<p>From the looks of it, your “expectations” were to consider primarily big-time status schools–six of the eight Ivies, plus Duke, Northwestern, WashU and the two most competitive LACs in the country. There doesn’t seem to be much strategy there other than seeking prestige.</p>
<p>Not picking on you, just using you as the typical example of what a lot of us consider the misguided approach xiggi is talking about.</p>
<p>I visited every school on my list except for Duke. I could see myself fitting into all of them, and was overall impressed by the presentations each gave, and by what I researched about them on the internet.
I understand your point, but I made sure to do my due diligence and discuss every step with my guidance counselor. By the time I was applying, I had also visited UChicago, MIT, MIddlebury, Carnegie Mellon and Swarthmore among others, and chose not to apply to them for various reasons. In addition, I applied to safeties, such as U of Rochester, U of Richmond, and SUNY schools.
I can see why you would criticize my previous way of thought, as it is obviously flawed. At this point, however, it is too late.
Right now I am leaning towards Wash U, and would love to go there, but I am also thinking about trying to get off of the three aforementioned wait lists. I don’t see anything wrong with that.</p>
<p>There certainly is a lot of hubris on this site.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But there is no way they would know that they are your tenth or twelfth choice, so it is irrelevant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>then that statement is quickly followed up by the earlier quote: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My point is that the second comment is wrong. Not all applicants have an equal shot.</p>
<p>It is truly amazing how negative and rude some adults are towards teenagers who are disappointed, made some bad decisions, had wrong expectations, etc.</p>
<p>This is an unusual site in that both adults and teenagers hang out here, so it is really disappointing to read how some adults respond to teenagers.</p>
<p>@satsarecool</p>
<p>I agree with you.</p>
<p>Good luck with the waitlists and with whatever choice you make. Don’t take criticism from anonymous strangers seriously 
(also don’t take my suggestions, another anonymous stranger, seriously either).</p>
<p>fluffy, the point is that we would love to see fewer disappointed teenagers year over year, instead of more. satsarecool is obviously a very smart kid with a good head on his shoulders. He also has some fantastic choices that a lot of kids would kill for. Parents/guidance counselors/everyone else who gives kids false hopes are the ones doing the real damage.</p>
<p>@fluffy2017 Would you rather we tell the teenagers that their predicament is someone else’s fault and that they are “victims” of an unfair admissions process. </p>
<p>Most of all do NOT discount your financial situation. Full Pay kids DO have an easier time. Be realistic that if you are not full pay you are asking a school to give you money. That means you must be better than the full pay kid in a way that benefits the school. </p>
<p>College education is not a right just because a student has attained great stats.</p>
<p>@tomsrofboston.</p>
<p>What? I would never say that and I don’t see why you set that strawman up as alternative.</p>
<p>I have said repeatedly that the admissions process is non-deterministic. You can have great grades, great ECs, great Recs, and a great head of hair. That does not mean that you are guaranteed anything at all. At best, you may have an advantage over someone with poorer grades who has some premature balding, but that is all.</p>
<p>That can all be communicated to a teenager without being rude or picking on them after the fact for decisions they made or disappointments they have.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>and earlier, someone else said: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That statement is the ultimate in giving people false hope.</p>
<p>Now, there are plenty of parents, guidance counselors etc. who tell the student that they are a good student and have a shot so may as well apply and then point them to Naviance which often has a sea of red "X"s. There is a fine line between false hope and hope. If you have no hope, then you shouldn’t apply at all. It is odd that after the fact, with no information, people can assign who was giving false hope and who had the wrong expectations.</p>
<p>Those that give false hope are not the only ones who do damage.</p>
<p>re: rushing applications after a disappointing ED result–we required our sons to complete applications to other schools (of their choosing, but with a range of selectivity) BEFORE we let them submit their ED application.</p>
<p>For one thing, we wanted them to avoid that exact problem.</p>
<p>For another, we felt that the question-answering and essay writing for some of the other applications worked to hone what they submitted for their ED application.</p>
<p>As far as all the sad students suffering disappointment this week–if they are so smart as to be competitive applicants at these incredibly selective schools, they should be smart enough to realize that unhooked RD applicants actually have only a two or three percent chance of admission. They are so smart? They should realize they are playing admission-ticket lottery, and not plan on winning their mega-millions. They should concentrate on making realistic plans (application lists) and then if they win the lottery? great! But I don’t know anyone in real life who bases their life plan on the fact that they buy lottery tickets every week.</p>
<p>I personally don’t think it is as much of lottery as people like to make it out to be. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One other point about this.</p>
<p>By definition, you only know if it is a false hope AFTER the fact. Since many people encourage people to apply even though they don’t have stellar scores, because maybe there is a unique part of their story or EC or some other factor (besides having a parent donate a building), or say that you’re chances are the same as everyone else’s - 90%+ of those people are spreading false hope since not that many teenagers will get in.</p>
<p>At CC people encourage people to apply (everyone should have 2-3 reaches after all, right?) and when the students are disappointed that they didn’t get into a reach, people here second guess and say they had “false hope” and their teachers and parents did them a disservice. LOL.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is like a lottery in the sense that nothing is guaranteed.</p>
<p>However, some people may get 10 tickets and some only 1.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is only true if they actually believe that every single candidate is equal in terms of academics, and recommendations. I think people are smart enough to know that that is not true. The book A for Admission describes how this is not the case. People with different AI have different odds of getting in.</p>
<p><a href=“everyone%20should%20have%202-3%20reaches%20after%20all,%20right?”>quote</a> and when the students are disappointed that they didn’t get into a reach, people here second guess and say they had “false hope” and their teachers and parents did them a disservice. LOL.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, actually. My older kid had no reaches, because his match schools fit what he wanted. My younger one will likely be the same. This “reaching” seems to be the province of a small subset of college applicants, most of whom are on this site (or their parents are). Those of us who actually look at the data know that the differences between a “match” and a “reach,” in many cases, are nothing more than the result of name recognition that makes some colleges harder to get into even though the stats of entering students–or the outcomes for graduates–are more or less the same. </p>
<p>But the needs can also be met at the reach school. For many middle/upper middle class families, the cost of attending a reach or a match school is likely close so why not having a few reach schools in the selection? If I have to pay the same for a Camry and a Mercedes, I will choose the later even though the Camry will meet all my needs. </p>
<p>Quote: I personally don’t think it is as much of lottery as people like to make it out to be.</p>
<p>Agreed. The top students in our 3 area high schools (straight A students, published data) mostly matriculated at one of the top 20 schools (also published data). Those who didn’t mostly attended the state flagship with full ride or chose other schools for money reason. These are from a collection of 8000+ data points over a period of 5 years.</p>