<p>singita-</p>
<p>I don’t believe that I have ever told anyone that they shouldn’t apply. I have merely noted when, in my opinion, a school is a “reach,” as I believe it is for the OP.</p>
<p>And as for “approach,” I wasn’t referring to the overall application strategy or applying to “reaches,” which I also recommend to any motivated student. I was referring to being realistic about assessing a kid’s odds at a given school so that s/he is not filled with unwarranted expectations that are likely to lead to disappointment. A motivated student with a 27 ACT should apply to GU if that’s where s/he really would like to be, but s/he should be realistic about his/her odds of admission, lest that kid engage in an overall riskly application strategy.</p>
<p>Your other points are not terribly relevant to this discussion: Yes, many schools don’t require test scores - but GU does. If this were a Wake Forest or Bates board, my response would obviously be different. Yes, many brilliant kids are social misfits. So what? That doesn’t mean that a kid with poor grades and poor test scores (which I am not saying describes the OP) would do well at GU or any other top, and highly competitive, school. And no, there is no harm in applying to a “reach” school. Like you, I would encourage it; but apparently unlike you, I would tell a kid straight up if it looked like s/he were in an applicant group where the odds of admission are not high. Kids with 1500+ SAT or 34 ACT scores and 3.9+ GPAs with the most rigorous course loads have high odds of admission, while kids with 27 ACTs and 3.4 GPAs might get in, but their odds don’t compare to the first group.</p>