<p>My son attended an academic reach school. He graduated, so I can say Mission Accomplished. I never doubted that he was on the same intellectual level with the best of them, but his commitment and academic focus tended to waver so we worried about his ability to keep his grades up. </p>
<p>In that context being around achievement oriented kids and demanding professors was a major plus. He was swept up in the flood of ideas, activities, accomplishments. In retrospect I think he “sacrificed” grade point average for a very rigorous and challenging milieu. Would he do it again? In a heartbeat. The intellectual stimulus, the friendships, the opportunities were -- and as he launches his adult life continue to be – stellar.</p>
<p>How did it go?
It went very well, better than we could ever have anticipated Harder than expected?
Yes. Easier than expected?
After the initial jolt the academic road became somewhat smoother Comforting?
In some ways because of the excellent academic and social safety nets and support systems. Stressful?
Often What made it worthwhile?
A profoundly great education. Connections to networks of alums. Lifelong friends – both peers and faculty. What made it regrettable?
I’ll come back and answer that in a year when the results of graduate school admissions are known.</p>
<p>There's a saying that the toughest thing about an ivy is getting in.</p>
<p>"Fit" is a whole other matter. A student may be capable of doing the work, but may, for example, not be comfortable around children of privilege, if they are from a working class background. Or imagine a minority student, at a school that has little diversity.</p>
<p>'Reach' has different facets, as has been alluded to already in this thread. There is</p>
<p>Admissions reach - two kinds here - pct admitted, and numbers (test scores in the low end, or less than the mid 50, lower GPA, lower rank); one can have matching numbers but still it will be a reach by virtue of the pct admitted (anything under, what, 20,25, 30 pct?);</p>
<p>Academic rigor - difficulty of the curriculum. Princeton Review attempts to quantify this with it PR academic rating; how fast is the current of the academic river, if you will. This, as all of the reach flavors noted here is relative: one student's academic reach is another student's easy swim.</p>
<p>and I will now also fold in </p>
<p>Economic Reach, as in, the student and/or the student's family is really stretched, stressed, and challenged now and in the future to come up with the money to make it happen.</p>
<p>for this facet of 'reach', one can certainly ask these questions...
harder/easier than expected?
stressful?
regretful?</p>
<p>I would be interested in hearing of the experiences of people who did the academic reach, and are now in mega debt.</p>
<p>The reachiest schools aren't always the most academically challenging. On paper, Columbia's stats are higher than Barnard's, but D's GPA at Columbia (40% of her classes) is higher than her GPA at Barnard. Many of the Barnard women feel their school is more rigorous, either in the material or in the grading policy.</p>
<p>So, if DD had applied to and been accepted at Columbia and I had worried about her success I would have been mistaken. Equally, if I had breathed a sigh of relief that Barnard wasn't as reachy, I would also have been mistaken.</p>
<p>According to the Boalt Scale devised by Berkeley Law School the two hardest schools to earn an A in are Swarthmore and Williams -- not nearly as selective as HYPS.</p>
<p>So academic "reach" and admissions "reach", not the same thing.</p>
<p>I think it depends on the goals of the students too.</p>
<p>My alma mater is a reach for anyone, and I had expected it to reject me, so:</p>
<p>How did it go?</p>
<p>Very difficult, but very rewarding.</p>
<p>Harder than expected?</p>
<p>Yeah. I knew it would be "hard", but some things you have to experience before you can really understand.</p>
<p>Easier than expected?</p>
<p>Nope.</p>
<p>Comforting?</p>
<p>Not really. It was a boost to my self-esteem when I got in. My fellow students were very comforting, as were the student support people.</p>
<p>Stressful?</p>
<p>Definitely.</p>
<p>What made it worthwhile?</p>
<p>Amazing opportunities, both in and out of the classroom. A great education. Great friends and great social development (since I was finally at a place where there were many people I could relate to). Feeling like I had a place where I really belonged. Learning to be more hands-on and not just live in my head. Learning that I was stronger than I thought I was and could withstand and bounce back from a lot. Losing some arrogant/insensitive edges that I didn't know I had. Doing things I never expected. Learning to be tough and resourceful and find a back door or a window when it seems like doors are slamming in my face - that there is nearly always a way, it just might be a little less straightforward, and take some effort to find. The feeling of graduating and reversing the curse for my family at this school. Being exposed to and getting into academic fields that I would never have considered had I not been in that sort of environment, one of which I work in now. Getting a name on my degree that opens doors with employers, and having the chance to take certain classes that, coming from this school, almost guaranteed my employability. Being forced to consider what I actually wanted in life instead of complacently going though the default path.</p>
<p>What made it regrettable?</p>
<p>Lots of personal and family angst/conflict/tears. Low GPA - certain goals (e.g. grad school) require more resourcefulness and effort to achieve than they would have (I'm not sure this is entirely a bad thing). A couple of complexes related to academics and family dynamics, perhaps.</p>
<p>I would say that for most people, going to their 'reach' school turns out to not be as intimidating or as difficult as people think. Remember: these schools would not have admitted you if they didn't think you could handle it. But, I have heard in some cases of students who clearly got in because they were an affluent legacy, and/or were a recruited athlete, who end up struggling, because the adcoms turned a blind eye to poor academic records in HS. As long as you don't have an unusually high-profile legacy status, or a recruitment to a sport, I am confident you will be fine.</p>
<p>I applied to 5 academic and admissions reaches (stats below median + "most selective" admissions rates), got into 4, and am now getting a 3.9 GPA on all-upper-level courses. Easier than expected, as I also get like 8 hours of sleep a night on average (9+ last quarter) with involvement in different shows and clubs.</p>
<p>For me, the key to getting 8+ hours of sleep is taking all afternoon classes. My earliest ones start at 2 and end 5 each day. I take a few hours' break (usually go to Downtown Chicago if I don't have any club meetings or events that I want to go to) before working on homework at 10 and going to bed at around 2. I also don't have class 2 days a week.</p>
<p>^^ Nice schedule if you can get it. A lot of kids can't, especially in lab heavy majors or majors without a lot of latitude in what you need to take and when.</p>
<p>I think it depends on your major too. If you major in engineering/hard science at a "reach" school you'll have a harder time than if you majored in something else.</p>
<p>sanjen- My kid took a similar approach. He had 2 days off a week, and classes didn't start until noon or so. He had evening classes twice a week, and then "studied" afterwards. God knows how late he stayed up!</p>
<p>why does no one say what school it is- instead of saying a top reach school in the top 20 but not ivy and not northwestern or emory but not in the northeast-</p>
<p>JUST SAY THE SCHOOL- ITS NOT PERSONAL AT ALL!! since everyone knows where everyone will attend school</p>
<p>At a grade deflated reach school, the kid who in high school got all As will find she/he will get As in college if he/she does all the homework and studies diligently. He/she will get Bs if they slack off at all, whether from too many ECs or too many late night parties. I do not know what it takes to get Cs.</p>
<p>Alumother, that rubric applies in some majors, but not really in the Engineering/tech/science majors in my observation. </p>
<p>For whatever reason, those fields live and die by "the curve." At a top school, they were all A students in high school. But by the curve, only a small percentage will get A's, plenty of non-slackers will get B's, and the C's will also go to working-their-tails-off students. I don't know about D's and F's. But there will be some. And they will be going to students who were A hs students. And who may well be working hard in college. At a grade-deflated reach school.</p>
<p>Wneckid99 - Frustrating, I can agree, to not see the school named. But some people want to do that little bit to protect their own or their student's privacy. One post won't identify an individual. But a body of posts might.</p>
<p>I don't know that our differing observations have as much to do with whether it's a softer vs. hard science or no science at all (humanities/social sciences). </p>
<p>Just that some of these fields Love The Curve. Don't ask me why. I do not get the notion that x% of students MUST get below average grades to make the curve work. But that is how some of these fields are. (If everyone has mastered the material beautifully, why don't they all deserve A's? If none of them have mastered it, why don't they all get C's, D's and F's? Not to mention what is wrong with the teaching in that case, but I digress.)</p>
<p>And to round out the picture, students who realize, early enough in the term, that they might be at the low end of the curve.... drop the course. Moving those who were average or just above... DOWN the curve. It's a ridiculous situation imo. (And possibly off-topic; because it could take place at reach or non-reach schools; but I think it's more shocking to the "reach-type" student. And that student is more likely to find himself/herself at the low end of the curve at the ready school).</p>