<p>Hi Ga2012mom! </p>
<p>Hope you are doing ok and had a safe journey to the NE!</p>
<p>Now I <em>really</em> wish your d had gone to our kiddo’s HS. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when you talked to the college counselors about the “pay for over 8” apps rule 
:D</p>
<p>GAMom, i agree with you. When there are need issues or other considerations, making any acceptance rate much further from the averages reporter, it is much more difficult to get an idea of what your options are going to be. </p>
<p>Though your D stuck to full need met schools, it is also the case that one can sometimes get a more generous package from even a “stingy” school that does not typically meet most of their students’ needs. Also schools that are not need blind are not necessarily to be crossed off the list when a student need aid. I have seen kids hit their jackpots at such schools. When you are looking for aid packages, it can make a big difference to cast a wide net.</p>
<p>That’s why I don’t like rules that say “you can only apply to 6 schools.” There are a wide variety of circumstances and each situation can call for a different number of schools. I think in GAMom’s kid’s case, it does sound like 14 were needed. Still, I cannot think of a case where much more than that was needed but perhaps one exists. I do think the number will vary from kid to kid given the factors and circumstances of that kid’s process. Six does work for certain situations. Thirteen makes sense for some others. For me, I have yet to find a situation where over 15 seems necessary to accomplish the goal for that student.</p>
<p>Cur,</p>
<p>Speaking personally, the issue I had/have with your D’s strategy was that I don’t think most of the schools she applied were financial SAFETIES. Like you said, most don’t offer full-ride or full tuition merit money. Applying to schools where merit aid would put you in “can stretch” range doesn’t reflect MY version of financially minded applying (YMMV, of course).</p>
<p>For example, I applied to seven schools, all with merit $$ foremost in my mind:
-2 OOS publics where admission was almost guranteed, but significant merit aid was unlikely.
-One private U will merit aid that would put us in “stretch but doable” range was highly like (though not guaranteed).
-One private U where tuition merit aid was possible but not easily predicted (not a great offer, as it turned out)
<p>In hindsight, I regret applying to the first two OOS publics and probably should have replaced them with ones with better guaranteed merit money. For me, merit money was something that ought not just make a school “doable” but also as comfortable financially as possible (full tuition or full tuition plus, especially). </p>
<p>But your mileage may vary. Money mattered more to me than prestige at that time (I can say that it was hard to watch my equally qualified friends head off to more prestigious schools senior year. However, I think that attending my financial–and academic–safety has kept some financial doors upon to me that otherwise may have been shut and so I don’t regret it)and I knew going in that the school that offered the best aid, barring any huge issue, would likely be the one that I would attend. Maybe I took the wrong approach.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hi jym626. I am going the first week of November, for parents weekend. Should be great, as my mom is coming from Arizona, so it will be 3 generations of us girls. 
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hmmm, that would have been a “nice” conversation with the counselors. How bout I make it up to you and invite you when I take her rejection letter along with her med school diploma to them??? :)</p>
<p>Don’t get me started, lol!!!</p>
<p>p.s. Hope you are dry!!</p>
<p>
Well, yes, but why do you assume that the number of schools that fit those criteria is small? That certainly wasn’t the case with my son, and he wasn’t really applying to a highly specialized program.
Perhaps one issue that’s confusing us a bit in this discussion has to do with the weighting of fit criteria. For example, a kid might have a preference for proximity to a large city. But compared to other criteria, that might be a minor consideration, and he might end up at Deep Springs.</p>
<p>*Well, yes, but why do you assume that the number of schools that fit those criteria is small? *
I guess it would depend on your criteria.
We considered location-size- cost- classes offered- surrounding community- extra curriculars available-diversity of environment/student body, rigor of program- ease of obtaining classes, ratio of profs:students, recreation opportunities, quality of food/housing…
If those offerings are really interchangeable in many schools then I would count my blessings because it sounds like your son wouldn’t need to apply to every single school that offers them to find ONE to be accepted to & to be happy with.</p>
<p>I think this is a fantastic post!
I think this would hurt and help many students as well as schools. I think it would force students to narrow down and really focus on their priority schools, but at the same time cancel out an unforeseen opportunity. I also think financially it would hurt the schools because that is quite a bit of money that comes in just from applications, but on the other hand the applicants they receive are definitely serious applicants…numbers they can count on!
There are many positives and negatives to this question…what a great question!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There would be no reason to meld the two or change current practices for that. In a truly need-blind college, the financial aid office only makes offers after the student is offered admission. The same would be true for the matching system- the admissions office would make the rank order list (based on all the factors they currently use) and the aid office would calculate the family’s EFC and control the button for aid. </p>
<p>Applicants could decide what they were willing to pay out of pocket and set that cutoff for all their colleges, or if they were willing to pay more for particular colleges they could specify that too. The only thing that applicants would not be able to do is to use one college’s offer to bargain with another college’s financial aid office. But the matching system would make sure they only match with a college they consider affordable.</p>
<p>I can empathize with students who want to apply to more than six schools ( I think eight is more reasonable), with high school counselors who really would love it if students would limit their schools, and admission offices who want students to show stronger interest in their applications.</p>
<p>For our family money limited #'s of apps. My oldest only applied to four schools as a senior & five schools during her gap year. ( she reapplied to the four schools- as they were all public and even though she had been accepted to all, they would not carry over her acceptance)
Her sister applied to two schools.
Once you find a school that meets your criteria and you have a good shot at acceptance, there really isn’t any need to apply to twenty.</p>
<p>
Ah, there’s the rub! It’s that “good shot at acceptance” that’s the problem. If a student is interested in some of the most selective schools, like Ivies, top LACs, etc., almost nobody has what I’d call a good shot. That’s why the kids who are applying to a lot of schools seem (on CC, anyway) to primarily be (1) kids who want to apply to the most selective schools; (2) kids applying to highly competitive programs like Musical Theater, and (3) kids who need to compare aid offers, which I guess is a way of having a good shot of being able to attend.
My son’s list had seven reaches, and I thought he had a reasonable shot of getting in to one or more of them–but a quite definite possibility of getting into none of them.</p>
<p>*Ah, there’s the rub! It’s that “good shot at acceptance” that’s the problem. If a student is interested in some of the most selective schools, like Ivies, top LACs, etc., almost nobody has what I’d call a good shot. *</p>
<p>Right, that’s why hyperselective schools are added after reasonable fits, with reasonable acceptance rates. </p>
<p>Because the " top" schools are not interchangable, adding more to your list does not increase your chances, although if money is a consideration, it is reasonable to add a few more for the sake of comparing packages.</p>
<p>I would have the student in question ask themselves what is it about the " top" schools that appeals? Those qualities are also offered in different combinations in schools that are not as competitive for admission.</p>
<p>Schools talk to each other and a student who only applies to 15 or 25 " top" schools may find themselves not accepted to any. IMO because they haven’t done the work to determine which differences matter to them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, not mathematically speaking (in the sense that I can’t add the 10% acceptance rate x 8 Ivies and conclude that I have an 80% chance of acceptance at an Ivy).
But if you are in a reasonable ballpark of a highly selective school – that is, it’s a “reasonable” reach for you (you’re not trying to slide in with a 3.0), then obviously you have more chances if you apply several places. </p>
<p>I don’t understand your comment that a student who only applies to 15 / 25 top schools may find themselves not accepted to any because they haven’t done the work to determine which differences matter to them. Whether or not I’m admitted has nothing to do with how much I care about urban vs rural, Greek vs not, etc.</p>
<p>I just gotta ask: how many of you long-time cc’ers who find the bid-idea interesting were clapping loudly when H, P & UVa dropped early admissions?</p>
<p>I don’t understand your comment that a student who only applies to 15 / 25 top schools may find themselves not accepted to any because they haven’t done the work to determine which differences matter to them. Whether or not I’m admitted has nothing to do with how much I care about urban vs rural, Greek vs not, etc.</p>
<p>in my experience committees evaluate interest, some value it more than others. It is just not possible to show strong interest in 25 schools with multiple visits, with essays describing their " special" connection to the school, etc.
On the other hand- when students have limited their applications such as with EA/ED, that indicates strong interest in a particular school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Correct, but too many people here on CC make the other extreme opposite statement- that applying to more reach schools does not increase the odds of acceptance. The fact is, applying to 8 colleges with acceptance rates of 10% will definitely raise the probability of acceptance over applying to only 2 or 3 or 4 of them. Assuming your individual chance is greater than 0% in the first place.</p>
<p>It is not a random process but there is an element of randomness in the process and you increase your odds if you increase your applications.</p>
<p>One of the enduring myths on C.C. (at least in the minds of many people here) is that there is NO randomness in college admissions.</p>
<p>I do agree with Emerald that there are very much differences in the schools. Talking about applying to all the Ivies is akin to applying to all the Big Ten schools. The schools are different" their strengths are different, the locations are different, the sizes are different, the cultures are different. Part of making decisions is the ability to critique and discern differences… a good lesson for all young people. Applying to “top colleges” simply because they are top colleges is not a good strategy. Being able to articulate why a particular group of top colleges in on your list is wise. Perhaps they are on your list because they are strong in your field of interest. Perhaps they are strong because each has a prof you want to study with. Perhaps they have proximity location to something that interests you. Perhaps they have a long history of being mined by certain companies. These are what separate the kids that have a clear vision for applying from the kids that are randomly applying in mass. There are smart kids at way more schools than we have fingers and toes to count. Being around “smart people” in and of itself is not a smart strategy.</p>
<p>I agree with you momofthreeboys and emeraldkity. I think once you get much over 12 or so applications, it is hard to fully articulate and show specific interest in each school, which I believe is very important to do in selective college admissions. Maybe those who put in for 12 reaches aren’t doing this enough and aren’t getting a hit for that reason? </p>
<p>While I FULLY understand the very chancy odds at the low admit rate schools even for the most qualified applicants, and that they may need MORE schools than a different type of applicant, given the odds, I don’t think they need 15+ schools to get a hit. If they don’t score a hit, then they either were not an appropriately strong candidate, didn’t show specific interest in the school, or had a very imbalanced list of schools. </p>
<p>The other thing I sometimes see on CC (not speaking of anyone specifically on this thread) is what I call the “Ivy or bust” mentality…where no other school will do and so they have to put into all 8 Ivies or ones like it (Stanford, MIT, etc). They add more and more and more of those to the list and can’t fathom attending a highly selective school such as Tufts, Georgetown, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins, WashU. That is part of the problem. I understand a fair number of “reach odds” schools, I truly do. But the list should have other very selective schools in the ballpark of the very competitive candidate that accepts more like 20-25% of applicants at a high level of academic profile. These are not exactly second rate options! No truly top end kid should be closed out of a very selective college entirely if they have a balanced list and no more than about 12 schools. If they are closed out, there is a reason. The list was not the right list. It isn’t because they needed 17 schools.</p>
<p>Well, that’s because people are making rank distinctions between the ivies and the NU/JHU/WUSTL/etc. level. Which is really just stupid. They are all highly selective colleges where the smartest kids can’t go wrong. Trying to slice it much thinner than that is goofy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let us just agree to disagree. I have provided ample evidence that our D’s list of 17 could not have been cut much further without seriously impacting her chances of admission. </p>
<p>How difficult is to understand that not all colleges are created equal and that for some students with the potential and qualifications, it DOES make a big difference to attend one of the most selective colleges. Not that Tufts, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame are not great schools, they certainly are, but they are simply not at the same level as Harvard, Stanford or MIT. There a number of schools with great music programs but there are few at the level of Juillard. The fact is that very few students ever turn down an opportunity to enroll at HYPSM if offered admission, and when they do it is most of the time to attend another college within HYPSM. </p>
<p>I would also seriously challenge the notion that there are such fundamental differences between the Ivy League schools to the point that a candidate could not legitimately be interested in all of them. I would even go further: the common characteristics of the Ivy League colleges (and by extension the top 20 colleges) are far greater than their differences. Very strong academics, moderate size colleges, strong networks, large endowments, excellent faculty, high selectivity. There is clearly a pecking order and some school are better than others in certain fields, MIT and Stanford in engineering, Penn in management… But we are talking choosing among some the very best colleges not only in the nation but also in the world. Most countries would pay a small fortune to have any one of the top 20 US universities within their borders. </p>
<p>I don’t buy at all the argument that you can’t show serious interest in more than 10-12 colleges. Our D had selected colleges on the availability of her chosen program and spent plenty of time researching them. There could not have been a clearer fit. She could easily have added more. Most highly selective colleges don’t care how many times you visited them or how much you swoon about their buildings. There seems to be widespread confusion about demonstrated interest and fit. Most colleges care strongly about the fit between the candidate and their institution but that has nothing to do with whether you showed up 20 times on their campus. Arguably, our D had a clear fit with all her target colleges than the vast majority of applicants. </p>
<p>Even more absurd is the argument that applying to more schools reduces your chances of admission to a highly selective college. If have never seen even anecdotal evidence of that claim. Harvard is not giving any candidate any bonus points if he were to claim that it was the only school he applied to and was never even considering Yale, Princeton or MIT. They actually EXPECT candidates to apply to peer universities and strongly recommend them to diversify their applications and apply widely as they have to reject many highly qualified applicants. </p>
<p>I also believe the significance of a “Tufts syndrome” to be vastly exaggerated, especially among selective colleges. I don’t even think Tufts has Tufts Syndrome! Our D was accepted at Tufts even though she responded to the interviewer’s question regarding other colleges of interest that she was also applying to a number of the most selective colleges with programs in her intended field of study. Tufts offered her admission because they liked her profile and felt she was a good fit for them. The college also knew she was applying to higher ranked schools, but realized she may not be admitted to any of them and had a reasonable chance of enrolling at Tufts. </p>
<p>LACs often play the waiting list game, because of their limited enrollments but not a single one denied our D admission. Those that waitlisted her essentially wanted her to commit to attend before offering her a spot. </p>
<p>But even assuming a clear fit, the vast majority of qualified applicants are rejected at top colleges. The admit rate of unhooked student st HYPSM hovers at around 4-5%. Still in single digits at places like Columbia, Penn and Brown. If you are white or Asian, middle class , from a public HS in the NE or California, your chances of admission drop even further. </p>
<p>Our own HS had just experienced several valedictorians in a row with near-perfect SAT scores closed out of all of their top choices. One ended up taking a gap year and was admitted the following year to Princeton and the second transferred from his safety to U. Chicago after a year, schools they hadn’t bothered applying to the year before. The only solid rule that guided us in the end was:</p>
<p>You can’t tell for sure which highly selective college will admit you, but you can be absolutely certain you won’t be admitted to a school you didn’t apply to.</p>