<p>Posters 34, 35, and 39: See my comments in the Admissions thread on 'What would you change?' :)</p>
<p>Mythmom, the point of my posting was precisely because there seem to be many non-choir members this year, maybe even more so, or to put it better: previous years applicants posting on CC were more discriminating about their reaches. Now, it seems, they just want to take out an application 'machine-gun' and blast away at the targets. My point was, that with MORE, and more foreboding, info out there now versus previously, there's even more ignorance and/or denial going on. Just seemed that way to me. Hence the thread.</p>
<p>Another issue is when parents have lost touch with reality of today's admission process. Yes, your S/D is smart, has done well in school and is blessed with above average musical talent. Take a number. I just shake my head when parents can't understand why the school did not see how "special" the S/D is. No, your child is not special in this way. In fact you and S/D have closed your eyes to the fact that above average is not going to get an Ivy/competitive LAC acceptance. Hard facts but there it is.</p>
<p>Note that this conversation is especially difficult if the S/D in question is a niece/nephew or close family friend.</p>
<p>Blossom, I am one parent who would NOT necessarily want my kids at Yale or Harvard ... even if the cost differential was less than $8k per year. Neither of my kids would be happy at either of those schools. The fact that their income levels might or might not some day be higher because they attended Y or H is irrelevant to me. I am not impressed or driven by money. I am not saying that you are, blossom. I am just saying that the idea that everyone automatically would choose Y or P is not necessarily so.</p>
<p>But if you apply "only" to top schools, what are you saying? That those are the only colleges worth studying at? (Ivy or Bust?) That no place "beneath" those "top schools" deserves your brain? That attending a non-Ivy school is humiliating & not worth a dime? (Surrender and go to trade school?)</p>
<p>My blunt perspective as a blue collar- no college degree parent.
Only applying to schools where knowing the name, doesn't mean knowing anything about the undergrad experience at the school. Schools where the prestige is from the programs in the graduate schools- that has gilded the reputation of the undergrad departments. Schools that geographically are in a part of the country that has a high % of higher education institutions.</p>
<p>When students /parents encourage only those schools, I hear them saying " I am so brilliant and have worked so hard, & I deserve the payoff of a brand name- because I can't quite value my accomplishments for themselves, without someone else putting a seal of approval on them.</p>
<p>I am worried that I will not be recognized for further accomplishments by my peers, unless I have * alumna of big expensive school* after my name.
I am worried that I have really messed up raising my kid- but if a brand name school accepts him, it means that people who are smart think I did O.K." :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Well, that's what I was trying to say kelsmom. A friend's D who is at Harvard probably got a free ride there because of family income. That's a great deal with all the prestige built in, but if not for that, I'd have wondered if she'd have been better off at Oberlin.</p>
<p>Bethievt, you posted while I was midpost ... stopped to talk on the phone & when I finally hit the submit button ... there were quite a few new posts!</p>
<p>epiphany: The darned internet. I wasn't being critical. I was just observing that everyone the <em>this</em> thread agrees with you and the people we wish would see this probably won't. Just my frustration and in no may diminishing you.</p>
<p>I wonder whether part of what we are seeing is a change from applying to one safety, two matches, and two reaches, into applying to two safeties, three matches, and ten reaches. If that is what's happening, it certainly will result in a lot more rejections at reaches, and more kids with multiple rejections. However, I can't necessarily say that this is a bad strategy, as long as the reaches are chosen for sensible reasons.</p>
<p>I don't understand what is wrong with the old strategy of two reaches, two matches and two safeties (OK, maybe add a safety to be sure). Why does anyone need to apply to more than 6 schools. I have seen some threads with 15 applications. I just don't get it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why does anyone need to apply to more than 6 schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Because some highly desirable colleges only accept nonbinding applications in the regular admission round, so there is no way to cull the application list based on news of where else one got in.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Applying to more high matches and reaches just maximizes the chance that the spaghetti will stick to the wall at one.>></p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>You think?? I might agree with the high match idea...but my daughter could have applied to 30 reach schools and she would not have gotten accepted at any more of them than she did by applying to one (she didn't get accepted). No illusions here...she applied to ONE reach. It was a reach and she knew it.</p>
<p>I think it is a little of this and a little of that. We are in an area with a lot of recent Asian immigrants, so I believe some of the tendency toward applying for either large flagship state schools or Ivies and nothing in the middle is driven by the traditional immigrant desire (not exactly new) to ensure your kids take advantage of the amazing opportunities available in America.</p>
<p>I also think the skyrocketing costs of higher education has some people in the camp of saying if it isn't a household name, it isn't worth paying up for. So again you get the bifurcated list: state school and a bunch of HYPS and near-HYPS. </p>
<p>Finally there is selection bias--the people who find this site were already looking for advice about getting into elite schools and may have stumbled on this via a google search.</p>
<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>
<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 seem to recall a thread not very long ago in which some CC parents likened Ivy-caliber schools to fine dining experiences and state universities to greasy spoons where everyone slurped beer and the professors were slinging burgers.</p>
<p>^^^LOL! cur, you are priceless!!
"Applying to more high matches and reaches just maximizes the chance that the spaghetti will stick to the wall at one."<br>
I don't think this is true at all for the most selective reaches, and numerous threads before have conjectured on this. If you have a relatively "weak application", there is no reason to think your chances would be better applying to 10 equally selective colleges than to 1-2. They are all looking for the same qualities, again relatively speaking. There should be a difference between matches and reaches on any students list.</p>
<blockquote>
<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.<<</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Our local high school doesn't do naviance, but you can find scattergrams on the internet of high schools that do. I find these great tools to show a high school student the "lay of the land" when it comes to college admission.</p>
<p>For those schools that have enough plot points, you can get a good feeling about what kind of application stands a good chance of success (we're talking strictly about SAT and GPA). You can show kids visually what reach, match and safety schools match their stats.</p>