<p>Who here has a son or daughter who was accepted to and decided to attend the reach (or even far reach) school? </p>
<p>How did it go? Harder than expected? Easier than expected? Comforting? Stressful? What made it worthwhile? What made it regrettable? </p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>My daughter is attending a school that was barely a match for her. It was a match/reach. AND to top it off, she has chosen engineering as a very challenging major. The work is very hard. She spends hours studying, and her GPA isn't nearly as strong as it was in high school. She got her first C in her life, and she was crushed. But...the upside...she loves the school. She is happy with her major and knows it will take a lot of studying to do well in the courses. Because it is a smaller school, her access for tutorial services and to the professors is excellent. She has an advisor who actually knows her by name. Another up side is the has to really budget her time well...no time to fritter away if she wants to have time for her social life. </p>
<p>She's happy...working hard, and has no regrets. Neither do we...although we'll breathe a sigh of relief when she graduates.</p>
<p>This is an interesting question: was it a reach because of the admissions statistics, or was it a reach because of the academic rigor of the college vis a vis the student's ability? S1 just finished his first year at a school that was definitely somewhere between a reach and match for him as far as admission statistics were concerned (i.e. percentage of students accepted), but was absolutely a match for him academically. He did very well, felt comfortably challenged and most asssuredly academically prepared, and made the Dean's list both semesters. I guess for me this begs the discussion of whether academic rigor and those ever-challenging admissions stats have any relationship at all? What really IS a reach? Is Yale THAT much more academically rigorous than, say, Tufts? Does Princeton's percentage of accepted students reflect a vastly significantly smarter student body than, hmmm, Pomona's and how much of of this is relevant to success in college?</p>
<p>"I guess for me this begs the discussion of whether academic rigor and those ever-challenging admissions stats have any relationship at all?" and add that to the fact that kids are coming out of vastly different high schools......this has been my question thoughout this admissions process......</p>
<p>SJTH: I think you hit the nail on the head.......and yes, how much of this is relevant.???</p>
<p>S1 has now taken courses at a state flagship U, a top Ivy, and an Ivy peer school known for good academics. He has found the course work similar for each, with the peer school somewhat more demanding as far as extensions required. He felt, however, if one could do well at one school, one could do well at the others. So it appears if the state flagship is a match, and one does well, one could do well at the admissions reach. Admissions reach and academic reach should not be confused. I recall once reading a former Harvard president saying that he thought a student who received a 600 on the SAT verbal could do well at the school.</p>
<p>Yes, exactly, SJTH. </p>
<p>If my son is a match for Gettysburg and Dickinson, but gets into Hopkins and Duke, what does that really say about him? About the schools? </p>
<p>And do I, as the mother, have a responsibility to encourage him to attend JHU/Duke, just because he got in? If we've always told our kids "take the most challenging classes you can," does that mean we automatically have to tell them, "go to the hardest college that lets you in?" </p>
<p>What makes a reach a reach? is it just a smaller chance of acceptance based on historical %? The rigor of the coursework? Who compares rigor? Is it even done? </p>
<p>I'm rambling. And don't really expect direct answers to these hypothetical/rhetorical questions. I'm just trying to sort it through in my head.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Son#1 is at a reach school for him. He has been fine. His grades are about the same and/or better than he received in high school and he feels like he is very much able to handle the work load</p>
<p>DD is at her reach school,based on stats and academic rigor. It seems each is there for something they bring that is special and unique. For her the academics are harder and she has to work harder at them, but she loves it. In all her classes, even lecture classes, there is at least one person passionate about the subject area that enlivens the class. In her group of friends there are people who are tops at their subject area and who help the others out in study groups. She has worked hard for a C+ or a B- in her weaker subjects, more than she had to in HS. But she would not trade it for anything, and neither would we.</p>
<p>Our son's stats suggested that his reach schools were also matches. It was no surprise to us that Mathson is doing very well in his computer science courses (though of course you always wonder when you know many or most of his peers are just as talented), it was a bit surprising that he's been doing well in his required history and English courses as well. </p>
<p>It was a different era, but I didn't think Harvard was particularly difficult, though you could easily make it more or less difficult depending on which courses you chose to take.</p>
<p>I have Twin sons with identical GPA and ACT scores out of high school. They are freshmen in college this year and one is at a top 30 Private school that is very selective (not ivy though) and the other is OOS at a Third tier University, (honors program).</p>
<p>Both are studying computer/electrical engineering and in comparing notes they see little difference in rigor or class requirements. the Private school was reportedly tougher in the English class and son1 had to take a poetry class versus a PE requirement at the public school. Too early to call the academics a wash as professor difference can be significant, even in one school, in terms of rigor but it is an interesting viewpoint I have.</p>
<p>Agree that one needs to clarify whether a school is a reach due to academic ability of the kid or because of admissions percentages. S is at an Ivy, which I think has to be considered a reach for everyone, and was a match stat-wise. He is doing really well and was smart enough to bail on a couple of classes that were going to be impossible (e.g. the Chinese class where he was the only non-Asian and he texted me from the first class telling me it "wasn't going to happen"). He works hard, but doesn't seem to be excessively burdened and also works 20 hours a week.</p>
<p>"And do I, as the mother, have a responsibility to encourage him to attend JHU/Duke, just because he got in? If we've always told our kids "take the most challenging classes you can," does that mean we automatically have to tell them, "go to the hardest college that lets you in?" </p>
<p>No, you do not automatically have to tell them to go to the hardest college that lets you in......In our case, we had to leave it up to our daughter to decide where she wanted to be in the scheme of things....All of her schools were academic matches; this year they became admissions reaches....Accepted or waitlisted to all of them and ended up choosing a curriculum fit at a school that is certainly not the "hardest school she was accepted to"......</p>
<p>My D did not apply to any true "reach" schools. All the schools were matches and a few safeties. She's very bright, but her grades do not always reflect that. I felt she would do better in an environment where she felt she was academically on par with the majority of the student body. She was accepted at all the schools she applied to - and later said you know I should have applied to more reach schools. I said to her - if you got in - you would have bragging rights for three months and then if you decided to go, would then have to do the work and you don't like to work too hard. She said you know you're right. She's very excited about the school she choose and has set a goal of getting at least a 3.25 GPA freshman year so she can be in the honors college program. To me that seems far more realistic goal for her.</p>
<p>My 10th grade son - I'd rather see him at reach. He too is very bright but does not work at all - he is not easily intimidated academically - likes challenges and will rise to the occasion. In hs, he has just not felt challenged therefore he doesn't work too hard and his grades reflect that. I would rather see him at a school where he is truly challenged and perhaps GPA the majority of the students will have higher HS GPA's - but I think he may struggle a bit with time mgmt and study skills, but if he is interested in the subject he will do very well.</p>
<p>So I think it comes down to knowing who the student is and what type of environment they would feel most comfortable at.</p>
<p>I heard a sad story a few weeks ago, about a kid who had been accepted at Harvard, which was a reach for this student not only because it's a reach for everyone but also because the grades and scores were (slightly) low for it. (The student had other qualities that fully explained the Harvard acceptance.) Apparently, this student has spent most of the year miserable, feeling out of his/her league, put down by others (intentionally or not), barely passing . . . . The student is considering transferring to a second-tier LAC (which would have been where the student would have gone but for the Harvard acceptance). </p>
<p>This is unusual -- I hadn't heard a story like this before, ever, although I heard a similar story about a kid at Stanford at about the same time. But it just goes to show it CAN happen. The student, by the way, comes from a top-level private school and was a multiple-legacy at another college equivalent to Harvard. In other words, this isn't a story about inadequate preparation or culture shock. It's more about feeling lost among the supersharks.</p>
<p>^ ^ I would guess that the student's feelings of being out of his league stemmed from his own feelings of inadequacy. Students at Harvard really never compare grades or scores. They are, however, tough on themselves.</p>
<p>My S has also attended three schools, courtesy of Katrina, so gives me a bit of perspective.... but still no real answers, lol.</p>
<p>He attended a match (with merit $, so obviously he was at the top of the pool), a top-25 LAC (also likely a match) and is now at what I would call a reach (cc top U but not HYPSM), maybe only a slight reach. </p>
<p>He struggled only at the reach, neither of the others. Although only struggled in a couple of courses, it colored his experience beyond those two classes. His comment was that the kids at Reach school are no smarter than kids at Match schools, but that they are much more intense about the academics. He is in a tough curve/tough courseload field (Engineering) and he does not think the intensity is the same in other fields at his school. As twinmom says, the kids are not cutthroat against each other, but are tough on themselves. At his school, they do, however, talk about grades - less comparing and more worrying/obsessing.</p>
<p>I do think this may be more the particular school and its culture and less the Reach vs. Match aspect, but can't be sure.</p>
<p>drizzet, how interesting that you can compare two schools. It will be really interesting to hear what the differences are when your son's have finished their programs.</p>
<p>Interesting topic!</p>
<p>jsmom--just wondered what made the difference in your reasoning that your daughter would do better in a 'match' school & your son in a 'reach?'</p>
<p>My son's grades also don't reflect ability (failure to turn in homeworks, but As on most tests--> low Bs during 9th/10th grade). He's got all As now as a junior, but I wonder about college---whether he'd rise to the challenge of a reach or think he didn't have to work hard (as he's used to doing).</p>
<p>Another dad here told me that factor is key in college selection -- whether the student would rise to the occasion in a very rigorous, competitive school, or whether he/she would be better at a more manageable school where he/she could excel.</p>
<p>I don't really know how to assess my son to see in which environment he'd do best. He has high standardized test scores, but the SAT/ACT is only a few hours on a Saturday (son didn't even study for the test on which he scored best). College is 7 days a week; planning, working and staying committed.</p>
<p>My d. is doing fantastically well at a big reach college, better than I would ever have expected, but also works much harder than she ever did in high school. Her cumulative GPA is actually slightly higher than her high school GPA was. </p>
<p>I think the main thing is that she knew it would be hard work and we discussed this before she opted for the school -- I encouraged her to think through whether she really wanted the challenge as opposed to the more relaxed atmosphere at one of her state U. options. So yes she is working hard, but she knew that was what she wanted and so I don't think she is surprised. There was a little bit of an adjustment the first semester with the first round of midterms..... but since that time she knows what is expected and is willing to work to meet that standard, and she's been doing fine.</p>
<p>This is indeed a very interesting topic, however, I think that a lot depends on the major! Personally, it is my observation that if the major tends to be engineering, then it is difficult no matter if the school is a match or a reach. The rigor of the program in and of itself is just plain difficult!!</p>