school they attended. That other kids are more talented or willing to work harder or are more naturally ambitious is fine. There are so many niches in life. This seems to be the only area where so many insist on only the highest.</p>
<p>No one says that unless they can afford a Park Ave. apt. and a Hamptons mansion they are going to live in the street.</p>
<p>Marian,
After the story in the WaPo yesterday about the student who was rejected from JMU, I suspect there will be some internal pressure from within the state to make more room for in-state applicants ala UNC.</p>
<p>I was just reading Tokenadult's new thead on safety schools, and the same thought you had occcured to me -- what used to be a slam dunk at the flagships aren't any more. Just have to look at the UF forum (and Cal-Davis, Irvine, etc.) to see that kids with stats that would have been a shoo-in just a couple of years ago are now getting waitlisted or rejected. It's great for the flagships, whose stats are rising as they get a sizeable critical mass of super students (our flagship had overflow housing for Honors this year due to the higher-than-expected yield).</p>
<p>S found submitting EA applications (and priority decision to the flagship) to every school on his list that accepted them was an excellent way of assessing his chances in the pool, and it was sure nice (and surprising) to have two of his top choices in hand in December. We feel doubly grateful now.</p>
<p>S isn't crazy about a huge school, but he knew the department he was interested in takes very good care of their undergrads (as you know) and that there are many opportunities for a personalized, challenging experience. He also has many, many friends there who are quite happy (as are their parents!).</p>
<p>I wonder if CC itself doesn't drive some of the admissions craziness -- kids come looking for suggestions, and the same schools and strategies pop up. With many lacking informed guidance from parents or GCs, they all follow the lemmings off the cliff (or fly to Capistrano). I am all for sharing info and paying what I've learned forward, but I share Curm's frustration that so many don't listen to the rest of the message so many parents and students put out there about safeties, finances, etc.</p>
<p>Historymom, good post. Lots of good ones following hers, too.</p>
<p>I am surprised by the number of people who are simply clueless about the whole college admissions process. I know a girl who got a 33 ACT --- 2 points higher than anyone in her high school had scored in recent memory. Everyone told her she could get into any school she wanted. No leadership positions, very few EC's, no research, no hook. She is a very smart girl, and she has challenged herself academically as much as one can at her school. She applied to HYP ... no acceptances (she did have a good safety, so no worries there). Her classmates & teachers were all surprised. They simply don't understand the amazing competition for elite schools. One high school's "best score in years" is another high school's common score.</p>
<p>I don't have much to add to these thoughtful comments by so many veteran CC posters. I'm troubled by the attitudes that only "dull" students inhabit public universities and that well-known private colleges are a guaranteed route to success in life. I'm glad the admissions process is over for us, and not just because this was a competitive year. It simply brings out the worst in people--parents and students--and that makes me extremely sad. We've really lost our way here, and I'm afraid our kids are receiving some unfortunate messages about how you navigate through life.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>I'm troubled by the attitudes that only "dull" students inhabit public universities and that well-known private colleges are a guaranteed route to success in life.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Consider that many successful adults on this board (and in life) are products of public universities--how can we really believe that?!</p>
<p>I have seen this too -- but I can't blame our GCs. I'm not even sure I can blame the parents. Yes, there are plenty of adults who think only Ivys are top schools. (I was going to SCREAM if one more person asked my daughter who wanted a liberal arts school why she wasn't interested in Ivys!!!) BUT I get even more frustrated at the kids. I know of two kids this year who only applied to top colleges. One managed to get into one ivy (was rejected at all others) and will be going there. The other didn't get into the ONE top-five school to which he applied (ignoring his parents' advice) and now he says he is going military. </p>
<p>As far as our GCs... If anything, they were somewhat too conservative with their recommendations for my daughter. They didn't think her safeties were safe enough and, in the end, she got in almost everywhere-- but I think they were guiding themselves strictly by the numbers and may not have been too familiar with specific schools on her list. (For example, GC would compare my dd's SATs to previous students even for SAT-optional schools.) I actually think that's why there are so many surprises-- because the GCs don't know what each school is looking for so they tell kids they're ok if the numbers are good. I think we need to do that research ourselves and that's where CC helped us. But, really, our GCs stressed safeties for all the kids-- and the head of guidance told me that a match is a school where your SATs are above the mean and your gpa is at least .2 above the mean. Anything above that is a reach.</p>
<p>Let me start by saying that neither of our kiddos had the stats or the interest in the tippy top schools (oddly one graduated from a school ranked about 60, and the other is at a number 1 masters university in the region...but neither knew that until well after they were accepted). However, they DID have an idea of the kinds of colleges they were interested in attending. DD, for example, wanted a school with $5000 undergrads give or take, good sciences, good engineering, an orchestra for undergrads, near or in an urban area, decent public transportation, ease of getting to the airport to come home, small classes, and nice (for her that meant no snow) weather. There were HUNDREDS of schools...hundreds....that met her criteria. If students looking at the Ivies (and that is only one example), make a list of what the QUALITIES are in the schools, in my opinion, they will be much better off than looking at USNews rankings or dealing with the prestige factor (please...I'm not saying these aren't terrific schools...they ARE terrific schools). Look at the qualities of the school...what the school has to offer, and then look for other schools that have those same qualities. I'd be surprised if most students couldn't find many many schools from which to choose. Believe it or not, there are plenty of schools with those qualities and a huge range in terms of admissions competitiveness. This is how we did DD's college search. If you need to factor in the cost...then do so.</p>
<p>Thumper1 makes a very good point. D applied to six schools, all were matches or safeties and she got into all six. Much to our surprise, two happened to be in US News top 20 LAC list. The schools were selected by the following criteria: good percentage of students going on to PhD programs, strong freshman writing intensive experiences, semester abroad opportunities, plenty of music and athletic opportunities she could take part in and a good "fit" with the types of students usually admitted. To be one safe side, she picked schools where her SAT fell in the top 25%ile and additionally chose schools where she had something the school might be looking for (in her case music, swimming or XC).</p>
<p>What is interesting to me now is that some of the ivies and near ivies have sent surveys and letters to her asking why she chose not to apply. Her response "Why bother with a school that boasts a 10-20% admission rate?" Even if she was admitted, she would not be offered any scholarship money.</p>
<p>There are so many good schools out there. Perhaps if kids looked more at the outcome of graduates and visited the schools for an overnight rather than rely on US News, there would be fewer thin letters and more acceptances to wonderful experiences.</p>
<p>I've just posted this on another thread, but re the boy who now says he's going into the military and applied to only Ivies against his parents' advice.</p>
<p>I do think it is fair for a child to be forced to include a "mommy school"-- a school the parent things rounds out the list for fiancial, admissions or academic reasons. The child does have to attend, but in many cases the child is under 18 and many kids change a lot between in the six months between applying to a school and receiving admissions decisions. They change even more by the following September.</p>
<p>I wanted to make sure each kid had a school I thought s/he would thrive at, and in each case, for different reasons, I chose a school for each that they weren't that interested in and had had no plan to apply. If they'd hated my selection I would have tried to come up with another.</p>
<p>These two schools weren't exactly "safety" colleges which both kids had on their lists, but schools that were peers of the schools they were interested in but easier to be admitted to. (UofC had a 40% admit rate at the time vs Brown which had a 13% admit rate at the time. Mt. Holyoke had a 50% admit rate vs Barnard which had a 26% admit rate.)</p>
<p>As it happens they were each accepted at the more selective school (though S chose not to attend Brown) but both came to appreciate that their reasons for rejecting the original school were not good.</p>
<p>S's reason was that he didn't want to be far away -- he was scared, but he grew up in the intervening months.</p>
<p>D's reason was that her student interviewer at Mt. Holyoke did not impress her, but she admitted that in the end it was a more attractive option than most of her safety schools. However, she is a happy Barnard student.</p>
<p>After going through the process with D, I also insisted that S have EA schools (or at least one school, he had two) so that he would, indeed, have a safety and save us the expense of applying to colleges that didn't really turn him on.</p>
<p>Had he been rejected at those schools we would have had to really concentrate on low matches and safeties.</p>
<p>I know all schools don't have it, but I found that our schools Naviance site was excellent for having a general idea of what would be reaches, matches and safety schools. Your school does need to have a good database of applications and acceptances/rejections for each school for it to have much value, but it was a great resource once we (son & I) had narrowed down the search to about ten schools. This will also tell you if your school has had much success at the top 10 (or any) schools. For instance, our school sends as many kids to Stanford as it usually sends to all of the ivies combined.</p>
<p>The top 10 are probably a "reach" for almost anybody and the few that it is not a reach for are probably too few to have much impact on overall admissions. IMHO, you would have to be crazy to apply only to the top 10. Once you get past about the top 10, it seems to me that some of these top schools are matches for some high-achieving kids (by which I mean 3.9+ uw, 2200+ SAT or 33+ ACT, 700+ SATIIs and some good ECs). My son panicked in September/October last fall and wanted to add some good academic schools with good music departments as safety schools. Most of you would be shocked when I suggested Rice, Vanderbilt or USC as good choices. However, I had done some homework and concluded that he was very likely to get in any of them. Ultimately we limited him to two and he chose Rice and USC and he got very nice merit scholarships at both. He applied to three ivies and was rejected at one, waitlisted at another and accepted at the third. He applied to three other "CC Top Universities" and Big State U and was accepted to all of them.</p>
<p>It takes a lot of work to research colleges and I can see why most GCs don't have the time (or sometimes the knowledge if you are talking about music, musical theater or the arts). I have spent a lot of time on CC reading posts for various schools to get as much background as I could. The one advantage that I believe that most private HS have is a GC who "knows" what type of student each of the ivies is looking for (and in most cases it is different for each one).</p>
<p>I did have three philosophies working when we went through the college review process. 1. This year will be harder than last year. 2. One safety is enough, two at most if they are genuine safeties. If you have more than two, then they are not genuine safeties. 3. I didn't want to spend $45k a year to send my son to a college that would not be academically challenging (it would have driven him crazy).</p>
<p>Guess what? When the cost differential between Yale and a fourth tier private LAC which accepts anyone with a pulse is about 8K per year, what parent wouldn't be encouraging the kid to apply to Yale? When a parent runs the FA estimators and sees that at their income level Harvard will give them need based aid and BU will make both kid and parents take out loans, why wouldn't you want your kid at Harvard???</p>
<p>This isn't reality of course-- but as the top schools get more generous, and as the next tier down keeps raising to tuition to keep up with the top schools, what parent would want to pay a "penalty" by having their kid at a school perceived as less quality???</p>
<p>A parent of a junior I met recently put it this way, "why pay retail for NYU if you can get Columbia at a discount?" which was an interesting take on the schools which are perceived to be less than generous with aid. I'm sure if these parents put some thought and time into the process they could come up with attractive, affordable alternatives, but for many of them, the kid can go IVY or end up at CUNY or SUNY-- all fine options.</p>
<p>I guess what bothers me in many of these discussions is that the "top 10" or the "top 20" or the "top 100" aren't really the best choices for all students, not because they couldn't do the work, but because another school might actually be better for them. The prestige factor really blinds people to the fit factor and I think this hurts kids.</p>
<p>BU vs. Harvard.....NYU vs. Columbia. Remember...the challenge isn't getting the need based aid if you qualify for it at Harvard and Columbia (and Princeton and Stanford, etc). The challenge is getting accepted. These schools deny admission to almost 90% of those who apply. It's not like all applicants have the "choice" of the finaid at BU or the finaid at Harvard. They only have that choice if the student gets accepted to both schools.</p>