<p>Why would you apply to “most” of 17 schools that admit less than ten % of applicants? What do those schools have that one that admits 30% doesn’t?</p>
<p>People forget it still takes work to write a new application, especially with schools with very customised applications.</p>
<p>
They have students that are able to get admitted to schools that admit less than 10% of applicants. That may sound silly, but for some students, that is the answer. It’s like wanting to be on the travel soccer team that’s hardest to get on–not for the prestige, but for the ability to play with the best players.</p>
<p>Emeraldkity, you seem to have a real beef with highly selective schools. Why is that? No one is saying that there aren’t great schools at all levels.</p>
<p>cellardweller whose D applied to 17 elite schools and ended up at one of the most selective schools in the country, wrote:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First, let me reiterate, to each his own and it is an individual choice how many to apply to. I still contend that a very competitive candidate applying to highly selective colleges would not need 17 in order to score an acceptance. I know that these schools all accepted under 15% to their college (though frankly, I’d have a more balanced list where there would be a few schools that were still very selective but had a little higher rate). But let’s stick with YOUR strategy to apply to more and more schools that accept under 15% of applicants as that is the only kind of school your D really would want to attend (from what I can tell). </p>
<p>But I would maintain that your D’s chances really were not under 15%, even if a school’s acceptance rate is stated as such. IF a student is a true very strong contender at these highly selective schools, their odds are a bit greater than the stated acceptance rate. For example, at Brown, they accept 26% of all vals. If your kid is a val, their chances are better than the 11% admit rate. If your kid by chance had an 800 on an SAT subtest, the admit rate for such candidates is 24%. These are just examples but for some students with certain aspects of their profile academically speaking, the admit rate is higher than the overall admit rate of 11%. There are applicants to schools like Ivies who are truly NOT contenders. Then, there are applicants who are strongly in consideration of admission and then there are some candidates who are highly competitive for admission. This last group, will not necessarily get admitted of course! Applying to just one elite school would be very very chancy in fact. Top contenders do get rejected. But it would not take 17 arrows to score for such a candidate. If their profile is extremely strong in several respects (not just stats), they should be able to be admitted to one or more schools on their list. </p>
<p>Example…I think my D1 was a very strong candidate (some of you might not think so when I hear what SAT scores people think one must have to get in). She had 8 colleges on her list, reaches, matches, safeties. But let’s stick with the four reaches she had: Yale, Princeton, Brown, Penn. We knew she was a contender to get in. We knew the odds were long but the odds for her were a bit higher than the overall admit rate as she was very strong and wasn’t “reaching” to get in. So, while she got into all her matches and safeties (all quite selective in their own right but not as low admit rate as these four reaches), here’s what happened with the four reaches: Yale (deferred EA, denied RD), Princeton (waitlist), Brown (accepted), Penn (accepted). While she is not like some here who “wanted Ivy” or “only a reach school will do” at all, the fact is, it did not take 17 arrows at schools that accept less than 15% to score a hit. I’m not saying it only takes four tries. But for someone who is a very strong candidate for those schools, they should not be shut out if they even try 8 schools that accept under 15%. Why? Because their own chances are greater than 15% because they are one of the very true contenders that would receive serious consideration for acceptance and are not reaching. I can’t say this for every kid. But for someone who has what it truly takes to get into a school that accepts under 15%, it is hard to predict which school will take them, but there is a very good chance that at least one will even if trying 7 of this type of school. If someone of the highest/strongest level of candidacy is totally shut out of a very selective school with 8-12 tries, they likely were not as strong of a contender as one may think. </p>
<p>Another example…D2 had 8 schools. Every single one of her schools accepted between 2-9%. Unlike those here applying to Ivies and the like, there really are not reach, match, safety BFA in MT schools! The admit rate at them all is in this range, let alone has a very subjective element (audition in three skill areas) as part of the admissions process, on top of academics. The only safety is a non-audition school where one is an academic safety as well. Now, was I very nervous what would happen with 8 schools that accept in the single digit admit rates? You betcha! Very long odds at every single one. But I felt confident that D would get into at least one because while I can’t quantify it like my example with Brown and the acceptance rate for vals or acceptance rate for high SATs and such, we knew she was a very strong contender. She had previous benchmarks that showed she was quite competitive for BFA programs. Still, the odds were very tough to get in but I believe not every applicant who auditioned was truly a strong contender (like with Ivies). There were PLENTY who were (just like with Ivies). But her chances were likely better than the 5% admit rate overall to get in. Still quite chancy and we had no idea who might take her but we felt one of them would. We felt trying 8 was enough to land one hit at least. We were more than right in that estimation of the strength of her candidacy. Got into 5, priority waitlisted at 1 (accepts 2%), accepted to college, deferred/denied for BFA at 1, denied at 1. Got scholarship offers at 7. </p>
<p>So, while you can say that the admit rates are very very low (they are), I do believe that the strongest candidates in the applicant pool have a better rate of acceptance than the overall admit rate. I don’t know cellardweller’s D’s stats (I imagine darn good considering where she ended up), but it sounds like she was a strong contender. I don’t think the very strong contenders end up with NO school to go to even if they apply to 12 and under. If they are closed out after applying to 12 and under, there has to be a reason besides the acceptance rates. That’s my view. Even so, a very strong candidate should have some very good match and safeties on the list even if they walk on water. D1 did. She was not of the attitude “reach school or bust”. That was harder to do for a BFA candidate as all BFA schools are reaches with extremely low acceptance rates. The only school that could be match or safety would have to be a non-BFA school and she only wanted to study a BFA degree. There are very very few BAs in MT, as well, in the country.</p>
<p>I really applaud that last post, because that IS the fact - if you are very well qualified for the school, you certainly do have much higher chances of getting in. It really doesn’t matter what the admit rate is - it’s just how many people apply, and how many of those people were accepted - if you don’t consider it in relative to your own situation. That might just be reemphasizing, but I feel very strongly about soozievt’s post (positively).</p>
<p>
</p>
<ol>
<li>Access to leading edge research as an undergraduate.</li>
<li>Be taught and mentored by world class faculty.</li>
<li>Be exposed to successful role models at different stages of their careers.</li>
<li>Study at the frontiers of your field.</li>
<li>Have access to breadth and depth of material and courses.</li>
<li>Work alongside other highly motivated and driven individuals.</li>
<li>Be challenged intellectually to your limits. </li>
<li>Be part of a team working on problems with no known solutions. </li>
<li>Be given the opportunity to chart your own path of study or research.</li>
</ol>
<p>Most of our D’s classes have no textbooks. She analyses primary research materials and can ask questions to the people actually conducting the research. She is herself involved as full team member in exciting neuroscience research that will be published in a leading journal. She may or may not continue with this line of research after graduation, but she is being exposed to a world she had been dreaming and reading about since she was a little kid. This is just what she wanted to do at this is stage of her life and feels truly fortunate of having been giving the opportunity to make a meaningful contribution. </p>
<p>While not every highly selective university offers these capabilities, those that do offer them are highly selective.</p>
<p>cellardweller…I do agree with those points too about highly selective colleges. After all, my kids wanted those aspects for their respective education and fields of study and did end up at highly selective schools or programs. The only difference I would have with your thinking is that you seem to think that that can only be had at a school that accepts less than 15%. I think there are some really selective schools that accept around 20-25% where one could get that same sort of thing. I agree it can’t be had at all colleges. But even those colleges that accept a LITTLE higher rate than your D was willing to attend…truly offer something quite along those lines too.</p>
<p>As I understand cellardweller’s posts (and I could be wrong, my memory is fading), it is not just the selectivity of the institutions offering what his D wanted. It is the selectivity combined with the need for FA that drove up the app numbers. I can understand. Remove either factor and you get a shorter list.</p>
<p>Well, curm, my kids were also FA applicants. The situations may have differed in some ways, I’m sure, but just saying.</p>
<p>Did cellerdweller’s D take the best FA offer? I do not know, just asking. </p>
<p>Your D, curm, was trying for merit aid, though applied to Yale which gives none.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolute true. This is why my son applied to 13 schools. As a non-hooked candidate with stellar academics he did not view himself as a shoe-in anywhere but a possibility everywhere. Thus the game of chance was part of the equation. The more times you roll the dice, the more chances you have of getting lucky.</p>
<p>I think there is a mistaken notion among some posters here that certain candidates are slam-dunks at elite schools and are wrong to apply widely. That just isn’t true.</p>
<p>My son also applied to 13 schools. We were in need of some serious $ so we thought that by applying to more schools that we would also be able to use the FA package of one school against another if need be. His SAT score was 2090 with a 4.0 gpa and top 10%, so although we applied to 7 of the top 25 schools, we know that it would be a crapshoot on where he got in. He did end up getting in 3, rejected at 3 and waitlisted at 1. We also did end up using one FA package to get more aid from another. So in our situation, it worked to my son’s advantage to apply to 13 schools.</p>
<p>Re: 491…
Nobody is a slam dunk at any of the highly selective colleges. Some students are very competitive for them and others are applying to them as reaches for their qualifications. Even the most qualified candidates DO get rejected at top colleges. But the most qualified candidates are unlikely to not get in anywhere if they try for 12 or less schools. However, in terms of chances at any ONE particular school, it would be very chancy odds for ANYONE.</p>
<p>kleibo…13 schools is not 17-19 schools as some are discussing. Further, a 2090, while a strong score that COULD be admitted to top colleges, is not in the strongest pool of applicants to those colleges and so the odds are not as good for that candidate as someone with the strongest profile, who still has difficult odds. Also, top 10% is not top 5%. I was saying that a student with the strongest type of profile, should not be closed out of going to a highly selective college (but won’t get into them all!) if they apply to 12 or less. For a candidate like you describe, the odds are decent, but not as good as what I was talking about.</p>
<p>Were we talking about me? I forget. 
I thought my post was about cellardweller’s situation. And soozie, we were looking for all FA. Not just merit. If what you were suggesting was the case, I would be an idiot.
Give me just a little credit , sooz.</p>
<p>CURM, you ask if we were talking about YOU but the fact is, you have participated on this thread and in fact, have shared the number of schools your D applied to on this thread…17 you stated.</p>
<p>With Yale, yes, I know you knew they don’t offer merit aid. Of course I give you credit…you have researched your D’s college and now med school process to the max from what I can tell by your posts. :D</p>
<p>But using a FA calculator, it isn’t hard to estimate what aid a need based school like Yale would give. Didn’t you say you needed a certain amount of aid for her to attend college? Was your thinking that Yale would offer her more than the merit based schools to which she was applying? Just wondering how that might work.</p>
<p>Yale did offer more than (maybe the same as) a couple of the primarily merit based schools, IIRC. In our family’s case, need aid differed from need-only school to need-only school, using the same forms, by over $10K a year. (Even more OOP.)</p>
<p>Back to the original post, coupled with recent comments: It sounds as if it is safe to conclude, then, that under the present higher ed system in the US it is NOT wise to limit applications because the variance of admission percentiles, Financial aid, Merit aid, public vs. private cost of attendance is just way too disparate. It may be fine to limit same in countries like Cda and U.K. where the same financial formula applies at each.</p>
<p>Contrary to the suggestion of economic insensitivity the opposition to my greyhound comment implied, indeed our family had to look very closely at all costs, including travel, FA offered, merit offered, etc., and my s. had to save his own money to travel around the country to visit schools. We encouraged that level of visiting BECAUSE we don’t have very much money to play with and we wanted him to make the most out of what assistance we could offer. No – he didn’t do it all during senior year; it was mostly the last two summers and holidays and we relied on youth hostels and public transportation (and occasionally priceline but mostly amtrak and greyhound). In his case, his degree is a BFA with a very small acceptane % and a wide variance in program nuance, so onsite investigation was a really wise investment and helped him shape his vocational plan as well. It has also helped him feel comfortable with the debt load he is assuming for undergraduate, which is considerably less than it might have been had he not eliminated some of the farther flung options and focused intensely on his preferred list (which in the end, netted a generous scholarship). But to each his or her own.</p>
<p>
somewhat of a moot point … the standing proposal is to limit students to 6 applicatins … and numerous schools/parents suggest 6-8 applications … from my perspective a foolish strategy for numerous top students or students in need of significant FA. Not that I’d be in favor but if the limit were set at 12 I’d would have much less of an issue … while I wouldn’t like the limit I do not think it would be too cumbersome … but a limit in the 6-8 range hurts the best students the most.</p>