<p>The perfect safety is a match that the student likes with non-binding early admissions (and which accepts the common app). For example, for a student who really likes Bard--and some other schools--going to Bard's early admit days would be worthwhile. IF the student gets in, the safety is out of the way, and the student can dream. My D applied EA to Lewis and Clark, got in December 15th, didn't write apps for any of the safeties on her list, and was able to relax, knowing one admit was "in the bag."</p>
<p>Rolling admissions are just as good for this purpose.</p>
<p>If such a school is not available in the student's group of applications, THEN look for more traditional safeties, and have two.</p>
<p>I think mathmom's definition of a safety is largely workable. However, I think another poster alluded to a possible problem with that definition for SOME students (not saying it applies to mathmom's S). Some schools with very high acceptance rates (say >65%) don't have such high rates for certain of their strongest programs. You need to check whether the acceptance rate for a high demand program is also that high (eg, Engineering at Purdue).</p>
<p>I'm actually curious about the "definition" of a match. I assume the scores should be in the 25-50th area, preferably on the higher end. </p>
<p>I had a discussion with a friend whose daughter was calling schools safeties that I would consider matches. She's got very high SATs and GPA, but no hooks, and was assuming Skidmore, Kenyon, Macalester and Bucknell were safeties. All of these have acceptance rates below 50 percent, and even in the 30 percent range. Those are not safeties in my book.</p>
<p>"I think mathmom's definition of a safety is largely workable."</p>
<p>I have to add that the scattergrams really made me pretty sure - and this works best when you have a one sided kid where it's very clear how he's going to be looked at. Unfortunately the scattergram information is not easily available at every school.</p>
<p>I talked my school's college counselor into trying Naviance precisely because I felt that the scattergrams would be very helpful to students/parents in determining reach/match/safeties. Now the counselor tells me that the program is too hard to deal with, she doesn't have the time, she can't get the info she needs from the district, we parents can get all the information we need by reading the college guidebooks, a scattergram isn't that helpful because it looks only at SATs and GPAs, plus our school is so small that only one kid has applied to Williams (for example) in the last few years... and so on and so forth. Very frustrating. (This is also the counselor who refused to meet with my oldest daughter and me during the early weeks of D's junior year because she was "too busy", then told me last week that D might have had a better college admissions experience if my husband and I had taken the time to meet with her!) </p>
<p>I'm now trying to use Excel to create my own scattergrams of last year's UC admittances and rejections (since that's where a large number of our kids go, and that's the only information the counselor makes public) to motivate D#2, but since I'm basically computer illiterate it's slow going. I envy those of you who have access to this program through your counseling office.</p>
<p>I think that it is also important to keep in mind that the published acceptance rate is an average rate. In reality, it varies greatly with the SATs and GPA. See, for example, the breakdown on Brown website (in Facts and Figures) or Stanford. The best safety I know for my son is our state flagship university which actually GUARANTEES admission to every valedectotian and salutatorian.</p>
<p>pama,
You're not alone, after last year's college prep meeting I cornered our college admissions person (hired just for this purpose, she doesn't function as a gc) and asked her about scattergrams or other records for past students. She said that the information was "in her head" and that she didn't feel the need to keep records. In other words, she wants to be the sole source of information and therefore the person that parents and students must come to for an opinion. Personally, I'd rather have the cold hard facts of GPA and SAT scores as a baseline and then estimate the affects of EC's, coarse load, etc. after that in trying to determine safety/match/reach schools.</p>
<p>"Skidmore, Kenyon, Macalester and Bucknell."</p>
<p>Well, there's a bit of distance between Skidmore and Macalester. Not knowing anything beyond "very high SATs and GPA" I think it would be plausible to consider Skidmore a safety, but would put Macalester as a match.</p>