Very true, born2dance94 - or they think you’re “sour grapes” because you’re not Ivy material. </p>
<p>I wish there was a way to explain to people that just because your numbers match the mid-range for a bunch of colleges, applying to 10 schools that each have a 10% admission rate doesn’t mean you’ll get into at least one. They’re independent decisions - you could get into 10 or NONE. </p>
<p>Some people seem to get offended by the idea that they might need a safety school. What’s the harm in applying to a couple of schools where your numbers are in the top quartile of accepted students - schools that are the size you want, that have your major, and that you think you can afford (or that offer good FA) AND that accept at LEAST 30+% of their applicants? It’s a couple of application fees. If you get into your top choice - great. If not, at least you have SOMEWHERE to go and maybe you find out it’s a good place for you after all.</p>
<p>Even with superscoring I’d bet there are likely less than 10K with 2350 SATs, and even fewer who are also valedictorians. Looking at the applicants from our local high school there are lots of kids who apply with stats nowhere near these. </p>
<p>THe problem is that as Steve correctly notes, the schools don’t go purely by stats and you have to take hooks into account. She may very likely get skunked.</p>
<p>I’m just pointing out that these numerical stats are not a dime a dozen, as it would appear if you only read this website.</p>
<p>Does anyone else think it’s unfair that kids with really high stats and grades are shut out of these top schools and may end up with no acceptances? I think it’s awful, and it shouldn’t happen. These kids are the best of the best, so why shouldn’t they be the ones admitted to the top schools? That’s where they’re supposed to be. These aren’t truly “reach” schools for these kids because they’re so smart - they’re “match” schools. I think it’s sad that the collegiate world has come to this.</p>
<p>Post #42, agree, our high school has less than 3 students with 2300+ and top 1%. And the top 10 kids(out of 500+ students) do get into MIT, Princeton, Columbia, Harvard, etc…</p>
<p>^^^
Yes, I bet most high “stats” kids do get into top schools. THey just may not get into every “top” school they want. And on rare ocassion, if they don’t have a safety, they get shut out. But I think that’s pretty rare. So I’d edit my post #42 to say she may possibly get skunked.</p>
<p>Kids with high stats get into very good schools. They just can’t all get into the same 8. This is only problematic if one thinks those 8 schools are exalted somehow.</p>
<p>Also, how are students and parents supposed to know? I guess the theory is that GCs advise them, but that didn’t really happen for my D (large, competitive suburban high school).</p>
<p>One thing that struck me about the “No Happy News” thread from 2005 was that the college app. environment was apparently very different, just 7 years ago. The student had a 1470 SAT and ended up, what was it, wait-listed at two top Ivies, accepted at another, plus Stanford and with a major scholarship at Berkeley? I don’t recall noticing if she had stellar ECs, but that would seem like amazing success in 2012, wouldn’t it?</p>
<p>My D is a top 2% student, 1500 CR+M SAT, decent ECs but nothing special, very outgoing and actually enjoys interviews. My H, who thinks she’s the greatest kid in the world, insisted she apply to HPYS et al. She’s had a bunch of alumni interviews in which virtually all the interviewers told her what a fantastic fit she’d be with their school. However, it’s becoming increasingly apparent (I think) that nowadays, all that counts for virtually nothing in the world of HPYS admissions. Happily, we did also ensure D applied early to both of our state flagships (there are essentially two), and she has acceptances from both. That’s probably where she’ll end up and we parents are trying to express a lot of love for one of those options.</p>
<p>Yeah, if a GC does not make sure a kid applies to a financial and academic safety or two, they havn’t done their job, at all.</p>
<p>It’s the easiest thing in the world to pick out reach schools.</p>
<p>What I’ve noticed on CC, is that there are these kids who have no “real” match schools. A lot of them. All of their “matches” are reaches, no matter what, just because of the acceptance percentages.</p>
<p>Those are the kids who can get a bad run, I think, for whatever odd luck of the draw. Hopefully these kids, too, will have acceptable safteties, since I think we all already know that is the most important “dream school” on the list.</p>
<p>megan12-megan, high stats don’t always equal the “best students”. All those stats show is that the kid can study and do well in their classes. There is a lot more to going to school than that. Is a high stat student going to make a good employee, maybe yes, maybe no. That is a consideration for the school as well. Will they be able to deal with the stress of getting a <em>gasp</em> B in a class, maybe yes, maybe no. This is where the EC’s, interviews, teacher recommendations come into play. Just because they are “smart” doesn’t mean they are the best. In my example, this girl is going to have a hard time getting a job in any field that requires her to work with other people. She just doesn’t have the social skills to do that. Colleges figure that out. She won’t be the first one to experience that.</p>
<p>Might as well share my ancient rejection story again,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Change the D to S, slightly lower SAT and probably slightly less outgoing and that basically describes me in high school. And I was rejected by Harvard. In 1974.</p>
<p>Luckily I had a safety - UCSD - which you could call a safety back then, although I had never heard the term.</p>
<p>It was tough for me because I had absolutely no idea how selective a school like Harvard was. I figured maybe half the applicants got in, and my GC was really no help (or maybe I didn’t ask, I can’t recall). I got a bunch of mail from schools just like kids do these days, I guess based on NMS, and calls from local Princeton and Yale alum, where I didn’t apply, (Though not from Harvard where I did). So I figured I was a shoo-in. No real context for all of this in my circle in those days. Nobody told me about mass marketing and there was no CC obviously. So it was sort of shocking to get that thin envelope, althouigh in retrospect not really unusual because even then the admission rate was under 20% and admissions was somewhat unpredictable.</p>
<p>But kids do get accepted to the very top schools today with these stats. It is just even more selective and more difficult to predict.</p>
<p>^^ I really appreciate the comments from poetgrl and bovertine. So maybe things aren’t so different today, as in the past.</p>
<p>Great point about difficulty of finding “matches” for high-scoring kids. Now that poetgrl has pointed it out, I think that’s so true. D went to honors college admitted student day at the state flagship. She reported that when her group of students fell into discussion of their grades, APs, etc., all the others expressed awe of her stats. It’s kind of aggravating that she seems to fall into some middle ground there. But CC makes one realize that yeah, that’s her and probably at least 10,000 others much like her.</p>
Probably. Although I don’t think I was quite as insufferable then as I am now. I’ve been working on it for a few decades.</p>
<p>
Possibly. Apparently I do that by reflex. It’s completely unintentional however, since not only am I not trying to bring up a strawman, I’m not even trying to argue about anything. ;)</p>
Whoever said that high stats equal best students? And the second part, what makes you think the low stats student make a good employee? Same with high stats student?</p>
<p>In real numbers, there are many more high stats students than there are seats in that small group of colleges, so inevitably some of the "best students’ will be left standing in the admissions game of musical chairs.</p>