<p>Adoffocer:My kid is a fit at big or small and could happy at either or in between. He got into them all so adcoms saw the fit. Geography is not an issue either. So now it is down to finding specific distinguishing factors such as flexibility of schedules, specific research opportunities, what credits each would take, BS/MS possibilities and probably which ones have the nicest bathrooms for all I know as ways to separate them.(Fortunately USNews rank at this point is not even being consedidered). When ranked now by best fit, money can't even separate them. What do you think of the put the names in a hat and draw approach?
Or maybe do one semester at each?</p>
<p>Actually it was last year - they're now finishing up freshman year in college ... I've finally recovered! To be honest, there were a handful of schools that one kid visited with Mom and the other with Dad ... those were the ones that we knew would not be a good match for both. The only schools that they applied to in common were their safeties.</p>
<p>On top of all the visits, the one that applied ED visited that school twice - the other one visited that same school twice (didn't apply) - we also visited another school in Boston twice, and one kid did an overnight at still another school (second visit) to see if ED was in the cards ... it wasn't.</p>
<p>Then came the accepted student visits and the scholarship weekends. </p>
<p>We're still trying to recover from the application fees, Profile fees, motel fees, Amtrak costs, etc. etc. </p>
<p>Hmmmm.... I wonder if we visited <em>your</em> school!?</p>
<p>But I digress. There are indeed way too many good options.</p>
<p>Interesting just how many CC posters are telling us that perceived "matches" panned while "reach" school came through - all the more reason to do the research and most honest, app. possible and apply. Especially since ad coms view the current situation in terms of increased selectivity driving the move toward holistic admissions. So many choices, maybe even too many choices, coupled with enticing new financial aid initiatives at so many fine schools certainly up the ante. Enough to make my head spin. The "echo boom" admission cycle must also give quite a few migraines to many guidance counselors who must be torn between advising a conservative vs. go for it approach. Conventional wisdom - and the conventional rubric of "reach - "match" - "safety" or "likely" just doesn't seem to cut it for many students - as I posted before, I am beginning to think more in terms of "reach", "target" and "match". </p>
<p>Good article on the admissions fall-out at Emory:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Emory received a record number of applications for its incoming class and accepted a lower percentage of applicants than last year, keeping with the trends at top universities across the country.</p>
<p>Interim Dean of Admissions Jean Jordan could not give an exact acceptance rate for this year, but she wrote in an e-mail to the Wheel that Emory College admitted around 26 percent of applicants for the class of 2011, a 5.5 percent drop from last year.</p>
<p>Applications rose to 15,373 this year, an 8 percent increase from last year's 14,222.</p>
<p>Jordan wrote that the selection process had been "much tougher" than before.</p>
<p>"[We had] a larger group of applicants, an academically stronger group of applicants in every way - geographically, ethnically and in terms of their interests, experiences and backgrounds," she wrote.</p>
<p>Assistant Vice Provost for Enrollment Management Daniel Walls, formerly the dean of admissions, wrote that Emory College had an "extraordinary admission year in terms of quality and volume."</p>
<p>Walls wrote that Emory Advantage, the University's newly revamped, need-based financial aid package, had a positive impact on this year's admissions...</p>
<p>Walls wrote that the increased selectivity has led to a more holistic approach when evaluating candidates.</p>
<p>"Subjective information (essays, recommendations, leadership, potential contributions to the Emory community, etc.) have come to play a much more critical role in selection," he wrote. "Each year, there are students offered admission who may not have 'all the numbers,' but who demonstrate other impressive characteristics and who gain admission. Conversely, there are candidates with high test scores and grade point averages who are not offered admission.</p>
<p>"The amount of time the Admission Committee spends carefully evaluating applicants for admission represents a grueling schedule that demands much personal sacrifice," he added.</p>
<p>Walls explained that most applicants to Emory meet the academic requirements and achieve high standardized test scores.</p>
<p>"If [grades and scores] were the only criteria, it would be almost impossible to select a class," he wrote.</p>
<p>But the Admissions Committee evaluates candidates in part on standardized tests because that provides a "nationally normed indicator" not vulnerable to some secondary schools' grade inflation and their "wide variation in rigor," Walls wrote.</p>
<p>"Our research indicates that when test scores, grades and strength of program are all factored together, we have the best indicator of how a student will perform academically at Emory," Walls wrote...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From the Washington Post:</p>
<p>
[quote]
...stories of youthful hopes thwarted have become a staple of springtime. Parents of younger children tell each other it will get better when the current bulge of baby-boomer children gets out of high school at the end of this decade, but they are wrong. The latest data show that if anything, the frantic competition to get into the most selective colleges is only going to get worse.</p>
<p>The U.S. Education Department's National Center for Education Statistics says the number of graduating high school seniors will peak at 3.3 million in 2011 and decline only slightly to 3.2 million by 2016. Most educators predict that the percentage of those students going to college -- now about 67 percent -- will increase and make the application process even more stressful. Undergraduate enrollment, for instance, is projected conservatively to increase from 15.2 million this year to 16.6 million in 2015, the center says.</p>
<p>The number of high school graduates has increased every year since 1996 as the children of the huge, post-World War II baby-boom generation passed through. During the same time, college applications soared as the economy increasingly rewarded higher education. Federal data in 2004 showed male college graduates earning 67 percent more and female graduates 68 percent more than those with only a high school diploma.</p>
<p>"The economic demand for a college education will only rise," said David Hawkins, director of public policy for the National Association for College Admission Counseling. "I do not think anyone should count on an admission environment that is any less crowded than the one that we are experiencing now."</p>
<p>The competition for spaces has knocked the application process so askew that many students apply to as many as a dozen schools, often the ones least likely to accept them. The 15 percent of colleges that reject more than half their applicants get 28 percent of the total applications, according to Hawkins's group. Experts also predict a new surge of low-income and minority students seeking to transfer from two-year to four-year colleges, creating further competition.</p>
<p>Florida-based financial aid expert Reecy Aresty said that parents and students should also forget about the most sought-after colleges building more dorms to admit more students, which would just cut into their budgets. "All colleges realize that the applicant pool is getting better, and they have no need to expand to admit more students and take on additional costs," he said.</p>
<p>Andrew Flagel, dean of admissions at George Mason University, even predicts that the retired boomers, seeing education as a jolly pastime, will be shoving aside some of their children and grandchildren to take up university spaces. "We can already see the rapidly increasing market for university-based retirement communities," he said.</p>
<p>The one bit of good news, often overlooked by worried families, is that there are still many more spots available nationwide than there are college students. Harvard, Yale and Princeton universities are accepting only about 10 percent of their applicants, but the average U.S. college accepts 70 percent. The college drop-out rate -- only about 60 percent of students graduate in six years -- creates more space, and many schools advertise for applicants as late as June.</p>
<p>Studies have shown that students with similar personal characteristics, such as persistence and charm, do just as well financially 20 years after college no matter whether they went to a well-known or little-known college.</p>
<p>"To find the best learning, students must look for the best teaching," said Robert Massa, vice president for enrollment and college relations at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania, "and that's not necessarily found at the most popular, most prestigious universities."...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Post #28 demonstrates why someone could be accepted as an Emory Scholar (not easy to do) but not get into WUSTL at all ... two very comparable schools.</p>
<p>Father of the Boarder....I can't speak for everywhere but I know the counselors in our school TRY to get, kids to be realistic about their chances of being admitted and pick two schools from each of the "reach", "match", and "safety" categories but it amazes me how unrealistic students and parents can be. Even when confronted with numbers htat show the student to be well below the average admission stats they insist on applying. Don't jump to conclusions that counselors are encouraging kids to apply to schools over their heads. The last thing most parents in America want right now is to be told that their kid can't do something!!!</p>
<p>Many students (and parents) don't understand the meaning behind the stats, hence they apply thinking they are a "fit." For example, they look at a scattergram that shows themself at about the 50th percentile of accepted students and take it as a "match." What they don't realize is that this school has a 25% acceptance rate so it is really a "reach." Another school with the exact same stats but an acceptance rate of 75% would be a safety/match.</p>
<p>I know students who think as long as they are anywhere within the 25/75 spread, they're as good as there.</p>
<p>When colleges get rid of ED, and show stats sans legacies, athletes, URMs, celebrities, etc- then people will be able to make better choices.</p>
<p>dp, In theory, yes - but scattergrams or no scattergrams, at this point in the echo boom cycle the problem is precisely that many people, including GCs, are stymied when it comes to deciphering the meaning behind the stats or predicting the odds for admission. </p>
<p>With holistic admissions, colleges actively recruit prospective students and invite applications from what they hope will be an ever wider range of qualified candidates world-wide. How else might that eye-popping log roller or yodeler or star debater turn up? Yes, stat profiles are available, and one hopes a modicum of reasonable college counseling lights the way when it comes to "fit" - both in terms of college campus culture as well as academic qualifications, as AdOfficer so cogently pointed out. But these days, the main point remains: stats are only part of the story. </p>
<p>Of course, there will always be those out there with stars in their eyes and a hope springs eternal attitude (I am giving a wide berth here to unrealistic arrogance) who will apply to an elite in spite of, or to spite, recommendations to the contrary. That is just part of the system.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Of course, there will always be those out there with stars in their eyes and a hope springs eternal attitude (I am giving a wide berth here to unrealistic arrogance) who will apply to an elite in spite of, or to spite, recommendations to the contrary.
[/quote]
...and be accepted. As were many kids I know who were told where they were applying was way over their heads. Aside from the ones admitted this year, they are all doing very well at their schools. Must have been something the admissions counselors saw.</p>
<p>At our hs, if a guidance counselor were to tell a student that a school is over his/her head, especially if that student falls ANYWHERE within the grid, the GC would probably end up behind the woodshed with the parents, who go to the boss. </p>
<p>Parents at our school (private) pay big money to supposedly give their kids a better education, better resources, better everything. Then to be told after 12 years and over 100K that Johnny shouldn't apply does not fly.</p>
<p>I've seen it happen. A friend/mom of a student was told her son didn't really have a chance at a school and she was incensed. "How dare she??? What nerve!! Telling my boy this- look! He's in the 25th percentile! They're obviously accepting students like him!"</p>
<p>"Parents at our school (private) pay big money to supposedly give their kids a better education, better resources, better everything."</p>
<p>....which is why some of us parents at privates (boy, does THAT sound weird, LOL) are annoyed major with the exclusively CYA behavior of our GC's. They are concerned only with making sure they don't "promise" anything. The result is the opposite of the above. They are low-balling <em>everything</em>. And when you ask them a straightforward question, i.e., INFORMATION -- not "promises," not results, not expectations, but "do you have a list of schools in region X which are mid-size?", their answers are "non-responsive," as they say in court: "I just can't promise this student can't get into ____, " etc.</p>
<p>Yes, I pay. I pay for resources, as you say. I pay for information. No, I don't pay for personalized college counseling at premium rates, but basic knowledge of the student -- accessible without difficulty in a small class -- and a fairly comprehensive knowledge base of at least categories of colleges within various regions or at various levels -- & certainly a willingness to explore that irrespective of "predictions" about admissions. Year after year, parents at this school are doing a much better job at even the fundamentals, let alone much more sophisticated searches, than our GC at this elite school.</p>
<p>In a word, she's worthless at anything except administering the paperwork necessary to distribute to the colleges. That's all she does. And she has 1/6 to 1/7 of the student load that any public h.s. college counselor has.</p>
<p>Grrrr.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This year, Harvard accepted only about 9 percent of those who applied, and Columbia University took an even lower percentage. What are these incoming students like? Are they all genius athletes arranged in an ethnically diverse spectrum?</p>
<p>At U of All People, where we understand the publicity value of such standards - and like a good challenge - we've set our goal even higher: Next year, we intend to accept only 5 percent of those who apply to our fabled university. However, in order to attract that many applicants, we?ll need to lower our admissions criteria somewhat. Here?s what we?re looking for:</p>
<pre><code> a minimum SAT score of 400, calculated with a special bonus system that rewards extra effort
a GPA of at least 1.5, with special consideration given to vocational skills
a varsity letter?or some experience?in sports, with the term sports broadly defined to include Texas Hold -Em, video games, and yodeling
at least one extracurricular activity: may encompass shopping and watching most television serials
community service, with special credit for parole activities
proficiency in at least one language, such as English
a vaguely ethnic look, if not true ethnicity (may be waived upon lawsuit)
a geographical location for place of residence, including foreign countries with whom the U.S. is not currently at war
a median family income of some median or other
a high school diploma or a reasonable facsimile thereof
an application at least two-thirds completed, or to the best of the applicant's ability
</code></pre>
<p>Of course, if we don?t manage to attract such qualified applicants, we have our fallback position: our famous 100% acceptance rate - "Educational democracy in action!" - at U of All People, where enrollment is a way of life and our top priority.</p>
<p>Student success is important, but access to students is even more so.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think the universities going with the holistic approach is helping them come up with a student body that fits their school and wants to go there. Take Columbia. They admitted a relatively large percentage of those that applied early decision. These were students that really wanted to go there. When it came to students that had Columbia on their list, but not their top choice with the spring admits they could be very picky on who they admitted. For my daughter Columbia was her third choice, and the only reach school she applied for. She did not get in, but was not disappointed, as she got into her first two choices. </p>
<p>My daughter got into half of the schools she applied to, and surprisingly the "match" schools she didn't get into were also the ones she wasn't all that interested in. How did those schools know? I'm thinking they did a great job. She also got rejected from one of her safety schools, that also rejected many of the kids with stats similar to her at her school, but accepted those with less stellar stats, but most likely showed much more interest in the school. Good on them for being able to weed out the ones that would settle for their school, versus the ones that dream of their school. From the applications they seem to be able to determine a better fit than perhaps the kids themselves.</p>
<p>^^^^^^^
Thank You!</p>