<p>Or that legacies would never have gotten in on their own merits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When it comes to the most selective schools (those that admit fewer than 10% of applicants), I don’t think ANYONE can remove luck from the equation.</p>
<p>For those in the 10-20% range, perhaps a few can.</p>
<p>I doubt there are any DUMB jocks at Ivies, likely no DUMB legacies either, but one thing is true, you won’t find unhooked students in the bottom 25%. At one Ivy they were very matter of fact about that. They said, to the 400 massed to hear, that if a student’s stats are not in the middle 50% or upper 25% that their chances would be remote. The bottom 25% was reserved for students they “had to take.” The counselor specifically mentioned athletes, legacy applicants and under represented minorities. I have no problem with that, but to deny it flies in the face of reality.</p>
<p>M</p>
<p>No college of quality has ever reached out to me in my entire life because of a suicide of my closest friend that destroyed my prospects because my grades fell like dominoes as I couldn’t concentrate or think. That GPA has stayed with me and colleges really don’t care that I had to deal with that.</p>
<p>The idea of passing up colleges just because they’ve followed you for one reason or another and constantly badgered you? I think that’s low beyond low. It’s arrogant as well because it’s not something you’d do UNLESS you were already assured elsewhere.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not saying that any of them weren’t qualified, but do you believe the admissions committees looked at Tiger Woods, Chelsea Clinton or Emma Watson the same way that they looked at the rest of the applicant pools? Do you believe that they look differently at the kid who was a NMSF with a score of 215 vs. the kid who was commended with a 214?</p>
<p>M</p>
<p>
I’ll take your word for it. You have shared the second hand opinion of one admissions rep. THat’s about as close to gospel as it gets ariound here. But that still has nothing to do with the myth I was posting about.</p>
<p>Even if the bottom 25% is composed purely of athletes and legaices that doesn’t mean you won’t find a large share of them in the top 25% as well. There are people that assume ALL recruited athletes have lower stats than the general campus population. THat’s the myth I was writing about. I see no evidence of that, and know of exceptions.</p>
<p>And as an NMSF denied from one of these schools 40 years ago, I don’t personally think they care much about how well you did on the PSAT except for early marketing purposes (and possibly scholarships at some schools). They’re primarily looking at SAT scores, which are typically more recent and often significantly higher than PSAT scores.</p>
<p>^I believe that very selective schools couldn’t care less if someone NMSF with 215 or commended with 214. Maybe a state school looking for more NMF’s, but I think the tippy top schools would look at that as pretty arbitrary and a fairly unimportant data point.</p>
<p>and yes, the celebs you mentioned would have an easier time getting into any school.</p>
<p>Stipulated, and so what?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even adults need a chance to horse around now and then, Bovertine. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Palier, I am sorry about your friend and the anguish that resulted from his/her suicide.</p>
<p>But I think you are being a little extreme in your reaction to why people might not want to apply to a college. The typical 17 year old is overwhelmed with college mail and has to start SOMEWHERE to narrow down the options. Back when my sister was applying to colleges, she was so paralyzed by indecision that our parents made her go through the massive pile on the dining room table and Just. Pick. One. Perhaps out of frustration, she proceeded to examine each brochure to see which one had the best-looking guys in the photos. That is actually how she made her decision. (She transferred after two years.)</p>
<p>My son got so annoyed by the constant stream of communication from University of Chicago that he refused to apply, even though it would have been a good choice for him in many ways. People do the same thing to businesses that bombard them with direct mail or email marketing materials. I wouldn’t call that “the lowest of the low.” I will say that I think it is “low” of colleges to solicit applications from students who, based on what they know about them, have a VERY low chance of getting in. Yet that is what many do in a misguided attempt to increase their selectivity.</p>
<p>Palier, first I’m sorry for what you’ve endured. I can’t imagine how difficult that must have been. </p>
<p>The issue here is intent. With the exception of informing under served minorities, which is noble and has been shown to be beneficial, mailers have a single purpose, to drive up applications. One of the top quantifiable metrics used by USNWR is selectivity. You can’t reject a bunch of applicants, thus being selective, if a bunch don’t apply. Mailers are part of a a calculated plan to drive acceptance rates down and thus drive USNWR rankings up. Nothing in your transcript drives this.</p>
<p>M</p>
<p>I get your frustration, eyemgh. I don’t care one way or the other about the Ivies or their equivalents. I do care about the fervor they inspire. The driven pursuit of admission. The tutoring, the SAT prep, the loading up of ECs, etc. If you live in a place where the hysteria is the norm, it’s easy for the kids to get caught up in it and worry too much, way too early, about how they stack up. That’s the part I say no to and I assume that’s the point of your post.</p>
<p>This also stuck out for me:</p>
<p>“Whats more disappointing isnt the game, but how many other institutions are signing on to try to be the same. Theres a clear strategy for doing this. Get a lot of applicants to apply so you can reject most of them and become more selective. Vanderbilt has been mailing him since he was in the 9th grade.”</p>
<p>I hate this! Even 5 and 6 years ago, when my older kids applied to college, the mail was relentless and application numbers were climbing dramatically, but the game seemed less, well, developed. It seems to get worse and worse.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My younger son got hardly any mailers other than the ones he specifically requested. One would think that a 36 ACT would be like catnip to these schools. Is there perhaps an opt-out box on the exam that he might have checked? A handful of those he did receive mentioned his “AP accomplishments” instead.</p>
<p>I suppose I can’t relate to this thread perhaps as best as I hoped, and so I will retract my statement.</p>
<p>LoremIpsum, yes there is a box that eliminates the college mail. My youngest checked it (or didn’t check it, not sure which) when she took the PSAT in 10th grade and so far it has worked.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re the one with the engineering prospie and you’re not mentioning Olin or Mudd or Berkeley etc etc etc among the “elite”? (shakes head sorrowfully) OP, you’re either buying into the hype yourself or you’ve not done your homework. And you’re showing an engineering bias, because you’re not mentioning any of the super-selective LACs (which understandably wouldn’t be on your kid’s radar) as among the annointed list. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know, because I’ve never looked at the USNWR ratings, let alone how their relative rankings change from year to year*. And if you’re noticing that, then that’s saying that you’re paying a great deal of attention to them. Why not just say no to those ratings? You’ve been a member of CC for a year, and you’ve not harnessed one of its strongest features: posting about your kid and his stats/background/interests and your budget, and asking members of the community for suggestions for his college list. Speaking of which, is Purdue or Ohio State a possibility? I know engineering kids at both schools who are happy as pigs in, uhm, that stuff that pigs are happy in 
and both got really nice merit money. Your mileage, of course, may vary.</p>
<p>*I do, however, watch avidly to see how schools move up/down/on/off the biennial Reform Judaism College list, which tracks percentage and raw number of enrolled Jewish students. Not that their methodology is foolproof, but it’s much more useful for my purposes than that news magazine list.</p>
<p>I know several students who go to ivies. They didn’t give up their childhood. They did give up things, but they happily did those out of their own will. Ask them doing otherwise would make them unhappy. Everybody has his/her place. Ivies are not for everyone. That’s a sure thing. Just because my own child can’t get in an ivy doesn’t mean the school is bad. Nothing is perfect, but from what I observed, ivies have their sound selection criteria and the students they select mostly belong there. If your kid doesn’t belong there, that’s fine. doesn’t mean your kid is bad, and it doesn’t mean the school is bad either.</p>
<p>Slithey, he’s been to Olin. He’s still on the fence on whether or not he’ll apply. If you’ve been there you know how unique it is. It is small and cloistered. Some love it. Some hate it. He see’s the advantages, which are very cool, and is trying to weigh whether or not they are worth giving up much of the “typical college experience.” Mudd doesn’t resonate with him for some reason. UCB is off the list due to size. As one person put it, UCB is great, but it’s sort of like going to school at the DMV (sorry bears fans).</p>
<p>As for the “pick schools for my DS” or “chance me at XYZ”…no thanks.</p>
<p>M</p>
<p>Chance me threads are idiotic and worse than useless. Asking on the Parents Forum for help with your child’s list is a heck of a lot more sensible than using the USNWR as your resource. </p>
<p>And you said why Olin, Mudd and Cal don’t work for your son, but you said nothing about Ohio State or Purdue. Purdue in particular–the kid I know there now desperately wanted MIT, got turned down there and everywhere except Purdue, and now says he couldn’t have a better hands-on experience. His high school grades were weak because he spent too much time doing robotics work, but between that and a couple of summers spent as an intern at a NASA center (again, robotics work), he is a shining star.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ivies never had a “lock” on the “market” (whatever that means). In fact, I think people are more Ivy- conscious today than they ever have been. For generations in the Midwest, the South, and California, the best and brightest headed happily off to the flagships, where they got excellent educations and went on to lead accomplished lives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or, to put it another way, Just Say Yes to hundreds, I mean, thousands of schools who aren’t on the so-called A-list but have terrific programs, outstanding professors, and inspiring student bodies. Some of the individual programs at such schools exceed the quality of similar programs at the A-list schools.</p>
<p>Just say Yes to discovery.
Just say Yes to individuality.
Just say Yes to learning all these secrets.</p>
<p>Just say No to peer pressure and peer “information.” (Sometimes I think this is actually far more determinative of college-list-making than even parental pressure. At least, that has been my experience in my position.)</p>