<p>I agree with you mathmom about tons of schools that are safeties even for below average students. </p>
<p>But even on CC, we see people who say…“I don’t want to go to UVM” as if it is a consolation prize when they are squarely in the ballpark but claim it is a safety school. I’m talking of out of state students. Like it is not good enough. Yet, here, where I live, some top students, even vals, go to UVM. Some people, even with very average stats like 3.3 GPA, are not satisfied going to schools that accept more than 50% of applicants. But I don’t know what they expect. These are good schools and where their qualifications lie. They may want a school like BC, but realistically speaking, the school is very reachy odds. So, some need to adjust their thinking of the kinds of schools they qualify for and not thinking that these are not good or nice schools. The problem can be the outlook they bring to the process.</p>
<p>I agree, Mathmom. We live near each other, and I know that your school district is one that has most of their kids in relatively selective colleges. However, the Catholic schools where some of my kids went, tend to have kids going to Pace, Iona, Manhattan College, etc, as a rule, and many of the kids are perfectly happy applying to those schools. It doesn’t even come up about applying elsewhere.</p>
<p>CC is a whole different world. Also the kids that independent college counselors see are not indicative of the way things are for the vast majority of college bound kids. Those kids who are doing the college counselor route want something other than those schools that are nearly open admissions.</p>
<p>I think the observation that a student with a 2.8 GPA won’t be “happy” with their safety is a little like saying that a person who only has $3 to spend for a meal won’t be “happy” with the meal they can afford for that amount. </p>
<p>Obviously $3 is enough for fast food and not enough for a fine restaurant, or even the typical diner. But my view to the question of whether the person with $3 would be “happy” with the meal they can purchase would be, it depends how hungry they are. </p>
<p>There are thousands of students attending community colleges all over the country who are delighted with the opportunity it represents for them. That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be happier if somehow they were miraculously blessed with the opportunity to attend an Ivy League college instead (and if they could manage to keep up) – but the point is, we can’t always get what we want.</p>
<p>cpt, I think you’ve forgotten where I live. My school district absolutely does not have most of the kids going to very selective colleges. The vast majority go to CUNYs and SUNYs and a bunch go to Catholic schools - especially the nearby ones. The top 5% of the class get into top 50 type universities.</p>
<p>I see kids with average and below average (not using CC standards but national standards) profiles who seem very unwilling to consider schools truly in their range or their safer range too. It is like these schools are not good enough for them. But I don’t understand the expectation that they should get into schools well out of their range. They insist on applying to very very unrealistic schools (I don’t mean merely reaches as I believe in having some reaches), but just truly out of range schools. They don’t seem willing to accept the reality of their profiles and the schools for which they qualify, and their outlook on the schools in their true range is very negative. But when April rolls around and they truly have options that are in their real range and not the highly unrealistic options they thought they might get, they are unhappy, but the admissions outcome was predictable to me all along. But not to them.</p>
<p>I mentioned a student with a slightly below 2.9 GPA, with a very average curriculum, an 1100 CR/M superscore and below top 50%tile of class, who in my view, had a GREAT admissions outcome getting into every safety, every match, and several reach/matches and a reach. But they seem very disappointed that the kid did not get into Villanova (which was not on the college list we had built and discussed as it was OUT of reach but they added it at last minute of their own accord), and is waitlisted at a reachy match, Marist. In my view, the kid has many really good options that are about as I would have predicted and even better as some reachier schools came through, including UConn, for example. What I see as a wonderful outcome full of many fine acceptances, still means disappointment to them due to their unrealistic expectations to want a school like Villanova which was NOT at all in range. Had they had a realistic outlook, they would see what a successful result they had.</p>
<p>Soozievt- D went through this same conversation with her HS counselor, who was very unhappy with her applying to some reach schools. She did it anyway, because, in her words, “If I didn’t, I would always wonder if I would have been accepted”. Sure, she was disappointed with her rejection at Duke, but she got over it- in about half an hour. And she was thrilled with her acceptance at Wake Forest, a soft reach the counselor discouraged her from trying for.<br>
At the school award assembly the counselor bragged that the school had an overall college acceptance rate of 78%. Finally I understood why she was so reluctant to let kids apply to “out of range” schools- she was trying to protect HER score.</p>
<p>Well, I don’t agree with that. I am also a college counselor and ENCOURAGE reach schools. Everyone should have reach schools! My own kids did too…in fact, they had schools with extremely low admit rates on their list. The key is a balanced list of odds. </p>
<p>I am NOT into “out of reach” schools where one has NO shot AT ALL. That is not the same as a reach school. However, while I would honestly give that assessment to a student, they are free to apply wherever they like as the decisions are solely up to them. I do provide facts. I gave an example on this thread, I believe, where, for example, a student had stats where NOBODY is ever admitted to a school the student wanted to apply to. The stats are in black and white. I don’t think applying in that case make sense. A reach? Yes. A school with zero chance? No. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>I can see that the GC where you are likes to use “acceptance rate” of their students to brag. And I have seen private counselors also brag about their rates of success. I don’t do that and so there is no motivation to insure some high success rate. The way I look at it, every student I advise is going to college. Some got into their reaches or first choices, some didn’t. But they all successfully got into colleges and have places to go. </p>
<p>Again, every student should have some reaches. But some families are unrealistic and want schools where the student cannot be admitted. If there is some chance, surely apply. Make sure to have matches and safeties too that really fit those classifications. There are many people who seem fixated on schools that are not anywhere in their ballpark.</p>
<p>To be clear, I am into aiming high. Aim high, but also be realistic.</p>
<p>Let me give an example. I have had students who have a 2.8 GPA, no Honors or AP classes and a very minimal HS courseload, bottom 50% of HS class, and a combined CR/M SAT of 1000 and they want to go to NYU. NYU doesn’t accept students with this profile. The student can apply if she wishes, but it doesn’t serve the student well to encourage it. I think it is more beneficial to give an honest assessment. Some ignore the black and white facts. It makes more sense to encourage the student to find reach schools where they have some chance, albeit very low odds, of getting in, as opposed to impossible odds. Then, the key would be to find match/ballpark/realistic schools, and some safety schools. It doesn’t help for the student to fixate on schools that are not remotely in their range. That doesn’t mean not to reach high but it does mean to have a realistic outlook of odds, and that every school on the list should be one where you have at least some chance, even if it is just a 3% chance. And then have schools where the chances are greater than that to balance out the odds. For a typical student a list might be something like 40% of schools are reaches, 40% are matches, and 20% are safeties on their list.</p>
<p>One needs to be honest about their own academic profiles. Some people have top schools on the brain when they are below average students. Or the parents don’t want to face that the student is not eligible for very selective colleges and seem disappointed at the kinds of colleges in their student’s range. Maybe it is hard to face reality, I don’t know. They are dreaming of something that is not realistic. It would be like my wanting a Rolls Royce, but I am in the middle class and it ain’t ever gonna happen and rather than look at a Subaru and be satisfied, I’m gonna focus on what I think is the only thing that would make me happy and not face that for my budget, I have to look at Subarus. </p>
<p>There is no joy is saying “told you so” in the spring. I’d rather HELP the student have some options in the spring. If they want to apply to NYU, they certainly can, but I am going to give an honest assessment. Luckily, most families take my advice and so the student is not shut out of going to college (again, we do have reaches on their list!!). I hate seeing situations where the student has no place to go. I’ve seen that happen with people (not my own students). That is avoidable.</p>
<p>By the way, my own nephew got shut out of colleges when he applied a year ago. He had to take a gap year. This round, I helped him every step of the way. This time he got into every school but one…had great options…he is very excited about where he is headed next year! Great program, just what he wanted. His list was much better developed this time around, as was his application process. I was so sad when he was shut of college the first time but it all has turned out great in the end.</p>
<p>There’s something to be said for framing expectations. Maybe we should be encouraging students to find three positive things about every single school on their list, especially the safeties. There can be big meta things, like “I’m going to have an easier time impressing a professor and finding someone to work with closely” or “I’m going to save enough money to finance a study abroad year or unpaid internships during the summer” or “I can easily crash at home if I need to”. There are also the smaller things, like “There’s cheap surf lessons” or “Professor so-and-so is supposed to give interesting lectures” or or “there are really good and cheap burritos at that stand near campus”.</p>
<p>Great idea! Really…some people put down the schools that are truly in their range without really bothering to see what is really good about them! </p>
<p>What sometimes happens is that after they get rejected from all the schools that were out of range and they have to face that they are actually going to attend a school truly in their range, they finally look at the bright side of that school, but could not see it beforehand. The fixation on what they wanted but was clearly not attainable was blocking their vision from exploring all the merits of some really good schools if they had only been open to seeing them.</p>
<p>My son was admitted to a number of schools. His college counselor put Bates on as a safety. My son didn’t visit, didn’t have an interview and Bates’ deadline for alumni interviews was earlier than other schools and he missed it. So, while he was admitted to schools that were arguably significantly more competitive from an admissions standpoint, he was wait listed at Bates.</p>
<p>shawbridge, I can see how that could have happened with Bates. At a small liberal arts school, visits and interviews will matter, as part of demonstrating interest and the school believing that you might consider attending. Add in that Bates is still pretty selective…29% admit rate… (I know nothing about your son, but trust if the GC said it is a safety, it is), and that “interview/visit/interest” factor may have tipped it into the wait list pile.</p>
<p>As I said earlier, my S DID interview at Bates, on campus. He wasn’t even wait listed. I think they found him too high powered or something. He BGF was accepted with lower stats in every direction (GPA, EC’s, and SAT.) It was fine; we wanted BGF to attend. S was accepted at several much more competitive institutions.</p>
<p>It was one of the things that got me thinking so much about fit. S accepted at Brown, flat out rejected at Dartmouth. Accepted at Williams, Amherst, Wesleyan, Vassar. Rejected at Bates.</p>
<p>mythmom, I also agree that with a small liberal arts school like Bates…the school was assessing fit. Given your son’s entire admissions results, that seems to be the case (educated guess of course).</p>
<p>Soozievt, we have been told that with some of the NE schools, showing interest is important and that Bates is one of those. We’re in a Boston suburb with a strong HS and lots of kids apply to Bates and he was in the upper right hand corner of the graph and everyone in a reasonable neighborhood around his grades/SATs was admitted. The reality was that he wasn’t that interested. I think he knew someone at Bowdoin and decided that if he were to go to one of the three Maine Schools, it would be Bowdoin, to which he was admitted. He didn’t go to either, but I suspect your explanation is correct.</p>
<p>Bates and Bowdoin are not safeties. Colby isn’t either. Those three little Maine LACs are very choosy about who they take. I know a number of kids who were WL or denied at those school that got into some highly selective colleges. I was surprised when I saw those schools’ selectivity numbers. I know a young lady who applied to one of them because SAT1s are not required. She was a 4.0 student at a rigorous prep school, and had a very strong profile. Was rejected. But accepted to Haverford, Swarthmore, Middlebury, among other schools. A peer was accepted at one of those main schools but was denied at Middlebury, which was her first choice. Who would figure?</p>
<p>When they have this pretty low admit rate, it is not out of the ordinary that a very strong student may still get rejected, even if they do get into more competitive schools. There is an element of chance with an admit rate that low for most people. It just may not be a sure bet even if it is a likely bet.</p>
<p>Frankly, I would not put Bowdoin as a safety for anyone…accepts 18%.</p>
<p>As a point of reference, I have a child who was competitive for elite colleges, but even so, schools in the range we are talking about here…she called matches (she didn’t apply to these ones specifically…but for example, she considered Tufts, which accepts 25%, to be a match).</p>
<p>I saw that, Soozievt, which surprised me. A lot of kids from my sons’ school go there. In fact, all three Maine schools get a lot of apps from their high school. Because their high school is geared towards these small LACs, I think kids from there do get a bit of a boost in admissions. Where these kids don’t do as well, is at the state universities. I’ve seen kids accepted to Bowdoin and rejected from UVA, for example.</p>
My school district absolutely does not have most of the kids going to very selective colleges. The vast majority go to CUNYs and SUNYs and a bunch go to Catholic schools - especially the nearby ones. The top 5% of the class get into top 50 type universities.</p>