<p>For the typical student would no rejections mean they didn't reach high enough? Has anyone reconsidered their concept of a match school after rejections/acceptances came back? or If you applied to 9 schools how many rejections/acceptances/waitlists or otherwise would you expect?</p>
<p>In your opinion, How does a student know if they aimed too low or too high? How many choices of schools is optimal after the acceptances roll in?</p>
<p>Assuming that the most competitive schools are the most desirable ones and the least competitive schools the least desirable ones, being accepted by half and being rejected by half would provide assurance of the right aim.</p>
<p>However, the name of the game should be getting an education, NOT going to the most selective and prestigious possible college. If a Sure Bet school is the first choice, then there is NO need to apply to any more competitive schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, the name of the game should be getting an education, NOT going to the most selective and prestigious possible college. If a Sure Bet school is the first choice, then there is NO need to apply to any more competitive schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have one problem with this - most kids, (not my daughter she went ED, and has had only about 5 minutes of "Gee, what if?", but she still could have gone to the state honors program if necessary) should have a choice at the end of the year. Some kids may know in June before senior year that State U is right for them, and they are finished in Sept, but a lot of kids need to apply to more than one school in case they grow and change over the year.</p>
<p>What I definitely agree with Jhsu, is that the other school does NOT have to be more competitive.</p>
<p>If you are shooting for merit aid, then presumably you would aim for sure acceptances at virtually all of your schools since you have to be in the top percentiles to qualify for the scholarships.</p>
<p>Weenie - Good point, especially if HS limits the number college applications it will support with recommendations. Fifteen apps with ten acceptances is a lot different that six apps and four acceptances.</p>
<p>A good search list will result in at least one acceptance from a college where the student will be happy, intellectually fulfilled, and can afford to attend.</p>
<p>That's truly all that matters. Applying to college isn't a competition in which the students with the most or most prestigious acceptances win.</p>
<p>Some students are most fulfilled in environments in which they are extremely intellectually challenged. Some prefer places in which they are on par with most of the other students. Some prefer the confidence boost that they get from being intellectually at the top of the heap. </p>
<p>It truly is up to the student. What we parents can do to help our students who desire to go to college is to help them apply in a way that guarantees that they'll get an acceptance from a college that they can afford and that will meet their intellectual and social needs.</p>
<p>Some students will be able to guarantee this by submitting just one application. Others will need to submit more.</p>
<p>As to OP's inquiry, a lot depends on the student. DD put a lot of effort into her list and apps, and ended up applying one SCEA and just five RD. She had two acceptances with scholarships, one acceptance with scholarship offered only after she declined enrollment, and three WL. So she had a choice of two, which fortunately were #1 and #3 on her list of six. Having an EA acceptance mid-December meant she could limit her RD apps to lottery-type schools. So she could have gone zero-for in the RD round and still have been happy.</p>
<p>MrB - You may want to search the Parent's forum for additional threads on this topic. I faintly recall a thread a few months ago which asked how many colleges students had applied to. Answers ranged from one to twenty, but the most useful part was "why that number?"</p>
<p>My friend's daughter was looking at state universities and other low cost schools for colleges as the budget was tight. She applied to 5 schools, 3 of them her state schools. She visited College of Charleston, fell in love with the school, and that was it when she was accepted on a rolling basis. It was a bit more than the state schools but doable for them. Both parents feel she could not have picked better. She was accepted to all 5 of the schools where she applied. She could have applied to some more selective schools, but she was pretty clear on what she wanted in a school, and she also knew that the family income precluded any aid, yet her test scores were not high enough for merit money. Perhaps she could have applied to some less selective private schools that might have given her some money, but it is doubtful she would have gotten enough to bring the cost down to the $20K level where she is. Who is to say she did not do a good search?</p>
<p>Yet, my son went with 17 colleges of varying selectivities. From ivy to pretty much a walk-in. He got no money and was rejected and waitlisted at the first selectivity tier (accepted on waitlist to 1 school on there at a later date). Was accepted to all other schools but very little merit aid in the next tier with the exception of one school, which is where he went. Got some nice packages in the next tier, and full rides on the safeties with some pretty quick turnarounds in the acceptances. It gave him a nice array of choices in the end. And he applied last to the school he ended up picking--it was not on his list. I think, in general, that 17 schools are too many, but in his case, it worked out well . He ended up with a dozen choices , with 8 offering money.</p>
<p>I agree with Northstarmom that the ultimate goal is one school that fits the academic and financial need of the student. The entire list of applications should be created from schools that the student would love to attend. The choice of selections comes after the student is accepted. Having a choice allows a student the advantage of comparing financial aid packages with academic and social offerrings of the various schools. I am interested in the group thought on whether having a balanced list of reaches matches and safeties is reflected in at least one rejection letter arriving in the mail along with waitlists and acceptances.</p>
<p>"I am interested in the group thought on whether having a balanced list of reaches matches and safeties is reflected in at least one rejection letter arriving in the mail along with waitlists and acceptances."</p>
<p>Short answer: no. All that matters is that the young person gets to go to a college that they want to go to and that they can afford and be fulfilled by attending.</p>
<p>To reach that end, some students will end up with several rejections, some will not even if their reach schools are sky high.</p>
<p>It seems to me, Mr. B., that that thinking leads to the idea that if you got into your ED school, you weren't trying hard enough. And that at least one reach school should be unattainable, else, again, you weren't reaching far enough. It seems to add a new category: the unreachable reach. Not sure how this would be helpful.</p>
<p>Every rejection letter reflects a mistake in judgment on the part of the student - either in choosing to apply to that college or in the way the application was structured - and a waste of an application fee.</p>
<p>That doesn't mean that students shouldn't take chances or try to get into a reach school -- but it's just that having "rejection" letters is not a sign of a good strategizing, it's a sign of imperfect strategizing. A lot of rejections is a sign that the student is following a scattershot, hit-and-hope strategy, rasther than a research-based, targeted strategy. </p>
<p>Ideally, the student should target schools where there is a high likelihood of getting in - including reach schools. But with the ideal strategy the student has figured out how to target his applications to the right schools, recognizing and using factors that might add weight to the application. </p>
<p>In the end, the only thing that matters is which schools have accepted the student and which the student can afford to attend. The kid who is rejected by 3 Ivies and ends up at the state U is not better off than a classmate who didn't bother applying to the Ivies in the first place.</p>
<p>I happen to agree with Northstarmom's post. It is hard to evaluate which number of total admittances reflects a success story as a student can only go to one college. That said, it is important to like the entire list. And it is a nice bonus to be given a choice of schools so ideally the list should be well balanced between reach, match/ballpark, and safety schools, which should yield a choice of more than one acceptance. As well, selecting which school to attend need not be equal to which is the biggest reach or most selective one the student was accepted at. It only has to be one of his/her favorites, if possible. In my own D's case, one or two matches were favored over one of her reaches. Her list had reach, match, safeties. But then her list could also be divided into most favorites, next most favorites, and schools she liked but not as much as the first two piles but would be happy to attend. This breakdown was not the same necessarily as the reach, match, safety categories she also had. </p>
<p>I don't agree with a statement that CalMom said: </p>
<p>"Every rejection letter reflects a mistake in judgment on the part of the student - either in choosing to apply to that college or in the way the application was structured - and a waste of an application fee.</p>
<p>That doesn't mean that students shouldn't take chances or try to get into a reach school -- but it's just that having "rejection" letters is not a sign of a good strategizing, it's a sign of imperfect strategizing."</p>
<p>I think this does not apply when a reach school is one that has such a low admit rate as to make it a crap shoot school for ANYBODY. We all know that the most elite schools have way more applicants who are qualified enough to get in. The trick is to not have too many schools like that on the list and definitely not to count on getting in no matter how uber qualified the student might be. I do not agree with the statement about the student needing to target schools where there is a high likelihood of getting in INCLUDING reach schools. I think the student most definitely should have schools on the list that he/she realistically can get accepted to but that does not mean a well balanced list cannot have reach school where the reaches may be reaches for anyone due to the low admit rates. </p>
<p>My oldest had 8 schools on her list. She actually applied to 9 only because the state university offered her a free ride and so she submitted the application but had not intended to apply otherwise. Her list had a balance of reach, match, safeties. She got accepted to seven schools, waitlisted at one (Princeton), and deferred EA then rejected at one (Yale). I think her results reflected a balanced list. She ended up with seven choices. Two of her three favorites (remember favorites does not necessarily equate with reaches) were options for her in the end. The two she was not admitted to were ones that realistically nobody can COUNT on. She was an appropriate candidate but never would assume she would get in. </p>
<p>I feel pretty good about the total outcome for my own kids' processes though agree with the post that it does not matter how many colleges a kid gets into as it is not a contest and after all, he/she can only go to one (shucks) and the kid who got into her favorite school but only acceptance, is no less successful than the kid who got into 9 schools.</p>
<p>My other child's process was very different from what most here are doing (thus I spent more time on the Musical theater forum! than here this past year). She was applying to BFA programs in Musical Theater and the admit rates at all her schools were worse than the Ivy League, averaging 5%. In my view, they were ALL reaches. She was a viable or appropriate candidate, we felt, but we knew that the odds were quite low and difficult. None were remotely safeties. To get a safety, she'd have had to have opted just about to apply to something other than a BFA degree program (like a BA degree) which she was not interested in pursuing. While her list and the odds sound outrageous (I mean look at me preaching to have a balance of reach, match, safety!) but this process is just a very different ballgame. I just prayed that she did not strike out. I felt fairly confident that one of the 8 would come through. It had a very subjective element given that auditions were required. She applied to 8....she got accepted to five, waitlisted at one, accepted to the college but not for the BFA at one, and rejected at one. It turned out well for her. We thought if she had gotten into ONE, that would have been a success cause she could only attend ONE. We felt that when she was blessed with a choice, it was icing on the cake and allowed her to choose, compared to being given just one option. All gave money, as well. Because of the "game" she entered, it would not have been wise to only apply to one, two or three schools because the odds of getting in were so difficult. To increase the odds in HER process, she had to have at least six, I think. </p>
<p>I shared those two experiences, not because they spell success but more to show how a well balanced list (in D1's case) has potential to yield this kind of result. And in the specialized admissions process for BFAs, how applying to at least six programs might yield a success (with one caveat...the kid must be a viable candidate in the first place and must assess that before entering into this difficult game). But again, as Northstarmom points out, the success is getting into one that you want to go to. You only need one. But it is nice to have options if you have yet to figure out your first choice. It seems ideal to me to have more than one for that reason but if you have a clearcut first choice and get it (such as in ED) then it does not matter if you have more acceptances! </p>
<p>Susan</p>
<p>the winner is always the person who has the nicest job and family and a lot of happiness</p>
<p>I like ThomYorke's sentiments and would suggest this revision:</p>
<p>The winner is any person with a fulfilling life who also helps make the world a better place.</p>
<p>Another consideration is that if a student is waffling between two or three types of school (or majors, or whether) fall of senior year, it would be nice if two or three choices were available come April that would reflect these. When my son were looking, we visited LAC's, Uni's, and Techs with varying rates of selectivity.</p>