<p>"I do not think that people like Xantos are "taking spots" or being selfish. If so, there would be a law limiting the number of colleges one could apply to."</p>
<p>Without making any judgments on school count, just because there is no law about something doesn't make it unfair.</p>
<p>"I am simply keeping doors open for the future."</p>
<p>It seems like a huge hassle and a waste of time. You're going to have to decide on one school sometime (as in 5 months), so you might as well start now. "Keeping your options open" is the same thing as procrastinating in making a decision. It also makes planning for college more difficult. All the 27 schools are different- can you really say you'll feel just as comfortable on a trimester system vs. a quarter system? A school with pass/fail vs. no pass/fail? Core curriculum vs. none? Maybe you think you're being really smart and planning ahead, but it seems to me like you're just not looking ahead enough.</p>
<p>So that must mean that you are paying about $1500 bucks to apply to 27 schools. Wow. That's insane.</p>
<p>I would love to apply to that many schools(I was planning on it), but then I started on the applications, and dealt with my counselors and teachers, and I decided to stick with 5 schools.</p>
<p>Yeah, the app fee is what has made me want to curb the # of schools I'm applying to. However, I've settled on 8: 5 reaches, 2 matches, 1 safety (guaranteed acceptance). I think that's pretty reasonable, but others disagree. <em>shrugs</em></p>
<p>oppurtunities and options, I have no problem with around 10 to 15 applications, My son has 9 in at the moment and may add a few more. A student has to find where he is going to fit in best. </p>
<p>RaspberrySmoothie makes a good point about procrastinationg on a decision, however in terms of financial aid packages and oppurtunities for college level EC's (sports music theater) you simply have to apply to a more than one to see where your oppurtunites tp compete or perform will be best</p>
<p>Slipper: why is less than 7 selling yourself short? Are you applying to college merely so you can brag about where you got in? Am I selling myself short by not being able to say later that I got into Harvard AND Yale AND Princeton? I can honestly say that reach, match, or safety, I would be extremely happy to get into any one of them, and no more are necessary.</p>
<p>include 2 safeties unless it's an automatic...if you are happy with these why the large # of applications? and if not happy with the safeties why apply to them at all?</p>
<p>3.97 said "I do not think that people like Xantos are "taking spots" or being selfish. If so, there would be a law limiting the number of colleges one could apply to."</p>
<p>Yes, it is a shame we can't criminalize selfishness and gluttony.</p>
<p>I have to say that I agree that applying to more than 10 colleges seems a little outrageous.. 27 seems pathetic. If you are that unsure about where you want to go to school maybe you should spend the time you have spent (or will spend) applying to schools on researching them. You are going to have to make the decision sometime. St. Judes Hospital could really use the $$ you are throwing away. My D is applying to six (maybe seven, but most likely six).. 2 reach, 2 match, 2 safety.</p>
<p>I see 2 interesting points:
3.97 - if you don't know where you want to go, and you want to keep your options open, what is going to make you better able to make a decision in April? DO you think you can do better research and have a better decision-making process under the gun in April with acceptance to say 18 schools?</p>
<p>The flip side of the coin is if you are under Ivy or bust pressure, either internal or external, then wouldn't statistics say that, up to a point, the more you apply to, the better? Financial pressures would be the same - say, a top student whose parents make $75000 a year, but have financial circumstances that make it difficult to pay toward the child's education - might need more apps to get the best combo of financial aid and fit. Its about the reasons why a person is applying to more than 6-8 schools.</p>
<p>ALso, I wonder if 5 very well done applications to 5 carefully chosen schools might be more likely to lead to acceptance at School#1 or School#2 than the shotgun approach with last minute essays? Hhhmmmmm.</p>
<p>By the way, one reason to do safeties you're not certai you want to attend is because circumstances change. DD applied to 2 rolling admit schools that I didn't think she wanted to attend (I thought she had tossed the apps) - her answer why was interesting - "I thought about it, and what if something happens to you guys or the g'parents, and I don't want to go far away, or you get hit by a bus and we have no money (thanks, kid)? What if I decide I do want to go to a big school?" It was a mature, if somewhat disconcerting answer, I thought.</p>
<p>imho, no more than 6 - 8 applications are ever necessary -- IF the student takes the time to carefully research the schools. (You can use the time you save by not filling out all those extra applications.) 6-8 still lets you have a couple of reaches, a couple of matches, and a couple of safeties. The shotgun approach doesn't buy you anything because you still can attend only one school. And I do think an excessive number is very selfish. You are just making more work for admissions staff who have to process and evaluate your application, even if you have no intention of going there. And you might be making some other poor student -- who really does want to go that school -- lose his/her chance, or have to sweat out the wait list.</p>
<p>worried_mom said: "And I do think an excessive number is very selfish"</p>
<p>Please do not pass moral judgments on what is, in the end, a peronal decision based on emotional make-up and personal circumstances. Just state your personal preference. Let other people have theirs.</p>
<p>Rabokerabekian, do you think my friend who now goes to Duke but didn't get into Brown, Northwestern, Dartmouth, Penn, or Rice was selling herself short because she applied to a number of schools I think not. If you are 100% in at HYP, sure, apply to one school. But that is never the case. Admissions is often a crapshoot, and the $65 you spend extra per school is well worth it. I know this because I have seen it in person.</p>
<p>I think applying to more than 9 is pointless. I agree that if you research, you'll see you're not really a good match at a lot of schools. You really have to have some direction in where you'll apply. I don't even understand how 27 schools could seem appealing to one person.</p>
<p>Jym626 - I respect your position, but allow me to elaborate: I just don't think it's fair to force people who have worked their butts off for four years for their moment in the sun to limit their chances in a process fraught with uncertainty. You say that I must have applied to the amount of schools that I did just so I could show off. I was what you would probably consider a strong applicant (valedictorian at a prep school, strong SAT's and ECs, etc. etc.) Of the 12 schools to which I applied, I was accepted to 5, rejected at 4, and waitlisted at 3 (waitlists which, might I add, I chose to reject). I was not a legacy, athlete, or anything else of that nature at any of the schools that I applied to, and I feel that my chances were just the same as anyone else's, if not lower. I even found out after graduation that the head college counselor at my school (who had mad connections) wouldn't lift a finger to help you unless your family literally offered him use of summer homes, free vacations, and the like. Yes, it's an unfortunate process and many deserving individuals are not given a fair chance...I neither approve of nor condone the it. However, it is what it is. As an example, if you're applying to schools with a 10% acceptance rate, then statistically speaking you need to apply to 10 just to get into one. Considering that the overall admission rates at colleges factor in people who are given easier admissions standards, the numbers are even lower for most applicants. Sure it would be great if we could all go back to the 1980s and when everyone just applied to 3 schools in their range and everything was swell. Considering that the number and quality of applicants has increased exponentially every year for at least the past 10 years (and will continue to do so until at least 2008), this just isn't possible. And I don't even think I have to mention that for every brochure that Harvard, Yale, Wash U, whatever, send out saying, "Based on your PSAT scores we think you would be a good match for our school," that's one more unfortunate high-schooler who gets duped into thinking he has a chance.</p>
<p>So, I understand what you're saying, and it's an unfortunate set of circumstances that causes somebody to apply to a multitude of schools, but that's the way college admissions works nowadays. We can't all be recruited athletes, now, can we?</p>
<p>Reaches: HYP
Matches: Brown
Safety: Iowa state, Pepperdine, Babson</p>
<p>this person should have a list more like this:</p>
<p>Reach: Brown, Penn, Duke, Dartmouth
High match: Northwestern, Cornell, Middlebury
Match: Emory, UNC-CH
Safety: Wisconsin
All of a sudden this person could get into a reach, likely will get into a high match, is in at his matches and will likely end up going to Northwestern, Emory, UNC, Midd, etc rather than the first person who will end up at Pepperdine or his state school. I just see this too much!!</p>
<p>Oh yeah, I'd also like to add that "taking someone's spot who would otherwise have gotten in" is an invalid argument because that is what the waitlist is for.</p>