<p>Kermit, who was your hubby interviewing with, and in what field? When my son interviewed a few years ago, the recruiters certainly knew about UofC -- after all, they had come to UofC to recruit, as they do in large numbers every year. It isn't just people in universities who know about Chicago. (Then again, when my son first sent his profile in highschool, was it for SAT or ACT (?), he accidentally sent it ti UIC. . . . But he knew the difference between UIC and UofC.)</p>
<p>At the same time, I know from hearing them directly that the admissions people (at least) at Chicago are irked by the seeming greater attention to Northwestern than to UChicago in Chicagoland itself. And they are irritated when they see that Northwestern is ranked in places like USNews higher than or closely behind UofC. They "know" they have a stronger faculty. What UofC hasn't figured out is how not to get lost in the context of their nearest "competition," that is in their nearby market. And so yesterday, Northwestern went off to East Lansing and murdered the MSU Spartans, and this gets a lot of attention in Chicagoland. Exactly what did UChicago do yesterday? What it always does, and does well. But that doesn't make the Trib or Sun-Times.</p>
<p>for tom's benefit, i will reiterate that the yield statistic published in guidebooks is an indicator of whether a school is percieved by applicants as a first choice school or a safety school. it is not absurd to say that uchi is a safety school because the yield seems to bear that out. as i stated in earlier posts in one form or another, relying upon current uchi students to determine whether uchi is considered a safety school or not is not a reliable indication of whether students consider uchi a safety.</p>
<p>i find myself constantly repeating that being considered an ivy safety does not reflect upon the quality of the education given at uchi. i just wonder why uchi apologists continue to get that confused. i can only imagine the type of responses that will be posted in response to mackinaws last posting. the stuff about what uchi did yesterday will set them off. uchi people on this board, as evidenced by these postings, are really quite insecure.</p>
<p>I don't think a low yield rate neccessarily means that UChicago is an ivy safety. A safety is generally a school to which you are guaranteed admission. Because admission to Chicago is highly subjective (the essay plays a v. important role), few would really consider admission guaranteed. I know many people who are nearly perfect statistically and still wouldn't dream of using Chicago as a safety (viewing Northwestern or the UCs as safer bets). I would argue that many who are applying to elite institutions (HYPS and the like) would apply to Chicago as a school of similar caliber, and choose one of the other schools instead. While I prefer Chicago to other schools, I can certainly see why one might be more inclined to choose an Ivy league school- excellent connections, prestige- plus Chicago is considered by some to be too theoretical.<br>
I think we can all agree that yield rate does not affect quality of education. Let's just blame this disagreement on word choice and move on, shall we?</p>
<p>gambadent: i'm sure yield is used for other purposes as well, but i do know that it is used as an indicator of what other students are thinking. the problem with viewing nw as a safer bet is that their overall acceptance rates are lower than uchi's. the fact that uchi accepts 40% of their applicants coupled with the low yield leads an applicant to hyps or thier ilk to view uchi as their.......</p>
<p>For a general rule of thumb, and not with reference to any school. Whether or not a school is a safety, match, or reach (and there is overlap of course) is often determined by the following.</p>
<p>If ones stats falls in the top 25% and the school accepts 25% or fewer of applicants, the school as a lottery reach, meaning that their are likely to be twice the number rejected with the same or better numbers than the accepted.</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts fewer than 45% of its applicants it is a reach (about the same number rejected will have the same or better numbers than those accepted).</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts 45% to 65% of its applicants its is a match.</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts over 65% to 85% its applicants, it's is a safety.</p>
<p>This changes as one's numbers drop. If one is in between the 50% & 75%, the lottery reaches become even more remote, the reaches become lottery reaches, etc.</p>
<p>Of course, this is a general rule, schools are affected by different things. At some schools EC's play a big role, at others recommendations and essays (huge at Chicago) play a major role, while at others, it's, mostly grades and numbers (U of Wash for example doesn't read recommendations at present).</p>
<p>For a general rule of thumb, and not with reference to any school, whether or not a school is a safety, match, or reach (and there is overlap of course) is often determined by the following.</p>
<p>If one's stats falls in the top 25% and the school accepts 25% or fewer of applicants, the school is a lottery reach, meaning that there are likely to be twice the number rejected with the same or better numbers than the accepted.</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts fewer than 45% of its applicants, it is a reach (about the same number rejected will have the same or better numbers than those accepted).</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts 45% to 65% of its applicants, it's a match.</p>
<p>If one's stats are in the upper 25% and the school accepts over 65% to 85% its applicants, it's a safety.</p>
<p>This changes as one's numbers drop. If one is in between the 50% & 75%, the lottery reaches become even more remote, the reaches become lottery reaches, etc.</p>
<p>Of course, this is a general rule, schools are affected by different things. At some schools EC's play a big role, at others recommendations and essays (huge at Chicago) play a major role, while at others it's mostly grades and numbers (U of Wash for example doesn't read recommendations at present).</p>
<p>those are pretty good guidelines to follow when making up a list of proposed colleges to attend. the problem is that it is a general template and doesn't really apply to the type of students that apply to the most competitive colleges in the nation. most ivy caliber students don't rely on formulas such as that, but rather on reputation and percieved prestige of an institution. many ivy caliber students could view schools with a 30% acceptance rate as a safety, a school like nw or hopkins come to mind.</p>
<p>Whereas this, unfortunately, may be true, a quick trip to the parents forum after the April admission results will reveal many horror stories of top students doing just that and not getting accepted to any college, or to their lone in-state public safety. It is a good idea to have a good list of true matches and safeties with which one can be happy.</p>
<p>"My son's second grade teacher said that it was unusual to see a boy who was so intellectually talented not only in mathematics but also in language. Today, a high school senior, he quotes Shakespeare as easily as he writes equations in his physics class. His passion for classical music has brought him joy and wonderful performance opportunities. </p>
<p>This year when he applied to colleges, he selected places where he felt he would be challenged intellectually and that would offer him music opportunities such as good music teachers and fellow students whom he could perform with on a comparable level. His teachers and guidance counselor thought his list commensurate with his love of learning, grades, test scores and course load.</p>
<p>He's one of 12 National Merit Scholars from our very competitive suburban HS, and four of the other winners -his peers- have been accepted at Stanford, Harvard, MIT and Brown. (don't yet know about the others) He's won other types of awards but listing his stats here is not my point.</p>
<p>The results were as follows:</p>
<p>Waitlisted at Oberlin, Swarthmore and Wash U
Rejected at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, U Penn and Columbia"</p>
<p>the one example you cite is inadequate to prove your point. this kids peers may have gotten into the top ivys but this kid, though a national merit scholar, may not have done well in his standardized tests. this kid may have had no community service ec's. a lot of kids get rejected by hyp, penn and columbia. this kid may not have been up to snuff. i'm surprised about oberlin, they also have a high acceptance rate like uchi. this is an indication to me that this kid didn't have what it took. his peers did, he didn't and he should have been more realistic and not followed his more talented peers like a sheep.</p>
<p>That's a pretty diverse pool of schools. It sounds as if there was something wrong with that student's application. Like, for instance, a wicked bad recommendation or maybe two really mediocre ones. Moreover, he needn't have taken a year off. First of all, he was on more than one waitlist. I'm sure he could have begged his way in somewhere. Secondly, unless he was from Arizona or Kansas, there is nothing wrong with his state school. I'm not clear that Indiana University or even the University of Oregon, say, is any less attractive than Skidmore, for instance. Finally, it was a bit stupid to apply to (almost) all of the Ivies like that. He had to say that he was doing as much on his applications and it flags him as an elitist with no institutional preferences. Much better a Harvard, Yale, Princeton combo. Or Yale, Columbia, Brown. Or Dartmouth and Penn. You need some common denominator besides 'Ivy'. Act like you care where you go to school and it is more likely to happen.</p>
<p>As for the individual circumstances, a read through the link will give all the details. The point is simply that this not as rare as some would indicate if one looks into it beyond opinion. This happens to kids all the time who do not plan well. It is hard to predict out there and the formula posted for identifying reaches, matches, and safeties, is recommended by many experts for all level of students. See some of the other forums. Students from S's HS were turned down by schools that accepted S (and by schools to which S did not apply), who had better numbers, more academic awards, and very good recommendations, and are now at our state flagship university (a very good school by the way). The HS school they attended is a top notch public that sends more kids to top tier schools than the local privates. They were all supremely confident, valedictorian types who simply had bad advice on composing their college choice list, similar to what some have said here. (Notice that the acceptance rates for two of the non Ivy's were about 40% and the yields for all three ranged between 22% and 32%. One considers these schools as safeties at ones own peril.)</p>
<p>It is very odd that the term 'safe' has become such a four-letter word. From what I have seen, Chicago is safe for American students, in that, if one's qualifications and fit are sufficient, there is more than a dim hope that one will be admitted. The situation for internationals requiring aid is more difficult due to limited resources.</p>
<p>ohio mom: go to any of the other schools on this site and "safety" is not a four letter word. it's just that it seems uchi people are really uptight about it and have a serious chip on their shoulders about it. regarding idad's last posting, i went to the link and didn't see any stats, just a lot of crying. even if the kid had decent stats, they were obviously not as good as his classmates. the really competitive schools will only accept one or two from each high school usually. sure, occasionally hyps aws may take more than one or two, but it's not often. with regard to your s's friends, there are only two roads to travel. one is that your son is terrific and sensational, which is the one i believe to be correct or the second road is that he got lucky. your examples to support your statements and opinions though are flawed. you cannot make a case by simply referring to examples that occurred at your s's hs. noone is able to refute those examples because noone can confirm what you use as an example is accurate. some of your s's friends may have decided that their safety is going to be the state flagship university and if that is the case, then they did designate a safety. that's what a safety is. you get rejected by everyone else and if all else fails, you have the school you designated as a safety. maybe flagship state was both a safety and a match. if those kids did get bad advice, then your s's hs gc must really suck. beyond using suspect examples to support your comments, i'm sorry, but your statistics are consistently wrong. the three non ivys in that example were oberlin, wash u and swarthmore. which two have acceptance rates of 40%? swarthmores is around 25% and wash u is around 20%. only oberlin has acceptance rates as ridiculously high as uchi's at 40%. also which of those three schools have a yield of 22%? oberlins is 32, wash u is 33 and swarthmore is around 39%. you can't make up numbers to support a position, you lose credibility like that. lastly, these three schools are also considered safeties just like uchi and they are. wash u and swarthmore are definately safeties for the ivy's, the difference between them and uchi is that uchi is easier to get into according to the admit rates. oberlin, a fine institution, but not in the same class as swarthmore uchi or wash u. the only ones that would find it perilous to view any of those three and uchi as safeties are the ones with non ivy credentials. i have stated in other threads (maybe even this one) that uchi is not a safety to everyone. to some it is an incredible reach, but to the very best in this country, uchi and those other three are indeed safeties.</p>
<p>ohio mom: just went to tufts posting board on cc. there is a huge difference in the quality of the posters on the tufts threads and the uchi thread. the quality of the applicants are lower, the quality of the postings are lower. it's amazing how this cite can be a microcosm of higher education. now that i've said that, the tufts people will hate me as much as the uchi people.</p>
<p>A safety school is one where one has a 85% to 90% chance of being admitted given their credentials.</p>
<p>A match school is one where a person has a 50% or better chance of being admitted given their credentials.</p>
<p>A reach school is where the odds of acceptance fall below 50% for a given set of credentials.</p>
<p>There seems to be a confusion between yield, and acceptance rate. Oberlin has an acceptance rate of 40% and Swarthmore 38%. Of those accepted, 26% decide to go to Swarthmore, and 32% decide on Oberlin. (Washington U has a yield of only 22%). There are several sources for these data including the Princeton Review. The point being made about miscalculating safeties was drawn from many actual experiences described right here in the CC forums and not only from S's HS. As for S, he was accepted because of his essays, not his numbers.</p>
<p>I have seen no evidence submitted for opinions presented, only assertions. Where are the data that suggest top students consider Chicago a safety for example? It may be true, or it may not be true, but I have not seen any evidence, only assertion. What is the basis for the assertion? My point about safeties was to be careful and have true safeties, not how some may consider Chicago.</p>
<p>Before making any more assertions as though they were fact, at least provide some evidence they might be valid. The assertion that most students who turn down Chicago, for example, do so to attend Ivy's was not supported by follow-up analysis of where students who turn down a Chicago offer actually attend school (the reference was provided earlier). </p>
<p>Though I have tried to keep this simply directed to the matter of reach, match, and safety schools. Many Chicago rejects have so-called Ivy level credentials as do many of the Ivy rejects (the credentials of accepted students are above three of the Ivy's, and a close look at accepted vs. rejected students at Chicago shows little difference in the "numbers"), it would be unwise to consider UChicago a safety. There are a number of Ivy admits that are UChicago rejects (I know some) as well as vice versa, I suppose using the logic expressed elsewhere, those schools should be considered safeties for Chicago for those students.</p>
<p>princeton review misprinted the stats for swarthmore. the accurate stats are on their site. wash u has a yield of 33%. if you are relying on pr for swarthmore's stats, then why don't you use pr for wash u's as well? pr has wash u yield at 33%. it would be great that if you use stats to underscore a point that the stats be accurate and not made up. </p>
<p>miscalulating safeties is derived from many actual experiences? how many? 10? most of the ones you cite refer to your s's high school friends and current college bretheren. I explained before that there are no stats to support my uchi as ivy safety assertions. who would conduct such a study? not uchi, they're afraid I may be correct. not the ivy's, the couldn't care less about uchi. i rely upon the yield statistic. if you would actually bother to read my postings, you would discover that i say that not everyone considers uchi a safety, but just as you point to many examples from this board about miscalculated safeties, there are also a number of postings that state clearly that ivy accepted students view uchi as their safety. one posting said that their friend who turned down an ivy for uchi did so because uchi bought and paid for them. you refer to the little difference in numbers between the ivy's and chicago, but you neglect to mention that the ivy's are well rounded institutions. they have top notch athletics. not all, but a lot of jocks bring down an average. uchi doesn't have to worry about that. if you have as much interaction with students from the ivy's as you claim, just ask them about uchi. i'm sure the predominant response will be that they never gave uchi a thought or that it was there safety. that is what the yield is for. do you actually believe that the 65% of the students who kick uchi to the curb do so because they all of a sudden, after applying, have a revelation that the work was "too hard" at uchi? if you believe that, then you are too much the uchi apologist to have an objective viewpoint. i have said on many occasions that i think uchi is a world class institution, but that's just not enough for some of the uchi people. they have to believe that they are on a par (not educationally, but i wouldn't argue if someone said that they get a better education at an ivy either) with the ivy's in desirability among graduating college seniors. that is not the case, has never been the case and if one believes ted oneill's statements about forming a class, never will be the case. </p>
<p>lastly, a reach, match and safety is a case by case analysis. i don't believe that hyps can ever be deemed a safety, but to some individuals, penn, columbia, brown amherst, williams and swarthmore can be considered safeties. you can try to pidgeonhole the world into nice little formulas, but it doesn't work all the time if they work at all. so yes, students need to be realistic, but to a superior ivy caliber stud or studdette, what could be safer than a midwestern school in a bad neighborhood whose students are still in school during everyone elses spring break with a 40% admit rate and a 34% yield?</p>
<p>Glad to see the honest admission that there is no evidence for the assertions being made.</p>
<p>Even if your yield statistics are correct, the acceptance rates are still the same. As far as why 65% choose not to go to UChicago, there have been survey's done, and the number one reason is fear of work load, there are of course other reasons as well, but when confronted with the academic requirements, it is a tough decision to make. It is also the primary reason for the comparatively fewer initial applicants, thus the first self-selction round. I just recently spoke with the Dean of Students at a very prestigious private NY school. I asked why more kids from the school weren't applying to Chicago. The answer was not surprising, most consider it until they find out about its academic requirements, to paraphrase her words, "only a few who really are motivated by a love of learning apply to that school, and even then it is hard to commit to that much perceived work when one doesn't have to."</p>
<p>If Ivy applicants really thought of Chicago as a safety without consideration of the workload and academic rigor, Chicago should have double or triple the applicants it does (which with the same yield would give it an acceptance rate of under 20%).</p>
<p>at least i don't make stuff up to make myself sound more authoritative.</p>
<p>why would uchi apps double? i didn't say all ivy caliber students apply to uchi. a bulk of them don't want to waste their time with a school that has harsh winters, bad neighborhood and a quarter system that leaves them in school while their friends at other universities are on spring break or summer break.</p>