<p>I like burgers too, curm and we have some great fries--with gravy--here in VT. Oh, and dbwes--I didn't mean that you were insulting. The last time I visited Harvard, the kids were slurping beer and the dining was not that fine.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>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.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Absolutely true! The problem is the high end kid...one whose application stands a chance at any one of those top schools, but you just don't know which one(s) would actually accept you. Yale rejects, Harvard accepts. Amherst is a go, Williams says no. These kids are applying to 10-20 colleges in the hopes of getting a yes somewhere.</p>
<p>bethie -- I knew you didn't mean me.
How about passing that gravy?</p>
<p>Not to hijack this thread, but this idea of gravy on fries interests me. Is this real meaty gravy?</p>
<p>dbwes</p>
<p>Yummm!!! I have to add characters.</p>
<p>S had a fairly strong application. He was accepted at three reaches and rejected at four. How would he have known which was which if he'd applied to one?</p>
<p>That said, there was no HYPSCM. They were too reachy, especially from LI. We were "realistic."</p>
<p>So our experience was that yes, the spaghetti did stick to the wall.</p>
<p>S was in stats range for all of them, around 50%, but what does that mean?</p>
<p>He wasn't a perfect applicant. I'm am glad we followed this strategy because he is now at a loans free school! LOL. And he wanted so to go there.</p>
<p>Personally I prefer burgers and fries to most fancy restaurants, too. But dinner is too too often .... salad, with diet dressing. (Cheesecake Factory Tues. nights in between two jobs.)</p>
<p>Chicken or turkey gravy--it is really good, if a bit on the fatty side. We only live twice?</p>
<p>I suppose turkey gravy with fries is not much different than turkey gravy on mashed potatoes. I've just never tried it.</p>
<p>It's pretty yummy.</p>
<p>You guys!!!!!!!!! I haven't made dinner yet and you're making my mouth water!!</p>
<p>Read the Harvard acceptance thread this year. Kids were accepted who'd been rejected by other Ivy's and lesser schools. Plenty of kids who'd gotten into other Ivy's were rejected by Harvard. IYou just can't predict where the spaghetti will stick. If you are a kid with Ivy level stats and ECs, I can really understand why you might apply to several of them. My son basically had five reaches: Harvard, MIT, Caltech, Stanford and Harvey Mudd. There was no way to foresee where he'd actually get in. (In the end only the legacy at Harvard was enough to tip him into the accept basket, though he was close on three others - two deferrals and a waitlist.)</p>
<p>It's tough as a parent to sit back and watch the effect of a rejection from "the dream school". We were lucky. D applied to 3 schools. All top tier. Not Ivy but darn close. I suggested a "safety". She didn't have any in mind so I told her to apply to the one I wanted to go to 25 years ago (but couldn't possibly have gotten in). She applied.....not all that excited about it.Then on her own she applied to a private school not too far from us.<br>
Then the wait....then the letters. Rejection from the "reach school" in Boston. Waitlist from the top rated instate school and rejection from instate Dream school. Accepted at the private school nearby. She was accepted and offered admission to the Honor's program at her Safety. 2 visits in the last couple weeks to the safety. She is happy. Loves the school. Mom and Dad are happy. Like many others we were surprised at the rejection from her dream school. And flipping glad we had her apply to the safety.</p>
<p>Sometimes the spaghetti on the wall trick works <em>if</em> the dream school is a reach and there are other schools or other factors that make admissions particularly hard to predict.</p>
<p>One of my older kids had a B average and corresponding SAT scores -- and an unusual interest. We quickly figured out that the major was offered at prestigious universities (Yale, etc) where there was no chance of admission and state flagships where there was a good chance of admission. No need to throw spaghetti on the wall. One reach (just 'cause said student had to do it) and several state schools later and there were several acceptable offers.</p>
<p>For this year's student, the spaghetti on the wall thing worked because we didn't know how strengths would offset weaknesses. In the end, she didn't get into either of her 2 dream colleges-- the only 2 reaches she would have included had the list been shorter-- but she got into a bunch of other absolutely wonderful schools. If the definition of a reach is a school where the applicant's SATs are lower than the mean, at least 7 schools were reaches and she got into 5 of them (all schools we truly, really like and she would be happy to attend). We would never had guessed that. Had her list been shorter, she would have only applied to the 2 that eventually rejected her.</p>
<p>Agree with so many other posts here. While going through process w/ D, we lived in a pressure cooker part of CT, filled w/ "special" kids -- in their parents' eyes and therefore, their own. Kids who have ALWAYS been handed everything on a sliver platter and feel entitled to all that and more. And, as it turned out, plenty of kids who may not have been qualified in their own right for HYP etc, but who ended up there because the "spaghetti" that was thrown against the wall was $$$ -- lots and lots of it. D saw through all that, but it all made the whole college process that much more intense. So glad to have moved out of the area!</p>
<p>What many, many parents & students can't see is that down the road, after graduation, all the alleged prestige and advantages of the "top tier" schools have a way of fading/disappearing. Getting into one of those schools does not guarantee much of anything -- except being able to say you graduated from there.</p>
<p>I wonder if perhaps the term "reach" is also misleading when it comes to kids who have the qualifications to get into very selective schools. To me, "reach" suggests that the applicant is taking a shot at a school which is really just beyond his qualifications. That is not the case for many of the students who apply to HYPS etc., including many who are rejected. They are well qualified, and would be able to succeed there. Many rejected students have grades and scores identical to accepted students. While we often say that these top schools are now a reach for everyone, what we really mean is that they are highly selective. Perhaps another way to say this is that a student should pick at least one school where he is Highly Competitive (Safety), several where he is Strongly Competitive (Match) and a number where he is Competitive (Reach). If he isn't at least Competitive, he really shouldn't apply.</p>
<p>mythmom, I was merely clarifying, not taking it "personally," if you will, but merely explaining my motivation.:)</p>
<p>"My son basically had five reaches: Harvard, MIT, Caltech, Stanford and Harvey Mudd."</p>
<p>mathmom, your son had 5 logical choices -- 4 grouped by program/interest, one by hook (H). I would not call his list scattershot. Very different from the "I like every program, can do everything, and want 'prestige.' I'm going to a 'hot' school no matter what. Here's my list: 8 Ivies + Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, Wesleyan, Stanford, UC Berkeley, and I'm sure I can drum up 6 more just to submit an even number of 20."</p>
<p>I thought they were logical choices, but they were still all reaches because they are so selective. :) I don't think it made sense for him to apply to just two or three of those schools.</p>
<p>"I don't think it made sense for him to apply to just two or three of those schools."</p>
<p>I agree. But again, there's logic, there's a sense of fit. On my D's original list, there were 5 reaches also, not 14. (See post 78)</p>