Have people who have used the Princeton Review found it to be accurate in it’s projection of admissions? Thanks in advance.
<p>what projection? Isn't it all historical data?</p>
<p>For college searches, when it says that certain schools will be good matches, safetys or reaches based on what you have put in for grades, SATs, etc.</p>
<p>you mean the counselor-o-matic?
absolutely not...</p>
<p>it isnt very in-depth, and checking a multiple choice bubble isnt a very accurate depiction of you</p>
<p>it used to be better before colleges made admissions more in-depth and used the points systems, but now no</p>
<p>My s found it to be optimistic, schools listed as reach were impossible, good match were reach and safety were good match. Just take evrything down a notch and it gets you in the ballpark.</p>
<p>Use the counselor-o-matic as a tool - something that may help you consider a range of colleges. THEN, do your research to develop your own list.</p>
<p>It is known to be optimistic. Just use it loosely as a "tool". While you may be in the norm for certain schools that come up as your match it doesn't take into account that there could be 10 students like you applying for every spot--it only looks at if you are in their range for legitimate applicants. Try to stay away from words like reach and safety. Its the fit that matters. You mAy choose a so called "safety" because you like it most or aren't a prestige hog or would like merit aid so PR doesn't allow for those type of issues that can have a lot to do with determining your choice. I know people who got into their so called stretch school but realized since they were in the lower half they'd have to study 24/7 so they chose a challenging school that allowed for better social life and more rounded experience.</p>
<p>I actually found the opposite to be true with the counselor-o-matic thing; it wasn't optomistic but pessimistic. While I have already been accepted to schools like Stanford, Williams, Dartmouth, etc. it stated that Middlebury, Harvey Mudd, Barnard, U Penn and others should be my reach schools even though my college counselor saw schools like that as safeties for me. These are all good schools, but it is simply impossible for a few multiple choice questions to accurately gauge a good college fit. I disagree with the whole reach/match/safety idea anyways; it often forces people into applying to colleges they have no interest in attending.</p>
<p>My S has found it to be "quirky" and takes it as a loose guide. It will have as example, Brown as a "reach" but Wesleyan as a "match". I think they are close in stats on paper. It did help us initially come up with names using the "other schools that are similar" selection on the left side of each school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it stated that Middlebury, Harvey Mudd, Barnard, U Penn and others should be my reach schools even though my college counselor saw schools like that as safeties for me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>penn should not be considered a safety school for anyone
no offense :)</p>
<p>It told me that the school I got accepted to was a reach. It conflicted with everything statistics and guidance counselors had told me. I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw my computer (which isn't very far).</p>