Hi ya’ll. I just revised my college list for the fifty-something-est time, and I was wondering if it made sense. I’m applying to:
Yale
Harvard
Dartmouth
Duke
Rice
Amherst
Stanford
UC Berkeley
UC San Diego
IU Bloomington (because I have a shot at a full scholarship)
I’m not looking for a breakdown of chances, or to be told they’re all huge reaches and I should be more sensible. I would just like to know if, based on what people know of these schools and campuses, they make sense as a group. I plan to go into Biology/Neuroscience. Thanks.
<p>Well pretty nice, but you should really try to bug them for app fee waivers! I think I'll end up applying to 10 too. I really think even if you are a super genius cancer-curing person, it seems just a little top heavy, unless you are in-state for the UCs (are you?). Also, Amherst kind of sticks out like a sore thumb. It's very different from the other schools, except for perhaps Dartmouth. But you may be one like me, who currently has no idea what kind of setting, location, or size is going to be right. But if you can tell yourself you'd rather be surrounded by the Nobel lauereates than the no namers who are good teachers, you should consider eliminating Amherst from the list (unless you are so rich it isn't going to matter). But if you decide you'd rather like the good teachers, you could probably throw out the whole list except for Dart and Am, and look at more LACs. (NOTE: I'm not saying that big schools and Ivies don't have great teachers, or that LACs profs are all no-namers. I'm just discussing a general trend.)</p>
<p>O, and you should try to find more schools like Indiana where you have a shot at good merit aid.</p>
<p>I am instate for the UCs, and I'm counting on merit aid from them as well. I'm just not into the whole UC system--my parents are making me apply because no, we aren't rich. We're very middling ($80K w/ three kids).</p>
<p>I just realized how much I hate big lecture classes. That's why I chose Amherst, Yale, and Dartmouth. The others are just kind of there. Rice would be horrible about that, wouldn't it? Darn it. I've been researching my tail off over the past few weeks, and it appears I have some more to do. :mad:</p>
<p>Hmm. Don't worry, there is plenty of time. Then I would say add more LACs. Also, remember, if you get into the Honors program at a public, you won't have to deal with as many big lectures. Add, also, is it true that Rice has a lot of big lectures? I'd never thought that before, not that I really knew much at all about Rice.</p>
<p>Might look at Holy Cross and Colgate 2 very good LAC's with strong science programs. HC is a Jesuit school like Georgetown that seeks applicants of any religious or non-religious beliefs and is only 1 hour from Boston. Colgate is more remote.</p>
<p>I know the researching sucks. You spend hours doing it, only to find you've barely scratched the surface. Sometimes I feel like saying "screw it all!" </p>
<p>I'd take out Rice for reasons above. Honors at the UC's would be great, just what you like</p>
<p>Both my parents went to UCLA. It's silly, but I feel weird going somewhere where there's a "legacy."</p>
<p>How about Brown? It's a big reach too, but collegeboard.com popped it up on it's matching service. I was going to try Colgate, but I heard it's really homogeneous, and I don't want to be too sheltered.</p>
<p>Wow, this got more response than I ever did before. Thanks, everyone!</p>
<p>If Brown is a big reach, your list is not practical. I would have something inbetween the ivies (and like) and the states you don't sound like you want to go to. Middlebury, Colgate, Trinity, Colby etc.</p>
<p>Ya=eah, it seems like there are way too many reaches IMO. Some schools that could be matches might be LACs like the above, plus Macalester, Bard, Grinnel, Whitman,etc. Eliminate some reaches that are not top choices.</p>
<p>Yale, Harvard, Brown, Dartmouth, Holyoke, Amherst, the UCs, IUB and Duke. I figured since I liked my safety a lot (IUB), I could apply to top schools I really like, instead of matches that I wouldn't be any happier at than at IUB. Does that make sense?</p>
<p>I may be mistaken but there is no "honors college" at UCB or UCSD. They have an "honors program" but that doesn't kick in until junior year.</p>
<p>I agree with Suze and Greenday --- even UCB and UCSD are reachy instate, simply because there are so many variables in how the UC's compute the admissions numbers. It takes more than great grades and test scores to consider the top UC's as safeties. And, to be honest, your chances at merit money may be better at some private schools a notch below the schools on your current list than at the UC's. Cal does have some merit awards, but they are very competitive and not automatic.</p>
<p>tkm, by Holyoke, do you mean Mt. Holyoke? It's a women's college, you know. Also, Rice is quite small, under 5,000 students total, which means there probably won't be any significantly large lecture classes. Are you thinking of UT Austin, perhaps?</p>
<p>Okay, call me a snob, but I am NOT going to a Cal State. It's not a good sign when Fullerton sends you a letter saying "We promise full tuition, boarding and books plus spending money if you come here" before you even start applying to colleges. And I know UCB and UCSD are "reachy," but they're really the only UCs I would consider going to. As I said earlier, I don't like the UC system. Too impersonal.</p>
<p>Scripps sent a letter offering at least a half scholarship if I apply, and I just got a similar one from U Seattle yesterday (I haven't checked it out yet). I know Mt. Holyoke is a women's college, so is Scripps and Smith and Wellesley, all good schools, and I don't think I'd mind too much. Might even be a relief not to have to deal with the social barrier between male and female.</p>
<p>I'm so confused. Maybe Rice is back in? I did like it, my Dad just scared me into taking it off. The problem is I like the top schools better than any of the lower ones, not just because they're at the top, but because they have the programs and resources I like. Maybe I'll just throw in the towel and go to Mount San Jacinto (the local CC). That's what everyone else in my school is doing.</p>
<p>Edit: Seattle U's out. It's Jesuit, and I really want a non-affiliated college.</p>
<p>What did your dad say about Rice? Could he have been confused about the UT Austin thing? I live in Texas and Rice has a stellar reputation here, very similar to the Ivies in academic reputation. </p>
<p>My daughter will be attending Smith College this fall as a first year. The women's environment was one of the selling factors for her. Mt. Holyoke and Smith both participate in the 5 college consortium, so she'll also be able to take classes at those two colleges, as well as Hampshire, Amherst, and U-Mass Amherst.</p>
<p>I don't understand what you mean by asking if they make sense as a group. You have five of the absolutely top ranked mid-sized universities, the top ranked LAC, Rice is a little lower ranked, and then three highly ranked large public universities. By "as a group", you meant...</p>
<p>"As a group" I meant do they have the same sort of aura, I guess. The qualities I'm looking for: personable professors, forward-thinking student body, good Bio department, research opportunities and resources available, and a campus full of trees. That last one is more important than you might expect; I suffocate in cities.</p>
<p>Therefore, I have redone my list again, cutting out the big places my parents want me to attend but I'm not too keen on.</p>
<p>Now: Amherst, Dartmouth, IU Bloomington, Mt. Holyoke, Trinity College (CT), Rice, UCLA and UCSD, and Yale. Names are in alphabetical order, not order of preference.</p>