<p>I think applications to, say, all of the Ivys makes sense in light of the frequently repeated comment here, and elsewhere, that getting in to an elite college is a "lottery," a comparison that is reinforced by the colleges' usual assertion that they could fill their class several times over with qualified applicants. If it's a lottery, buying multiple tickets increases your odds, right?</p>
<p>Little Mother, I've always thought that Alex Beam's use of GWU is very tongue-in-cheek and usually precedes some negative tidbit about Harvard.</p>
<p>For some kids and in some situations, it could. The problem with college apps is that you don;t just spend a few minutes buying those lottery tickets. Did you look at some of those apps? Sitting down and working on those monsters takes a lot of time and though to do a good job. And you should know the schools and what they have to offer in specific terms in order to sell yourself to the schools. This is also time taken away from school work, sports, ECs, other things,s tudying for the SATs that can enhance your profile. My son was very unhappy about the fall school play since he could not participate in a big way because he had no time this fall. Because of the college process. Also at certain threshholds, it may not make one bit of difference if you applied to a hundred such schools. If you are a B student with a 1300 SAT or below, for example, you just ain't gettin' in. </p>
<p>Also because even with multiple apps, there is no guarantee, you need to apply to schools with better chances and many of those schools demand demonstrated interest, visits, letters, etc and that too takes up time. There is a price attached to applying to many colleges.</p>
<p>For sure, Jamimom. I don't, personally, really buy the admissions is a lottery bit either. Or, on the other side, poor people are sometimes said to squander their lives away on lotteries and other hopeless forms of gambling.</p>
<p>For my S, with his specific interests, it made sense to apply to some elite schools but not others. There were 3 Ivies on his list, and 3 non-Ivies. And, as has been pointed out, some Ivies are closer to some non-Ivies than to the other Ivies. Brown, with its lack of a core curriculum, is far closer to Vassar than to Columbia, which in turn is far closer to Chicago than to Yale or Princeton in its emphasis on a core curriculum. So, it does not make sense to be applying to both Brown and Columbia just because both are Ivies.</p>
<p>Of course. I was just speaking loosely while making a different point. I should have said something like "all the elites you think would suit you."</p>
<p>Idler:
That's the difficulty of using the term Ivies to mean different things. For some, it may just be a stand-in for highly selective mid-sized research universities. For others, it may mean Ivies, any Ivy, and nothing else will do. And for some others, it is a stand in for HYP. The term is both too restrictive and too vague.</p>
<p>Marite--Yes, Alex Beam does use the term WGU derogatorily, but other Boston media outlets have adopted that as well. Let's face it, it seems that even Harvard sees itself that way. ;-)</p>