@TheDoge - For merit you typically have to be willing to go to a school a tier down. Your son would have been offered merit at a lot of schools with those test scores (assuming GPA was also high). Just not the Georgia Techs and UT Austins. They have enough high stat kids trying to get in.
" I have to be honest with you, this is one of the strangest comments I have heard on CC that all of the colleges that you toured would have said this"
Yes, both the colleges we toured and the recruiters who came to the high school. To be honest it did not make sense to me as why would anyone apply early but I heard it enough straight from the âexpertsâ that I never looked into it myself.
At Exploring College Options the schools say that they know what they are looking for and want you to apply with your best application when you feel that you are ready to submit it - whether that be EA/SCEA or RD. I donât believe they were referring to the ED schools.
The standard claim I have heard AOâs make is that yes, the EA/ED admissions numbers are higher, but when you factor in the stronger pool (and the recruited athletes and legacies), your chances are that higher in EA/ED.
Our daughter applied ED1 and ED2 to two schools whose acceptance rates appeared far more positive than their RD rates. No dice - she was flat out rejected from both.
Meanwhile, by the RD round, she had a semester of senior grades, which confirmed her upward trend. She was admitted too three schools whose acceptance rates hover in the low teens. So I guess it really does show that EA/ED isnât the be all, end all some folks make it out to be. For some schools (Tulane) it really does make a difference, but for others probably not so much.
@TheDoge - I think youâve gotten good advice here in the last few posts and I wish for your family that youâd signed on to CC earlier in the process. I know that I learned so much here when we were starting with DS1.
As others have said, the very top schools (Ivys, MIT, Stanford) never give merit aid. There are rumors that âone step downâ like U Chicago, Caltech, Georgia Tech give tiny amounts of merit aid (or they did; my information is about five years old) in extremely limited circumstances to maybe the top 2-3 kids in the country. And if you are out-of-state for a flagship public, particularly famous ones like UC Berkeley, U MI in Ann Arbor, etc. - thereâs also no merit aid from the institutions directly (there may be some ancillary scholarships; my DS20 was offered something in math from U MI I believe).
Further down the list, excellent schools give very specific merit aid (Duke, UNC, Wash U) but only to the kids who were at the TOP of the HYPSM application pile. For kids a tiny hair lower, there are targeted merit aid awards at the next crop of schools, maybe Purdue, Oberlin, Case Western. My guess is that Rice falls in one of these two categories.
If a kid who is in the 1550/36 range wants merit aid and theyâre not specifically extraordinary in some way from the collegeâs perspective, they can get a ton of merit - but it will be at least one more tier âdownâ. Think schools like UT Dallas, U Alabama, etc. And some of those schools offer guaranteed stats-based aid.
I believe there are also state programs offering guaranteed merit to their own residents, such as in Florida and Maryland, but Iâm not from there and this is only based on my vague memories from reading CC. I wouldnât be surprised if thereâs a program in Texas.
My kids (no legacy or athlete status) have gotten into HYPSM (DS16 into HYPM and DS20 into PM) and I agree with others that there is a high degree of luck/randomness.
DS16 didnât apply to S, but DS20 did and was rejected. DS20 didnât apply to HY so weâll never know about those for him, but he thought P and M were better matches.
Even my kids, who ended up at Princeton and MIT respectively, started out by applying to merit-likely rolling admissions schools (Pitt in their cases, but maybe Iâd now consider FSU based on my reading of merit likelihood), their own state schools, and some other public universities that seemed both likely and had specific things we sought (in our case, strong Jewish communities).
Iâm sorry to report to you that I think you were taken advantage of by your college counselor hire. That person should certainly have explained the various advantages conferred by EA/SCEA/ED, helped you understand financial aid, and set you on a more sensible path to college admissions.
When schools claim not to have an advantage for kids who apply early, I believe that is a lie (except perhaps MIT, as someone else said). Iâve taught high school for over 20 years and there is a clear advantage given when a student is so focused on a given college that s/he expresses love in that way (early application). If itâs a chicken/egg thing and actually the kid is admitted because they truly loved the college and not because the college thought the kid loved them 
- then fine, having a student go through the process to find the college they love, well that could be the ticket too.
That said, Georgia Tech is a wonderful school with all kinds of great opportunities - congratulations!
@TheDoge I agree with everything @fretfulmother said, above. Just wanted to add that your hired counselor also failed you in terms of advising about where to find merit aid - if that is what you were looking for. On the other hand, GA Tech is an awesome school â congratulations! Is your son a CS major?
It was not so much that we were looking for aid but more my surprise and naivety in the process. (Although I would not turn down any aid they wanted to give) Going in I had thought being in the top .5% score wise meant something but have come to find out that it is not that big of a deal if you are going for a highly ranked school. I was not even aware of Georgia Tech until a friend of ours who is a professor at Emory recommended it. I think our S would have chosen this school even if he was accepted at one of his stretches. It was probably me who was pushing for Stanford or Yale more so than him. Yes, he is a CS major. As of now he wants to go into Artificial Intelligence.
@TheDoge I kept hearing from the schools that have admit rates below 10% that remarkable grades and test scores are a dime dozen for them and that beyond those two things what else is the student bringing to that particular school. When I look at my own daughter her community service work has received national, statewide and local awards and recognition which I think set her apart for schools like Brown, Barnard and U Chicago to name a few who offered her admission. I thought it was helpful to hear from admission officers that they were look at what applicants were inside the classroom or school community and what they are doing outside the classroom too. A friend of mine has a son who was accepted to MIT, CalTech and Stanford in regular decision. He is going to University of North Carolina Chapel Hill in the end on a full ride. What set him apart as a CS major was his community service work in the CS field in helping the next generation who did not have access to stem opportunities. His end goal in the CS field is to expand access for women and communities of color to stem related opportunities.
There are so many quotes and ideas from so many people that might do well to pepper into this thread at this moment. Some I have used to help guide my kidsâ searches and some I have sent to other parents to help tamp down the crazy anxiety from the crowd when the frenzy of the college search has been upon them.
Below is a comment dropped into a UChicago 2024 RD/EDII thread here at CC by JBStillFlying which I found worthy of bookmarking, for addressing the ways we as parents try to make sense of the nagging âwhy my kid at this school, but not that school?â question which can make us bite our nails down to the quick. There is much to âinterpretâ for oneself what one takes from the excerpted words of Diermeier (then at UChicago), and I drop JBâs comment here to expand the conversation in a helpful way, not to antagonize.
The Comment:
"Recently I watched the UChicago Night Owls session on âWhat Are Universities For/Why Do they Matter?â and Iâd highly recommend watching all three hours of it! Dan Diermeier, former UC provost and soon-to-be Chancellor at Vandy provided a very thoughtful take on the subject. During the conversation, he made it very clear that not everyone is the right fit for a UChicago education. Hereâs a quote directly from the recorded session, during which time he was, not surprisingly, asked why the College didnât just auction spots off to the highest bidder:
âNot everyone would benefit. This is a demanding place. You have to bring quite a bit to be flourishing at the University of Chicago; not everybody can flourish here. And we want it that way, thatâs the way itâs set up. Itâs a place for a particular type of student and, as Agnes (Philosophy Professor Agnes Callard who runs the Night Owl sessions and who had served on the Admissions Committee one year) could testify, itâs hard to identify them. And yes, itâs true that there are many more that could benefit from this university than we have space for, but we try very, very, hard to pick the type of students who would benefit (the most) from the University of Chicago. Theyâre intellectually curious, theyâre engaged, they have a lively mind . . .these are all words that we use, but we try that very hard. And every university should do that. They should have a clear sense of their own purpose and then they should try to pick the students that would benefit the most from that, that would basically have the best chance of flourishing in that environment and then have an impact once they leave. Thatâs what we want.â
Prof. Diermeierâs statement indicates that UC - and most likely other schools as well - have specific criteria that they look for in an applicant. This criteria will have overlaps among the schools, but some of it will also be unique to the individual school, conforming to that particular âclear sense of their own purposeâ that Prof. Diermeier mentioned."
However, the numbers are such that some students would fit perfectly into a school but just there is not enough room. Not all but some. For example between two students that have about the same âfitâ the student that offers geographic diversity will get the offer and the other might not. I personally do not agree that a student that was not accepted was necessarily lacking in fit or the app was not well done. Might or might not. For example my best friendâs daughter just got off the wait list and was also offered a small research scholarship to a top college. The AO commented on her great app etc etc. IF that college was over enrolled and did not go to wait list this person would assume the app was not up to par or whatever. On the other hand another friend was admitted early to MIT and had zero fit. Horrible. After the first semester they transferred to another school.
In my opinion the numbers for the top schools are just brutal and I would not look at all rejections as meaningful. And honestly I find it insulting to tell individual students that they were not accepted because they were lacking something. That might or might not be true.
Congratulations to your son!
Just to second what @trippfolsom said. Around here (in these forums), schools like Harvard, Yale, Stanford â any school with a single digit acceptance rate â are considered âlotteryâ schools. Not even âstretchâ. You generally need high stats to even be considered for that lottery.
My D applied to a range of schools â likely, match, stretch and lottery. She got into all but the lottery schools. Different people have different definitions for these categories, but hereâs what I think for the higher stat kids. For lower stats, the thresholds go up.
Likely - acceptance rate > 50%
Match - <50%
Stretch - <25%
Lottery - <10%
So, by my definition, your son got into a Stretch school. Congrats again!
Iâve been thinking about the list of schools from @TheDoge . Out of this list: âStanford, Yale, Harvard, MIT, Rice, Georgia Tech, UT Austin and UT Dallasâ, Iâm thinking Yale and Harvard are somewhat odd choices for a CS major. Not that Harvard and Yale are bad schools, or even bad for CS. However, Iâm thinking that a college consultant would have recommended Cornell and/or Princeton before Yale or Harvard. Itâs probably splitting hairs here, though.
In any event, Georgia Tech is the highest ranked CS school on this list other than MIT or Stanford, so in a way, those other schools did his son a favor and heâs going to get a first rate education.
@Waiting2exhale Thank you for posting that interesting quote. It is thought provoking. Iâm sure many colleges try to find the students that best fit into their school. I just donât know that the application system is authentic enough for that to be a reality. How many kids do you know that had leadership positions in organizations solely for the purpose of their applications? Or community service hours only because they were required? Or consultants to help craft their essays? I just think it is hard to get a real idea of a student, especially with the huge numbers of applications these schools have to sort through in such a short time.
[quote=âmomzilla2D, post:10151, topic:1767270â]
Iâm not a fan of calling highly selective colleges âlotteryâ schools as it implies that everyone has an equal chance of getting in and that there is no rhyme or reason to the selection process other than randomness.
I firmly believe that adcoms at highly selective colleges take their job very seriously and know what they are looking for in an applicant. The applicants file goes through multiple reviews before they make a decision. I think one of the mistakes that applicants make in this process is that they donât really research what the colleges are looking for (e.g. they apply to 15+ colleges in the top 25) hoping to get at least one acceptance but not effectively tailoring their application to âmatchâ the college.
IMO, this is one of the reasons that good, insightful, and experienced private college counselors can really add value. One small example, D20âs college counselor told D that Duke was courting high-stat Jewish applicants (many whom prefer the Ivies over Duke ex. UPenn 17% Jewish population vs. âonlyâ 10% for Duke). So the counselor let us know that the Dean of Admission, Christoph Guttentag does an early fall roadshow in NYC and L.A. each year, visiting local synagogues. D attended the session with a small group of 25 students, got some great insight into Duke admissions and the college and then tailored her applications citing example of her Jewish identify and social action ECs she did through our temple. It was no accident (lottery) that she ultimately got an acceptance to this highly selective college. She was very proactive in identifying what steps to take to increase her chances that she would meet the institutional needs of the college she was applying to.
@NYC2018nyc : "I just donât know that the application system is authentic enough for that to be a reality. "
I get that completely, yet there must still be a buy-in to the idea that there is some overriding, guiding, determining âessenceâ at work in admissions from the top down.
âEssenceâ is, of course, completely qualitative and subjective. Such factors have always been in play, it is a human-led process.
Where there are objective measures which help administrators determine which pile the applications will fall into, objective measures are at work.
After that, the apps fall into the hands of (at least) three other people if we think of a first reader, second reader and then a committee of some size.
If they work from an âessentialâ guideline, combined with whatever bag they walked into the room carrying, the outcome is a negotiation of all of those aspects.
Hasnât it always been that way?
@NYC2018nyc Some schools to a better job in sussing out their applicants. UChicago has aâŠunique application to say the least. Stanford also does a good job â they ask a lot of short answer questions, many open ended. It helps admissions to see applicants from all those facets. The âwhy this schoolâ is a tired query and schools that are looking for âlively mindsâ provide opportunity for applicants to show that.
Your point about community service, consultants, etc. is true, though I believe authenticity rings clear on the bulk of applications, especially since the people assessing those dossiers have truly seen it all.
Per @socaldad2002, per @momzilla2D :
ââŠD20âs college counselor told D that Duke was courting high-stat Jewish applicantsâŠâ
Would such information about the particular, targeted population that a school is seeking be generally available to the average student? I am in doubt.
My kid was hammered by emails from Guttentag during this last cycle and I read some, though not all, of them. That type of lean-in was not there to be found.
Where college reps and administrators fan out across the nation to visit schools, assemble in town halls and libraries, does the smaller visit to the rural/ religious/ cultural meeting place signal that institutionâs particular openness and welcome to those students?
Does it broadcast a call for those students? (It does for the rural student, to be sure.)
Most meetings of this nature are not allowed to bar students who may not share an affinity with the hosting institution.
I cannot see such information being stated, or intimated, so cannot imagine how a student might otherwise glean it - and know to emphasize such aspects in their application - from a generic gathering.
Might such an overt statement as that made by the consultant to the daughter be a bit of insider information?( No fair or unfair here, just part of the question of what can students alone do to receive the strongest review and best outcome.)
Would the student have known to take such further steps to make sure her profile aligned with what the university was looking for without that particular nudge?
Re Duke recruiting Jewish kids, I know that when Vanderbilt did so a few years back, it was in the New York Times, which is not universally accessible but pretty close. That said, well-connected kids always have advantages, of course.
One great thing about CC is the greater equality of opportunity for such knowledge, right?
I think some of you have missed my point about the religious affiliation example. Itâs not a lottery, find out what colleges want and see if you can demonstrate that in your application. I know my D20âs applications to some colleges were not well thought out and she didnât put in the time and effort when filling out those applications. Had she done her âhomeworkâ she would have increased her odds (i.e. being proactive, doing your research, âshowâ the adcoms why you are a good fit).
It is not a âlotteryâ, the student can take control of the process to increase their chances of a successful college application season. I 100% believe that college admission is NOT a crapshoot or random luck, far from it.
Our close friendâs kid is at Harvard, she also got into almost every other college she applied to UPenn, Brown, Cornell, Duke, UCB, etc. She went above and beyond what a typical very high-stat HS kid does. For example, not only did she found a non-profit club on campus with 50+ student members, she expanded her club to multiple high school campuses, tripling the number of volunteers and the money raised for a great cause. Just one example (of many things she did) to show leadership and greater service to her community. She also did extensive campaigning for a mayor, which was in line with her intended major government/political science. Everything was tied in a nice bow and packaged so the adcoms had plenty of âammunitionâ to go to bat for this kid in the admission committee meetings. No surprise at all why she was very successful in the application cycle.
Again, my only point is that she (you) can help control her(your) own destiny and not leave things up to perceived chance.
@socaldad2002 : We are in total agreement about nearly all of what you said in the above comment. I also eschew the term âcrapshootâ for considering a studentâs odds for maximizing outcomes which confirm the student has been reviewed favorably by admissionâs officers.
Being committed to doing the attendant work for matching oneâs profile to the institutions stated needs and goals beyond the demographic is what puts otherwise high-achieving Applicant âAâ ahead of similar high-achieving Applicant âBâ. Such is the advice, to be so committed. That was not unclear to me at all.
Yet it seems incongruous that where one wishes to highlight the diligence and preparedness of any applicant as being a key aspect of why there were happy outcomes across a spectrum of top colleges and universities, critical information of knowing the institution was marshaling efforts to enroll a particular demographic would not factor into the conversation.
I was pointing out this incongruity in an otherwise uncontested statement.
That a student would be told directly, however, that their particular demographic is being sought out by an institution certainly gives that kid one more edge in knowing how to present and highlight their profile.
@fretfulmother : I think I remember something of that article or conversations like it anyway, related to historical cultural underpinnings at some of the Ivys. Yes, I think I am recalling items from the same time you speak of.
In truth, whisper and talk of such institutional needs and leanings abound in this present day climate. Do you recall (can PM if you want) if there was any arm flinging as a result?