<p>Maybe a more useful concept than "love your safety" is "have a safety you'd enjoy attending" Lots of good schools out there. . .</p>
<p>reidm--</p>
<p>
[quote]
"have a safety you'd enjoy attending"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think the way you've phrased it makes sense!</p>
<p>I am so glad I was rejected from my first choice school (a match, not a reach). I realize now that I was meant to be where I am now, and that things happen for a reason. If I had been accepted to my first choice, I would have surely attended, and I can see that it wasn't the right atmosphere for me. It was very similar to my safety -- small classes, personal instruction, rural location -- but it is very different socially. I had no problem finding a school that was both safe and attractive (even with my relatively lower stats). I guess in my case, both schools (Bennington and Wells) were fairly unknown, so prestige played no part in it. Maybe that has something to do with it.</p>
<p>"I realize now that I was meant to be where I am now, and that things happen for a reason."</p>
<p>I think this happens frequently. My D was rejected by several of her matches. The rejections came as a surprise and were painful, but in each case she did not really fit and would not have been happy attending.</p>
<p>U. Michigan, Wisconsin-Rice-Hendrix-Towson-College of Charleston. These were only some of the schools that Our cc kids already got acceptances to- So I might expand on the idea that if you can't find a safety to love, find a rolling admission school that you can live with. I cannot stress the importance of having a "school in the bag" by December. My d's confidence shot up tremendously when she received her acceptance from U of Tampa- but more importantly she is looking more closely at all her options (even though she hasn't heard from most of her schools). By taking the pressure off, I think she is able to evaluate her choices with clearer thought, because she knows that if all else fails, she has a school that she is content with. I think it would be an extremely anxious time in our household, if we did not receive any acceptances until late March. So I strongly suggest, especially to the Juniors who haven't started the process yet, get one of two rolling admission applications in early. It really makes the holiday season so much more enjoyable. Happy Thanksgiving to you all.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>find a rolling admission school </p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>That's great advice, marny1. There's nothing quite as safe as a safety where you already have an acceptance in hand. :) My kids both did rolling admission apps to schools they would have enjoyed attending, and that fall acceptance really takes the pressure off during the long wait until April.</p>
<p>Another vote for early application to a rolling admissions school. Worked like a dream for us last year!</p>
<p>I will never forget my son's delight when Indiana U's acceptance came before Christmas last year. All his other applications had gone out and he still needed to plod through music school applications but his delight was punctuated by, "well, why am I sending other applications?" I am going to college.</p>
<p>Cannot be said often enough, so I'll chime in. Those pre-Christmas acceptances, whether rolling or EA, create an entirely different experience in college admissions. The angst on this board - which is real, btw; I am not demeaning it - between January and April is palpable. Those of us whose kids had the early acceptances, from schools they could picture themselves at, well.... we were more or less in utopia.</p>
<p>I'm new to cc - love this "Love Thy Safety" thread. New to college applications, my oldest D applying now for Class of 2010.</p>
<p>Being the analytical sort, I started out asking my D to take a realistic and objective analysis of the Reach/Match/Safety LACs she was considering. But I quickly realized (my D being more the intuitive feeling sort) that it was like asking her to take an objective outlook on who might ask her to the prom. She is definitely more infatuated with the Reaches than with the Matches, let alone those doggy Safeties. Perhaps everyone should be granted the indulgence of a little fantasy now-and-then, but the immediate problem is that the amount of work she puts into her applications (mostly talking about her essays) is directly proportional to the college's unattainability. We did manage to visit a number of LACs last summer and this fall, but it mostly just served to re-inforce the existing hierarchy of choices in her own mind, not open her to new possibilities.</p>
<p>I think my erstwhile approach of "I order you to start loving your safeties, immediately" is just not going to work. Having said that, for all her petulance, she is mostly a resilient sort. So I suspect a few tears will be shed next April, but I'm guessing things will work out OK. There's probably no hope of "loving thy safeties" at this point, but my question to you experienced CC-ers is this: "What is your experience with your S or D learning to love thine Safety between the April 1 acceptance and May 1 decision date?</p>
<p>Justaparent, First, welcome.</p>
<p>Second, as I said earlier in this thread, my daughter's safety school was way down on her list. The term "safety" stuck in her craw and prevented her from looking very closely at what it offered. She applied, grudgingly I might add, because her mother said she HAD to have a safety school. </p>
<p>Then she was accepted (her first acceptance). The acceptance seemed to open something in her mind that allowed her to look beyond the "safety" designation and she started really looking at what the school has to offer. It's now actually moved up on her list of schools, even nudging out a former "first choice" school in her mind. I wouldn't be surprised if she ended up picking it, even if she does get into her other schools.</p>
<p>All of this happened within a matter of weeks, by the way. So, never say never about a dark horse safety rising to the top in the last few weeks before deposits are due. I expect a lot of changes between now and then for my daughter, and have pretty much stopped trying to make predictions about where she'll end up. In fact, I am now encouraging her to consider applying to at least one or two other schools that fit the profile of her "safety" school just in case she decides that none of her reach/match schools are what she really wants come April.</p>
<p>I haven't read through all 5 pages of this thread so maybe someone already said it, but maybe come up with a different safety? I'm not sure...I made my safety University of Colorado @ Boulder because I love to snowboard and Boulder still has a great (top 35 or so) engineering program, so I'll hardly be dissappointed if I have to go there. Maybe find something similar? There are a ton of "safeties" for someone with a 2260 SAT...I know it would be hard at this point to restart the search for one but it's just a suggestion. There are tons more schools that would be considered "safe" for someone with his new scores versus the old 2020...</p>
<p>Perhaps I obsess about language more than most, but I believe part of the reason why many students never love their "safety" is because something called a "safety" is inherently unloveable. It has such negative connotations -- last choice ... the if all else fails option ... the doomsday alternative. And all of them bad -- we tried to eliminate this offensive word from our college lexicon. Instead, a student should work hard to find a group of schools where the student would be "satisfied." Sure, the student might be more satisfied at some schools than others (or so the student thinks ... surprising things sometime happen once a student starts school), but why should a student EVER send an application to a school where he wouldn't be satisfied? To my way of thinking, that simply means not enough research was done to assemble a good list in the first place. Depending on all the circumstances involved, the student can apply to a range of reaches, matches, and ... well ... ummm ... very-likelies? almost sure things? near certainties? (pick your own favorite term). But, I think saddling a school with the "safety" label is a recipe for disaster. By simply changing the terminology, a student never feels that the parade passed him by and he's left only with the dreaded "safety."</p>
<p>I think it is all about match or fit not safety. Cause if a school is truly a match they are going to want you as much as you want them.</p>
<p>live-,</p>
<p>Thanks for the comments. Yes, we did do some revamping of the safeties. He eliminated a few schools that were less appealing to him and retained those that he felt more attracted to. We've still got 10 schools at this point, so I'm not sure we'd want to add anything unless there was a compelling reason. </p>
<p>I don't want to give the impression that son's decisions are motivated totally by rank. He tried to keep those schools on his list that were a better match, whatever their ranking. A lot of thought went into this. Amherst, for example, went on the discard pile after we visited because it was too isolated and preppy. Harvard lasted exactly five seconds on his list, despite pressure from a guidance counselor. Vassar, GWU, and Union were also rejected after visits to the schools because one or another aspects just didn't appeal to him, even though his SATS were in the top quarter. </p>
<p>U Rochester may have a lower ranking than Vassar in US News (albeit in two different lists), but Rochester is definitely his favorite "safety-match" school. He likes it because of its strength in science and the fact that the college has a very unique theater troop that's geared to non-majors. Although his other safety match is technically "ranked higher" on the US News and Princeton lists, he prefers Rochester, and has done so from the moment we stepped onto campus last summer.</p>
<p>I believe all his safeties are good matches, though some may be better than others. Overall, however, the positives outweigh the negatives. If he was accepted only to those schools, things should work out just fine. And yet, there is no doubt that he generally prefers the colleges at the top of his list, and there would be a period of grieving and readjustment. Despite all my warnings, I still can't say he "loves" his safeties and safety/matches. Two of his top schools are Brown and University of Chicago. He took summer classes at each campus and would really love to go back to either of them. He's applied to Chicago EA and will otherwise be waiting for RD decisions. The wait will feel a lot shorter if he does get into Chicago in December so we will keep our fingers crossed.</p>
<p>If the student's choices are strongly influenced by prestige and the "density" of very high achievers within the school's population, then the terminology change aimed to dress up the concept of "safety" will do little to alter the student's affection for it. By contrast, students who are more focused on the specific educational opportunities that a school can offer, as well as other lifestyle factors (and are less influenced by college ranking systems), will, I think, be more likely to feel good about attending a "very likely".</p>
<p>blossom wrote
"If you love the idea of a rural environment and being smack in the middle of New England, taking the subway to classes in Queens is probably not going to feel so exciting if that's your only option come April."</p>
<p>Its funny, I was just about to write how lucky I consider my children that they have Queens College as a safety. While it may not be as exciting as going away to college, there are benefits in going to Queens. A large proportion of the graduates of my children's high school end up at Queens. Its a fine school. A lot of very smart kids end up there, because the price is right. BTW, the winner of last year's Intel competition is in Queens College. I'm sure he could have gone anywhere, but he chose to save his money and go to queens.</p>
<p>I know lots of kids who go to Queens college. Yes, many of them did not get into their first choice colleges. But they have a challenging schedule at Queens, and they are able to socialize with their friends that attend other NYC area colleges. All of the kids that I know that attend Queens are happy there.</p>
<p>I think you need to find a place where a lot of your childrens friends will be using as a safety... because chances are, a lot of them are going to end up at the safety.</p>
<p>LC: Interesting that you mentioned the Intel winner--I actually met him and his family, and I recall that they said he was going to Hunter's Honors Program. Is that part of Queens College?</p>
<p>My mistake. I thought he was going to Queens.
Hunter is part of the City University of New York (CUNY). It consists of several colleges, including, but not limited to, Hunter, Queens, Brooklyn, Baruch, City (there are others).</p>
<p>Many of the colleges have an Honors Program. As far as I know, its very easy to apply. You simply apply to the honors program at the college of your choice, and if you don't get into that, you are automatically considered for next next level down, which is the scholars program at the college of your choice. If you don't make the scholars program, you are automatically considered for regular admision in the college of your choice choice. I think you can apply to up to 3 city colleges in one application.</p>
<p>I'm sorry my information is so sketchy. My kids go to a school with fantastic college guidance, and I pretty much stayed out of the whole process (aren't I lucky :-) ! ). My kid#1 got into the CUNY honors program at Queens college, which, regretably (on my part!) my kid chose not to accept. All of the other kids in the graduating class that got into the program did accept. I don't know anything about the application, college guidance took care of everything.</p>
<p>Hunter is also a great school. I don't know too much about it other than that its a great school. Queens College is in Flushing, NY, and Hunter is in Manhattan, around 68th street on the upper East Side. Because we live on Long Island, Queens is more convenient and hence, more popular that Hunter.</p>
<p>I consider us very lucky to have the CUNY system as a safety. I am pretty sure that my kid#2 will get into queens. But there are plenty of options around here. I had lunch the other day with a family whose kid was studying stage set design at one of the local commuter colleges. He was so excited about it, and it sounded so interesting ... he was working with bona fide Broadway set designers. I was so jealous of him! </p>
<p>Yes, it is possible to love your safety, just have an open mind, and take advantage of he programs that they offer.</p>
<p>"Perhaps I obsess about language more than most, but I believe part of the reason why many students never love their "safety" is because something called a "safety" is inherently unloveable."</p>
<p>Great point. Picture your child 5-6 years ago. There were no such things as safeties, matches, reaches. There were just opportunities to learn - in the present, and maybe a little bit into the future. She received what you hoped was a good education, often obtained simply by being a taxpayer. It was open enrollment. The school accepted all comers. She made some friends, some of whom had similar levels of intellect as she; others she valued for their athletic ability, or sociability, or any number of other attributes. If she was lucky, her teachers took a strong interest in her, and matched her abilities with opportunities for action. And if all this was true (often it may not have been, but if it was), she LOVED her school.</p>
<p>Now that's called "loving your safety". Difficulty of admission may very often have next to nothing about "love", potential attainment, value of the education any individual student is likely to receive, or even intellectual challenge if the faculty are truly committed to matching ability to opportunities for action. And some kids don't even need that - they simply do it themselves. Eventually, of course, one hopes that all will.</p>