What schools are matches for a very high stat student with decent ECs?

<p>I'm a rising senior at a public high school in California.
I have a 4.0 UW GPA, 4.4 weighted, 2400 SAT I and SAT II 800s in Math II and Chemistry. I also have six APs so far, all 5s. My extracurriculars are fairly major-oriented--I am interested in computer science, so I've done science fair and interned in a research project developing molecular simulation software, but I also play in a reasonably competitive symphony. I see a lot of good advice along the lines of applying only to two or three favorite reaches, and instead focusing on finding suitable matches... but I'm having trouble finding schools that are truly "matches". </p>

<p>What qualifies as a match for students in positions like mine? </p>

<p>I want to major in Computer Science, so I'm obviously looking to apply to the "big four" - Stanford, UCB, MIT, and CMU - but it's difficult to build my list from there without ballooning it with reaches. I do benefit from having the excellent UCs as in-state schools, and I view UCLA and perhaps even EECS Berkeley as matches due to my in-state status. UCSD, on the other hand, seems too good to be a safety--but I am pretty certain of being admitted to UCSD, and even then UC Irvine seems to serve as another good fallback "safety". Are there other match schools I should be considering (USC is probably a match but I'd only be able to attend if I got a full ride or full tuition scholarship), or should I keep along the path of applying to more than the usual number of "reaches for everybody" schools? </p>

<p>And before anyone helpfully reminds me of the role of finances in the search for suitable colleges, I have already had that talk with my parents and have run the net price calculators with them :). I will likely be taking on some debt no matter where I go, but either a UC school or one of those highly selective private universities with ample financial aid will probably give me the most schooling for the proverbial buck. </p>

<p>tl;dr - I really selfishly started this thread to find colleges for myself, but I guess this can be generalized as well -- how many "matches" are there, really, for people at the very upper end of the statistical curve in terms of GPA and test scores? </p>

<p>Of the ~25 colleges with 75th percentile M+CR scores above 1500, very few have admission rates much above 20%. Of course, the rates would be higher for applicants with the highest stats. Still, these schools consider more than just numbers. So if you are at all cautious, you’d be right to assume they are reaches for nearly everyone (including you).</p>

<p>If you’re looking for colleges that are a bit less selective than Stanford and MIT, but still have excellent need-based aid and good CS programs, check out Cornell, Rice, Northwestern, and Johns Hopkins. At another notch or two down in selectivity, consider the University of Rochester or Case Western.</p>

<p>However, in my opinion you may be a little too focused on matching your own stats to college admission stats. Instead, think about what you’re really looking for in a college (other than lots of classmates with test scores as high as yours). The most selective private schools do tend to have the best need-based aid (which for many lower or middle income students means the lowest net cost). On the other hand, you could find good CS programs at many in-state public schools, or at many less selective colleges (public and private) that offer generous merit scholarships to applicants with very high stats.</p>

<p><a href=“Loading...”>http://www.thecollegiateblog.org/2012/12/09/national-universities-that-offer-full-ride-scholarship/&lt;/a&gt;
(ranked by selectivity)</p>

<p>You simply can’t view Berkeley EECS as a match. You can’t look at your stats compared to the overall population and assume you are a match for impacted departments. I would call UCSD a match, but no sure thing. I would err on the side of caution and apply widely within the UC system because many of the match colleges, UCI, UCD, UCSB, UCSC are quite good in CS. There are people with stats like yours who get shut out. I’m thinking of one kid going unhappily to CSUF this fall in engineering. Yes match is hard for high stats kids, espec for CS as demand is so high. I do know high stats kids not invited to interview for the big scholarships at USC, but they did get need met and that was do - able for them according to the NPC.</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses. It’s easy to get overconfident when comparing myself to others from my school admitted to those colleges, but I suppose that they didn’t necessarily apply for impacted majors–and even the ones that did are just individual data points. </p>

<p>I’d suggest adding Washington U (St. Louis) and/or Vanderbilt to your list as “matches.” They are both known for liking high test scores, and have acceptance rates of close to 100% for students with perfect scores. </p>

<p>To me, “match” means you have a 40-60% chance of being admitted.</p>

<p>Your stats are very strong, but none of the very elite schools are matches for anyone: nobody has a 40%+ chance of getting in, so they are reaches.</p>

<p>If you want matches (high, medium, low), look at some good state schools OOS and some good private schools:</p>

<p>UIUC
UW-Madison
U Mich
UT Austin
UCLA
UC Berkeley
UVA
UNC
Case Western
Wake Forest
Boston U
Macalester
Holy Cross
Northeastern
U Washington
U Richmond
Occidental
Earlham
St. Olaf </p>

<p>Those are some examples of matches (again, high/medium/low matches). All of them offer high-quality education.</p>

<p>This student is truly exceptional. I don’t know why colleges that have posted near-100% acceptance rates for applicants with his stats are not “matches.”</p>

<p>@woogzmama, can you post the link to the data showing the near 100% acceptance rates for those scores? Just to clarify in my mind. Thanks</p>

<p>Erin’s Dad - I speak too freely, and quoted other sources. I will hunt around. I’m pretty sure others posted stats. I am willing to withdraw the specific statement if I can’t, with the provision that a student with these stats can consider colleges “safeties” that would be out of reach for the overwhelming majority of applicants. This is a very strong, accomplished student with test scores. He doesn’t need to worry too much about colleges with >50% acceptance rates. I would certainly say that Tulane, for instance, is very safe. My son got in with a 3.3-3.4unweighted GPA, no special hooks (albeit strong ECs), and test scores of 2060/31. How would a college that accepted him conceivably turn down this OP? I know that strange things happen every day, but that’s simply unlikely. The best I’ve been able to do so far was to compare the median ranges of SAT scores at WUSTL/Vanderbilt with Harvard/Yale. Although acceptance rates at the first two are dauntingly low, they are still double those of the latter pair. The 25th percentile for SAT scores at the first two was actually slightly higher, while the 75th percentile was lower. That would suggest that they reject more lower-scoring students in favor of high-scoring ones. The OP’s test scores are in the 99th percentile at Vanderbilt and WUSTL. I said that those two colleges would be “matches.” Absolute, metaphysical certainties? Of course not. I’d say that UC Santa Cruz is probably that for the OP, but his odds of admission at Vanderbilt and WUSTL are very good.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Au contraire. As woogzama says, certain students have far higher chances at certain ‘elite’ schools than the average applicant based on their GPA and test scores. Indeed, those chances can rise up to 40-60%.</p>

<p>I’ll give an example from law school admissions, where applicant stats are more accessible than in college admissions: Based on the Law School Probability Calculator’s data, a college graduate with a GPA of 4.0 and an LSAT score of 180 has an 80% chance of admission to Yale and a 71% chance of admission to Stanford, which would make these universities low matches for her their collective status as the most selective law schools in America. You’ll draw similar conclusions if you input these numbers into any other law school admission predictor on the internet. (I use Yale and Stanford as examples because they are the only two law schools known for seriously considering ‘soft factors’ in admissions, which makes the comparison to institutions that practice holistic admissions at the undergraduate level more appropriate.)</p>

<p>While Princeton’s overall acceptance rate for the class of 2017 was 7.4%, its acceptance rate for all applicants with SAT scores above 2300 was 16.5%. Furthermore, given that the data released by Princeton points to a rise in acceptance rates directly proportional to an increase in SAT scores, one can reasonably assume the acceptance rate for applicants with perfect SAT scores was palpably higher than 16.5%. (2400 sits at the upper end of the 2300-2400 score range and the direct proportionality established across score ranges implies that a 2400 would fare better in admissions than a 2300, and the number of applicants with 2400s was most likely lower than the number of applicants anywhere else in that range, making it unlikely that 16.5% was [the likelihood of admission with a 2300] + [the likelihood of admission with a 2400] / 2.) Even if you assume that Princeton’s adcom treats all scores over 2300 equally, though–and regardless of the platitudes such universities peddle to gullible high-schoolers to raise their application numbers, I don’t think that is true–applying with a 2400 is still a pretty sweet deal, relatively speaking.</p>

<p><a href=“https://www.princeton.edu/admission/applyingforadmission/admission_statistics/”>https://www.princeton.edu/admission/applyingforadmission/admission_statistics/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>What I’m trying to say is that while highly selective universities are very high reaches for the average applicant, they are statistically more likely to admit applicants like the OP than to admit the average applicant, and we shouldn’t hesitate to say so. I would not be surprised if universities like Johns Hopkins and Northwestern did indeed accept perfect-stat applicants at rates as high as 40 or even 50 per cent.</p>

<p>Which is not the say the OP should not add bona fide safeties to his/her list, as well as less selective universities–merely that people on these boards sometimes underestimate the chances of admission for perfect-stat applicants at very selective schools.</p>

Thought I’d update on how my story ended - I got into Berkeley for EECS with Regents’; Princeton; Carnegie-Mellon; and USC with the Trustees’ scholarship. Rejected from Stanford, MIT, and Harvard. Currently leaning toward Berkeley but I’ll be making some more school visits before I can decide.