So it gets taken a step further. Want Top X school not to brag to friends and family but to people I don’t even know.
1 Like
I’m the opposite of all this. My kid is in a school where half the people say that’s nice and the other half who no it says, excellent school. He didn’t pick my name. He picked by fit.
There are certainly more practical reasons for going to a top school. Several weeks ago, a thread where the OP was 15 and deciding between U Chicago and 150 ranked in the state. Freeride in-state, 100k in debt Chicago.
Some advice is given absolutely go in state. Don’t go into debt. Unless you have one hell of a crystal ball to tell a 15-year-old kid that he is absolutely better off going in-state, then I don’t know how you can make that statement.
For example, we know a student faced with the almost exact same decision. Decided to go to Penn full price instead of almost totally free in-state. four years after they graduate get a call from a Wharton graduate who got their name from someone else at Penn. Number four-employee making seven figures with eight figures in options.
I’m not arguing against that the best school is maybe the most affordable in-state option but IMO telling a 15 year old kid who got into Chicago that absolutely they will have a better outcome in state makes little sense.
10 Likes
Risk / Reward - most of us are “cautious”. Personally trait (maybe flaw).
1 Like
I think there are CC parents giving that advice so that the 15 year old isn’t taking a spot away from their precious child at that elite university.
2 Likes
Seriously folks, $100K debt equals about $1000 per month in payments every month for 120 months in a row. Not many UChicago grads can afford that directly out of undergrad.
Can that decision work out? Sure.
Or is that kind of debt more likely to negatively impact that person’s life for a long time after college…limiting the job they can take, where they can live, qualifying for a car loan or mortgage, even dating?
7 Likes
“Is it worth it” is one of the most well worn subjects on this board. Often times threads that don’t start out with that as the topic morph into it (this is one such thread). Ultimately the answer is “it depends.” On a host of factors known, not known (to people taking various positions) and not known to anyone (because they are in the future and will depend on a number of decisions/happenings in the interim). Doesn’t stop the normal cast of characters from chiming in with their views though. Read stories about successes and failures and salaries and rates of return. Sometimes we get really close to answering the question once and for all. 
Maybe next time. 
5 Likes
Bet you wish you missed that flight!
1 Like
Pretty sure that many people were saying “don’t go into that much debt”, which would require substantial parent loans or parent-cosigned loans.
1 Like
I don’t have an issue with the advice and it may be the best option for that particular kid. What I do have a bit of an issue with is when the advice is an absolute statement.
1 Like
Debt is a tool. That’s all it is. Tools can be used appropriately or inappropriately, but it’s ridiculous to blame the hammer if it cracked your toilet bowl because you used it instead of a wrench.
I agree with James West that blanket statements are usually problematic. Folks regularly post here giving others financial advice without knowing parental age, how many other dependents there are, if the parents have adequate life insurance, disability insurance, etc.- the BASIC facts you’d need to know before giving financial advice.
Debt can be great, debt can be crippling, debt can just be an inconvenience which like other inconvenient things in life- you deal with and move on. No single answer.
in my own case- debt is what made my career possible. I tripled my salary the day I graduated from B-school vs. the salary I had made with just a BA. I had a hard choice- debt for a full time MBA, or take my employers offer to pay for a part-time MBA while keeping my full time job. I confess that it wasn’t the opportunity cost that got me (how many years of earning my low salary before I could finish the degree), it was the gap in prestige between a top five program and a 50-55 ranked program which offered “night school” (as it was called back then).
I’m not advocating that everyone should go into debt for an MBA. BUT- even at the ridiculously high interest rates back then (one subsidized loan, one commercial rate loan) I paid off the loans quickly. And was earning WAY more than even my most optimistic financial projections had shown when I tried to figure out if I could afford to be in debt.
YMMV. But we all need more information than we usually get when folks pronounce confidently “NO DEBT”.
11 Likes
I agree that debt can be worth it some of the time - certainly for a top B school it is a really good investment. Likewise, I would encourage someone who had to borrow some money for an elite school to consider it. But, for many students big debt (like the $100k referenced above) for an undergraduate degree can be very, very limiting. In the case that was cited I think it would have been irresponsible for people to encourage a 15 year old (who was nervous about moving to Chicago in the first place) to borrow $100k - especially since she was also interested in going to law school after undergrad. Debt can definitely be a tool that works to your advantage, but it needs to be deployed judiciously and many 18 year olds aren’t capable of using it that way.
4 Likes
The US admissions system at highly selective colleges is currently set up in a way that makes it harder to figure it out compared to most of the rest of the world. Of course, that has meant upping the ante and lack of transparency from both colleges and applicants.
3 Likes
It also matters that, in the US, the most desired colleges are much smaller relative to the national population than in many other countries. Compare to Canada, where the national population is much smaller but the most desired universities are much larger. Canada also has greater consistency in high school courses and grading within provinces than there is in the US.
4 Likes
I think this applies only if the applicant is a likely candidate. If the candidate isn’t in the >50 pool of candidates the likelihood they get one acceptance is still very low. That’s why every year kids who don’t have a safety find themselves without a choice. Throwing an app into Columbia or Harvard or any of dozens of other schools is a waste unless there’s a likely match based on stats and similarity to other accepted students.
1 Like
Test-optional seems to be the leading cause for the swing for the fences approach and adding to the number of applications. I know a student with a GPA and Rigor to be within the range of most of the top schools. However, the SAT score is well below the 25% range for all schools.
There is an apparent difference between test-, test blind, and the Cal schools not considering standard testing at all. It would be interesting if there are stats on which type of student has the better outcome historically. For example, is it the 4.0UW with a 1200 or the 3.5UW with 1500?
1 Like
The College Board says that HS GPA is a very slightly better correlate to college GPA than the SAT. It also has some predicted college GPAs for HS GPA and SAT combinations. A+ with 1200 predicted higher than B+ / A- with 1500.
4 Likes
If we are talking about selective colleges, they consider other criteria besides unweighted GPA in isolation and SAT scores. And this other criteria that is considered tends to be quite influential in predicting outcomes. A good measure of rigor or contextual information about GPA is particularly important. If you compare the presumably lower score test optional admits that they do choose to admit (who often do well in other criteria besides just unweighted GPA in isolation) they generally have similar cumulative college GPA and graduation rate as submitters. Some example numbers are below:
Bates 25 years of Test Optional Study ( (Optional Testing | Admission | Bates College) )
Test Submitters – SAT ~= 1280, College GPA = 3.16, Graduation Rate = 89%
Non-Submitters – SAT ~= 1075, College GPA = 3.13, Graduation Rate = 88%
NACAC 2014 Sample: Average Over 20 Colleges:
Submitters: HS GPA = 3.52, SAT = 1231 ,5-year Graduation Rate = 77.1%
Non-submitters: HS GPA = 3.50, SAT = 1085, 5-year Graduation Rate = 78.8%
NACAC 2018 Sample: Average Over 13 Colleges:
Submitters: HS GPA = 3.64, SAT = 1234, 5-year Graduation Rate = 82.0%
Non-submitters: HS GPA = 3.63, SAT = 1108, 5-year Graduation Rate = 82.8%
4 Likes
I think that there isn’t perfect correlation between schools - so yes, it can be a good strategy to all T50 or T20 schools to get one.
But I do see a lot of correlation. So there are kids right now sitting on (since I’m focused on BBA programs for DD22) Ross/McCombs/Marshall/Olin/McDonough who will ditch all if they get Wharton. It’s bemusing to me that the schools must like the same kind of candidate - so yes, great GPA and score and leadership (in any field)/national awards.
Then there are the next tier of candidates (like DD22) who get into their state backup/Kelley/NEU/CW who would ditch them all if she gets into Ross and (much longer shot Wharton). Similar to top tier kids with GPA/score but no big awards or leadership.
And a great essay is a leveller/joker card kind of thing.
I feel from looking at this that it’s so much less of a guessing game than one thinks, even with test-optional.
So to answer the question, the impact of so many kids applying to so many schools is less than you would think (on acceptances) because the types of kids who get into various tiers of schools remain the same.
But the impact on kids is huge in terms of how many schools the next year of graduates think they need to apply to.
Personally, we held fast to the no more than 10 applications because we didn’t think outcome would be different and because D22 was done in October with applications, filled out a couple more because the essay questions spoke to her.
The internationals (on reddit/a2c) invariably apply to all T20s as they typically need large amounts of FA and there is a limit on international students at all schools.
3 Likes
NYC- I get your point- really I do- but I can’t imagine a student who thinks that Olin and Wharton are even remotely similar. Or frankly- thinks that the “what counts factors” (besides strong and rigorous academics, of course) are the same.
I’m not picking on you- I know many HS kids who assume that “applying by tiers” is going to be successful, but this just proves that taking a wide, scattershot approach is an expensive and inefficient way to apply to college.
There are some colleges (and I’ll put Olin in that camp, along with places like Wellesley, Wesleyan, Reed, Grinnell…) where some combination of size, culture, focus, etc. means that they are FANTASTIC fits for some kids, and terrible fits for others. It’s like writing your “Why Columbia” essay on how NYC is your oxygen, and then turning around and modifying it for your “Why Cornell” essay. Ummm… have you ever been to Ithaca? Or even looked for it on a map?
So I understand the tier concept- I just think there are more helpful ways to think about colleges than just “if X is more prestigious than Y, and Y is more prestigious than Z, my list is as follows:”
5 Likes
Interesting. I would have thought that all business schools had a lot in common, but I know nothing about business. Is it because Olin is in St. Louis, or just because it is lower ranked? What makes it not “remotely similar?”
1 Like