<p>Can anyone name an LAC with 70% ladies, I'm something of a ladies man, so I'd definitely like the 7:3 ratio.</p>
<p>Not quite 70%, but: Vassar, Goucher</p>
<p>Godfather: Sarah Lawrence</p>
<p>Back OT: Thanks for all the advice. I was away this weekend, and I am trying to catch up. </p>
<p>My daughter has had limited success in meeting with people (profs, etc.) on campuses. She is not an athlete or a musician, which seem to be two of the heaviest recruited (and most obvious hooks).</p>
<p>I'll respond to the title of this thread. My daughter did some significant research into the schools to which she applied. She really wanted to continue playing the oboe and English horn in college (not as a music major). This required finding a school with an orchestra that welcomed non-majors. AND it required a school that did already have a full section of oboe players. She contacted the oboe teachers and asked about the opportunities. In fact, one thing that tipped her final selection was a guaranteed seat in their orchestra, oboe lessons at no charge. So she knew she had something to offer this school...plus geographically we live on the opposite coast...plus she is a girl who wants to major in engineering (although she is going in undeclared). She felt these were pluses. By the way, in regards to a previous post...music and being an athlete are NOT hooks. They are probably the most common ECs out there. Hooks are things that truthfully few youngsters bring to the college application table.</p>
<p>"music and being an athlete are NOT hooks."</p>
<p>Really? So being a leading quarterback isn't a hook?</p>
<p>I think (s)he means: being an Athlete is not a hook. Being a nationally ranking athlete is a hook. Being a nationally anything is more or less a hook... but more so for athletes</p>
<p>Music and athletics are great ECs to have but are not considered "hooks". Being a recruited athlete is a hook. Other hooks include legacy status, first generation student, URM. In terms of an EC, having a national achievement can be a hook. Same with something very unique. Hooks are "tip factors."</p>
<p>A hook can also be if a student is of a different sort than the typical student that attends a particular college. Playing against stereotype creates a hook of sorts. Breaking the stereotype is less of a hook at places like HYP.</p>
<p>Remember, hooks are not the same as having a strong EC profile. Many students can have lots to offer a college without having a big hook such as the above. Athletics and music are examples of commited ECs and if one has achievements in those areas, that still is strong, just not unique. While being unique can help, certainly strong candidates with very solid EC activities and achievements can get in without a unique hook as well.</p>
<p>"Remember, hooks are not the same as having a strong EC profile. Many students can have lots to offer a college without having a big hook such as the above."</p>
<p>I guess we think about "big" hooks as being some sort of a sure thing and strong EC's as possibily being an advantage. So are there little hooks? Actually I think it is pointless to try to make this distinction. Thumper's comments point out the advantage of trying to leverage one's assets. There is no advantage to being an oboe player if the adcoms do not know the music department could use an oboe player. It might be pointless for the very elite schools or for big State U's, but often it is helpful to meet with admissions officers and department heads and faculty. Sometimes we were a bit aggressive in suggesting that the department faculty let admissions know that there was a good fit. Usually we found that this was not necessary and before the end of the day admissions and faculty had already talked with each other.</p>
<p>edad:</p>
<p>Yep. At least at smaller schools, meeting with faculty and other staff around campus can pay big dividends. You never know who might be having lunch with the Admissions Dean when the conversation turns to "that student who visited last week." I'm convinced that it is often such an unpredicable turn of events that results in an acceptance letter. Plus, meeting people on campus is a great way to find out if the school is the right place.</p>
<p>A rising freshman posted the best single piece of admissions advice I've ever seen this week on the Swat board, "If you really want to get in, prove it..." To me, that captures the essence of a really good application effort.</p>
<p>Is chess a common EC? Do universities have 'varsity' chess?</p>
<p>One way to find out what a college is looking for in a particular year is through interviews. While on a college visit a student can basically conduct his or her own survey by asking a minimum of 10 students what they like, and more importantly what they dislike, about a particular college. If there are similarities among the dislike(s) this can be important. For example, if everyone is saying that a college is too career oriented then a student who is less interested in a career may have an edge. This "qualitative interview" approach can yield interesting results for students looking to find out more about the unmet needs at colleges. Based on these weaknesses, students can figure out how to best position their applications to meet these unearthed needs.</p>
<p>One way to find out what a college is looking for in a particular year is through interviews. While on a college visit a student can basically conduct his or her own survey by asking a minimum of 10 students what they like, and more importantly what they dislike, about a particular college. If there are similarities among the dislike(s) this can be important. For example, if everyone is saying that a college is too career oriented then a student who is less interested in a career may have an edge. This "qualitative interview" approach can yield interesting results for students looking to find out more about the unmet needs at colleges. Based on these weaknesses, students can figure out how to best position their applications to meet these unearthed needs.</p>
<p>That makes some sense, but you are assuming that the college ad com wants to change whatever it is that the students seem to want to change-- there isn't always a meeting of the minds between admissions committee and students. So I would think your suggestion is an excellent investigative, fact-gathering approach -- it would provide only the basis for further questions and investigation.</p>
<p>I don't know what the book is called, but my college counselor has a book that outlines the schools with the best 'x' program. Would these schools that have top 'x' programs be more likely to accept someone with a strong 'x' background? Or would that only increase the competition because everyone wants to take advantage of 'x'? </p>
<p>Since an undergraduate education is very different from a graduate education, if someone wanted to get better at 'x,' does it really matter what school the person attends as long as the school as a whole is solid?</p>
<p>For example (I'll talk about music b/c that's what I know) - music composition students really don't need that top music program because the majority of the stuff they're learning is rules and guidelines. Later in grad school, the importance of top of the line teachers increases because that's when students increase (or are supposed to increase) from competent to amazing. So ultimately, does it matter if the school has a great 'x' program as long as the school as a whole is good? [Please ignore obvious outliers like going to Harvey Mudd for the liberal arts.]</p>
<p>An excellent one stop resource
for researching schools is
<a href="http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cool/%5B/url%5D">http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cool/</a></p>
<p>The schools's profile includes:
General Information
Estimated Student Expenses
Financial Aid
Admissions
Enrollment
Retention/Graduation Rates
Awards/Degrees
Accreditation
Campus Security
Federal Loan Default Rates </p>
<p>For example, Bryn Mawr College
had only 1 student earning a BA
in Russian last year. Interesting
in that Bryn Mawr provides an
excellent Masters degree in Russian.</p>
<p>Reading this thread disgusts me. You people sound like you're treating your children like chess pieces, making the most strategically advantageous choices while not factoring how your son/daughter may feel about them. Have you parents ever thought about letting your children decide where they want to go to be happy, rather than forcing your decisions onto them?</p>
<p>"Have you parents ever thought about letting your children decide where they want to go to be happy, rather than forcing your decisions onto them?"</p>
<p>My D made her own decisions when it came to applying and the final choice. As parents we did cooperate in trying to gain information and our part was heavily weighted towards deciding what we could afford and how to be able to afford the cost of attendence.</p>
<p>Unfortunately when it comes to college applications selectivity is becoming a big problem. It is often not a case of deciding what you want, but trying to decide where you fit and where and how you can gain admission. By the way you need not be disgusted. For a great many of us, our kids are well past the application and acceptance phase. Best of luck to you in your process. If you have interested parents, work together to learn as much as you can and in trying to piece together your strategies. It could be you are just so bright, so accomplished and so far beyond everyone else that you will have no problems with acceptances or financial aid. That was not the case for some of our kids.</p>