Vassar has pretty different admittance rates by gender–in the last CDS, 848/3283 for men (25.8%), 1281/8129 for women (15.8%). I know we don’t normally do this, but the way our HS does things, theoretically Vassar can be a target for a high numbers male applicant, but can only be a reach for a high numbers female applicant.
Anyway, by our definitions, Macalester (28% admit rate) can also be a target.
I think the preference in our feederish HS is more to talk about reaches being closer/softer reaches based on our HS experience with admissions, rather than to simply reclassify them as targets. That sort of strikes the balance between understanding some reaches may be worth special consideration because they are a better bet than other reaches (good idea), but not going so far as to use such reaches to replace more straightforward targets (maybe not so good of an idea).
Edit: BTW, Vassar, which I was just discussing, is a handy example. I am not sure we would ever formally reclassify Vassar as a target, but would a high numbers male applicant possibly identify it as a closer/softer reach? Yes, that in fact happens.
With stats like those, Fordham is a safety for every major except for dance and theater (which require an audition/portfolio.) As far as I am aware, Fordham does not play yield protection games either. Same with UMN (with those stats would be a safety for essentially any major except for the Guthrie BFA acting program.) Those are the 2 schools that I know best, but a lot of these schools you have listed as Targets are probably safeties.
That said, it is a better error to treat a safety as a target than to assume a target is a safety.
Yeah, my S24 is interested in William & Mary OOS, and I was pleasantly surprised to see their OOS acceptance rate. It was lower, but not as much lower as I expected based on other cases I knew about.
And I’m pretty sure I would feel different as a Virginia resident.
It is tough.
Folks here would have shredded my Ds list to bits with likelies being schools such as W&M and Colgate. This was based on historical data from the school and a rejection would have been absolutely shocking.
The issue though is the data that seasoned CC relied upon to do their counseling is now completely unreliable and the likely of the top 10% student is, all of a sudden, the same as of the kid in the 25th percentile.
Do you (or anyone) suppose that there are schools not listed in my post above, that i was considering to be reaches for all based on low acceptance rates, that others would move to target (setting aside special situations like the aforementioned private high schools)?
The difficulty is that we don’t really know what might move the needle - even less so without the more objective measure of testing. Institutional priorities play a big role in determining someone’s actual chance of acceptance.
Which puts us back where we were, lotta reaches and a decent state flagship safety. (I’m not sure the one target on the list is any more attractive than the safety…)
Yup. That’s pretty much how it goes. You just throw spaghetti at the wall and hope it sticks. The spaghetti needs to be a match on paper IMO. Both in terms of stats and fit. In other words, not a target exclusively because of the admissions rate.
Or on the flip side, a high stats kid may only consider some schools as targets because they are particularly strong in a few majors even if the school overall is not highly ranked.
Our D has SMU and Indiana as “likely/safety” choices only because they both have strong business programs.
Yes. A mid-1500s or 35/36, near 4.0 uw with good rigor is still a very desirable student for all but the most selective colleges or selective majors. So yes, I think that even schools with relatively low admit rates can be considered targets (as long as the definition of target is having about a 50/50 chance of admission.) No,these schools should not be considered safeties, but thinking of them as “reaches for everyone” is not accurate either.
I think people get warped by being on here on CC where such students are fairly common.
I also think there are some students with high stats who are very good at personalizing their applications for each school so their applications don’t come across as “safety apps”. I think they usually get better overall results (not surprising that a thoughtful app does better on average).
If a student has higher stats than the average admitted student - they should probably take care to make sure their applications doesn’t seem thrown together willy-nilly and their supplemental essay (if required) should be very targeted to that school, not just pablum.
In the Common Application under “Academic Honors” should being on the Honor Roll be listed as one of them? S24 is thinking no, I am thinking yes. Thoughts? He is interpreting that as actual awards/honors given. I am interpreting it as an academic honor in general.
Feel free to put it if he does not have 5 other academic awards/honors that are more meaningful. Honor roll is great! But it is over half of the school at many places, so it isn’t necessarily unique. But it certainly isn’t wrong to put it.
Our school gives no other honors before graduation, S24 will be including it.
My S22 didn’t have a lot of awards, so he listed honor roll in his apps.
I’m not sure that there these two “definitions” aren’t mutually exclusive - depending on how we define “relatively low”.
So, if it’s one of the schools with 10% admission rates, than even with an ACT of 35/36, NO (unhooked) person has a 50/50 chance of admission. (My student fell into the 36 range.)
Unless we are talking about 30-50% admission rates considered being (relatively) “low”?
When trying to decide whether a school is a reach/target/safety we need to take into account major and ED. The odds of getting in as a CS major during regular decision at a lot of state flagships are low but ED at a private school for linguistics might be a target.
@NiceUnparticularMan one of the factors that you may want to consider with St Andrews is the lack of housing. DD24 was thinking of applying there and this was a major concern of ours. An alternative is the joint degree program through William & Mary (housing is guaranteed for all years spent at St Andrews as I understand it). This seems like an amazing program/opportunity.
This is a huge concern especially when several of the Ivies don’t give large bump to REA. The worst outcome if deferral REA from an Ivy that leaves a student paralyzed using ED2. If this becomes your situation, my understanding is that counselors with good relationships with the schools can get a more clear view of the chance of deferral turning in to acceptance. That is the strategy we will use. If deferred from top choice we will likely go ED2 at a top40-50 with hooks.