We found Naviance not very useful because such a high number of applicants from my son’s prep school were either athletes, donor/legacies, or had other hooks. 50% acceptance to Williams is remarkably high by any standard, so I’d dig to understand the details. Without national or world class accomplishments, Princeton and Stanford are long shots for most unhooked students, so throwing in an early application should not be a Hail Mary, but well thought out, especially since her second choices may also be very selective, especially if they include Williams. Most selective schools like early applications, but if the student is especially remarkable, or if parents are significant donors, regular decision can work out. All of this really depends on a lot of intangibles and if you want to reach high, be prepared for a regular decision nail biter.
@say. There are plenty of students walking around Stanford that didn’t have a hook.
And also, you are slammed the last 2 years with 100% engineering courses. And students in those programs don’t typically have to option to switch out of engineering if they are in over their heads.
A typical engineering major, even if they spend the first year on base science and math classes, can spread out their engineering classes over the last 3 years.
Fitting all the WashU and Dartmouth engineering classes in to 2 years seems tough but survivable by a mortal. Just looking at the courses, fitting 100% of Columbia’s engineering requirements in to 2 years looks insanely daunting unless that kid is extremely well-prepared/talented by the time they go in (think MIT-level student).
The Williams website says 3 students in 20 years have completed the 3-2 program. Personally, I wouldn’t take those odds. But I also would take a 97% chance of rejection by Princeton, or whatever the current statistic is for middle class white girls from the Northeast. If there’s a 97 % chance of rain I bring an umbrella.
@KnightsRidge, My son was accepted ED to Williams. He had a wonderful 4 years and considers it the best decision he could have made. He might have had a twinge or two about the favorite Ivy he didn’t try for (a twinge not a pang) but Williams was far and away his first choice, and it turned out even better for him than we could have imagined.
Having said that, if your daughter’s first choice is not Williams, then I would advise against ED if it precludes her from applying SCEA to her real favorite. I’m not convinced that SCEA gives much of a boost at Stanford or Princeton, but at least she’d feel that she’s giving it her best shot. Applying ED to Williams may be over-thinking what is, to a large part, a gut decision.
If things don’t work out at her SCEA choice, I think she would still be in a strong position for RD at Williams, especially with her sports background. Rumors to the contrary I think that high achieving STEM females are people of interest at a lot of schools. I would agree with the posters who mentioned that she could use another well defined EC to round out her persona (academics+sports+?).
Williams’ culture and environment was a major draw for my son, but it’s definitely not for everyone. If your daughter is attracted by the size and environment of Princeton or Stanford she might do better looking at similar, but somewhat less selective, schools like Dartmouth, Brown, Duke, JHU, CMU or some of the others mentioned in this thread.
HYPSM had been the first choices of quite a few of my son’s classmates at Williams (including some who were a legacies). When they were disappointed by admissions, they chose Williams for several reasons: its academic excellence, its #1 LAC ranking, its familiarity if they were legacies. I think they may have been better off going with other medium sized privates or an honors college at a big university which had more in common culturally with their top choices.
3+2 programs sound rough to me. After 3 years you’re going to want to walk with your class at graduation. There’s always graduate school for engineering.
Depending on the type of engineering and the non-engineering undergraduate major and course work, that may be a more involved path than some here may be thinking. In some cases, the student may need to take significant “catch up” courses to get the needed undergraduate background for the graduate area of study. Also, such graduate study takes additional time and possibly significant money if the goal is not a PhD.
Given the student’s interests, it may be worth looking into schools where the desired majors are not “full” so that they require competitive admission to change into. At many schools, engineering majors and/or computer science are “full”, so it can be quite competitive to get into them. So check on this carefully if she is considering engineering majors and/or computer science but is not decided enough to apply to a specific major at colleges where that is done for frosh applicants.
"Sports only matters if you are recruited. "
At Stanford that is NOT true. Stanford has always prized “scholar- athletes” and students, who are not recruited, have many many options, including playing on any of the hundreds of club teams, if they want o stay involved with their sport.
At any rate, if applying early to S or P, it’s not just early that helps and not just having the stats and some activities with leadership. It’s what those activities are, how they form a picture of how she stretches, has some impact, is open, and more. And, I hope she also has math-sci ECs, if she’s thinking STEM; the right collaborative efforts, if she wants engineering.
Then, there’s the matter of how her thinking comes through- both in the choices she has made through hs and the writing in the app and supps. I can’t tell to what extent she “knows” S or P, beyond having lib arts and STEM and that they’re larger. She should go deeper. It’s not just what an applicant wants, but what makes a tippy top want that candidate.
menlomom where did you ever get the idea that non-recruited HS athletes get a boost in Stanford admission? This is simply not the case at Stanford or any other highly selective school. It’s certainly better to play on the HS teams than not at all but it’s of negligible importance. Yes they can play on the club teams if they get admitted but long gone are the day when being a smart well rounded HS student was enough to be admitted at HYPS or many other top Schools.
I didn’t see her say “boost.”
We could ask back, where do you get the idea it’s negligible?
The reason “being a smart well rounded HS student” isn’t enough is tied to the fact they ask for more than a transcript and a resume.
Thanks all for the replies. It’s especially enlightening that the Williams 3-2 is a virtual ghost program.
D will be meeting with a Williams admission officer for the offered legacy conversation/counseling session later this summer. Hopefully, that meeting and visit will prove helpful and provide her some strong guidance.
D’s dilemma has been colored by the experience of two senior friends who applied early (unsuccessfully) to top Ivys and felt they had wasted their ED bullets on the college version of Lotto tickets. One was a double legacy at UPenn who applied RD and was waitlisted and will be attending WashU (a wonderful school but a prospect that met with some initial disappointment). I acknowledge that this situation doesn’t --and likely shouldn’t-- garner much sympathy but that boy and his parents wonder “what if” he instead applied ED to UPenn. He acknowledges that he would have been very happy there. Both friends have strongly advised my D to apply ED to Williams but I want this to be my D’s decision–albeit one that is fully informed.
@momrath My D espe enjoyed reading your reply. Definitely food for thought. BTW the 3-2 program really is a 2-1-1-1 program where the student spends their junior year at Columbia or Dartmouth and then returns to Williams for senior year and followed by one additional year at C or D. She will take another look at Princeton this summer after her “conversation” at Williams. As for ECs, she is also captain of her school’s highly ranked varsity debate team and has volunteered for the last 3 years at a non-profit that introduces underprivileged girls to STEM fields. She hopes to continue to play at least one sport in college whether it is at a club level at a larger school or as a walk on at Williams.
Actually, engineering is a 2-1-1-1 program with Dartmouth but a 3-2 program with Columbia.
@KnightsRidge, I didn’t know about the Williams-Dartmouth 2-1-1-1 engineering program. That would be like junior year abroad in Hanover, though it might be difficult to meld with other Dartmouth students as a junior.
Your daughter’s ECs are strong. Debate is always relevant, but I especially like her involvement with the non-profit. She should get a good essay out of that experience.
@Looking forward “Has always prized” would of course mean it matters and hence gives a boost. I got the idea it’s negligible from the under 5% admit rate. HS athletics is a standard easily achieved EC that offers no advantage since dozens of students in every high school across the land have exactly the same accomplishment. An interesting post since the second half is in complete agreement with my original post. The bottom line is that being a non-recrutied HS athlete is just another very minor EC in admission to HYPS and almost all the top schools. The truth is that it can even be sort of a negative to applicants versus other EC’s since so much preference is given to athletic recruits at the most top schools.
@KnightsRidge your daughter sounds like a wonderful,bright, accomplished young lady but please be aware that walking on for a Williams Varsity Sports Team is a major challenge. It’s not impossible of course but sports is a much bigger thing at Williams than most D3 schools. The quality of the recruited players is very high and the NESCAC has very serious rules about recruiting that involve giving major boosts in admission to desired players.
Williams Is not known for being the friendliest to legacies, so the bump at ED there, may not be all that significant, so keep that in mind when making your decision.
Why not see if she can be recruited? It is a big hook at NESCAC schools and if grades are high enough and athletic skill is in the very good level, it might be enough to get her a ‘nod’ or a ‘tip’ or whatever lingo that school is using. Not a slot, but many teams only have a couple of slots for recruited athletes and then look for students who can be admitted on their own with grades, but the coach can let admissions know he’s interested. Walking on is not always guaranteed, and some teams don’t even hold tryouts. Some of the schools have intermurals but not club level teams as they are too small.
i think kids should pursue their dreams, but realistically too. “Well-rounded” can be used as a kiss-of-death type description if it means that there are no super outstanding aspects, especially when speaking in the context of Princeton and Stanford.
I would think that a Chem or CS female applicant at those schools would need very high standardized metrics to stand out in the applicant pool. Others can tweak this, but I’d say 750+ on math SAT and/or physics/chem subject tests, and with no AP test results giving conflicting indicators. Grades should be stellar in those areas, and recommendations from faculty should align with the college intended course of study, as should some of the extracurricular activities.
If the situation is a little lesser than that, then I’d give some serious thought to Penn and Williams. You also might give some thought to looking into the top public schools like Michigan, Virginia and UCLA. (Sorry for throwing a curve into the choices, but those places come to mind as possibly less daunting admissions hurdles, but equally valuable degrees and a great undergraduate experience.)