<p>If we think about it, there are so many high schools in america and only so many colleges. For top institutions (not ivies, MIT, Cal Tech etc. but more like Carnegie, UCLA, USC, NYU etc.) isn't it really the kids who rank in the top 1-4% at their schools who really have a chance? I mean, we have a lot of the top 10 kids out of large classes going to ivies, and as we go down the scale, isn't it the kids who are a bit behind that are going to get into the that next level of top colleges? What about the ones who tried as hard but are say top 7,8,10% who just can't move up those spots? This is probably a stupid question as most colleges take a holistic approach now, but it's just something that has been on my mind.</p>
<p>bump !</p>
<p>I don’t understand your question. There are thousands of colleges that will accept the vast majority, if not all, students who apply. Assuming that there is a “lower tier” of students who make it into CMU, UCLA, etc. is demeaning to those students’ abilities. The university you attend is not a measure of your ability.</p>
<p>I didn’t mean to make it sound like there was a lower tier of students getting in. What I meant was statistically don’t the kids in that top dew percent stand a vastl better chance. I apologize if i implied others were not as good.</p>
<p>Each year the 8 ivy league schools enroll about 15,000 freshmen. Approximately twice that number are offered admission. Each year a little more than 3 million students graduate from high school. That means that roughly 1% of HS students are offered admission to an ivy league college. </p>
<p>The good news is there are plenty of colleges that allow students to get a college education as good OR BETTER than at the so-called elite schools.</p>
<p>I’m not sure I get your point. Yes, the best students in high school stand a vastly better chance of getting into the best colleges. Why is this worthy of comment?</p>