<p>And I think that the main reason why those people with 2400s didn’t get in is because they didn’t send their application in early enough. They’re were probably feeling too confident and sent it in later. Therefore, the college didn’t have enough room and had to reject.</p>
<p>“And I think that the main reason why those people with 2400s didn’t get in is because they didn’t send their application in early enough.”</p>
<p>The real problem is that these schools don’t have enough room for all of the 2400s that apply.</p>
<p>Isn’t that what I said? The colleges didn’t have enough room, so they had to reject the person. “Therefore, the college didn’t have enough room and had to reject.”</p>
<p>If the person sent the application in earlier (maybe even ED) he’d probably get in.</p>
<p>If they all sent their apps early they still couldn’t all get in.</p>
<p>Are you a seer? You couldn’t possibly know for sure</p>
<p>“And I think that the main reason why those people with 2400s didn’t get in is because they didn’t send their application in early enough. They’re were probably feeling too confident and sent it in later. Therefore, the college didn’t have enough room and had to reject.”</p>
<p>That’s called rolling admissions. Ivies don’t do rolling admissions. The time sent for your application doesn’t impact the decision.</p>
<p>^^^ Funny because he could ask you the exact same thing. Your assertions are conjectures and conjectures only.</p>
<p>I said “probably” and “possiblity”</p>
<p>I didn’t say, “They STILL COULDN’T GET IN”</p>
<p>I said their chances would be higher</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I really wish that’s true. In addition to what vossron said, I’m almost positive that all of them sent in their application by the deadline, and most colleges explicitly said that there is no preference given to those who submit apps early as long as it is submitted by the requested deadline :(.</p>
<p>/debate</p>
<p>OP, thanks for the chivalrous defense.</p>
<p>calico, you asked whether apply to more than one reach increases your chances of getting into one of them. Not sure, as each admission committee considers each app separately. Certainly, if you don’t apply you can’t get in, but it’s not like doubling your apps doubles your chances, kwim?</p>
<p>You are so right that your idea of the ideal school could change. IMO, that’s why it’s good to have in hand acceptances to a range of colleges – large, small, near, far. You might start looking at colleges the summer after your freshman year in HS; there’s no guarantee that almost three years later you’d still be interested in that kind of school.</p>
<p>Ds got into some great colleges, but the aid packages varied wildly. One pretty selective school was the only one to offer him no merit aid; thankfully, I’d read on cc that it was stingy with the merit aid so I wasn’t too surprised. Also, some schools award merit aid based on the application cohort. One school gave ds $20K/year in merit aid whereas kids with his stats the previous year had gotten $25k/year. That $5K a year was a deal-breaker when he had so many other attractive offers. </p>
<p>You’re asking good questions. Keep reading and you’ll learn a lot.</p>
<p>^ xrCalico will be matriculating to Harvard next fall :)</p>
<p>
Not too good at calculating probabilities, but here’s a stab: If you determined that you had about 30% chance of getting into Great U #1 (that is, 30% of people pretty much like you got accepted - not the admit percentage), and you had about the same chance at Great U #2 and Great U #3, then applying to all 3 would give you about a 65% chance of getting accepted to at least one (I think). Of course, that assumes that the admissions personnel put all the apps for the people like you in a pile and pick at random.</p>
<p>One friend’s DD applied to 8 schools, got 7 rejections, was accepted at Tufts, which they considered her “safety”. It really has become a crap shoot at the top levels.</p>
<p>My DD applied to ten schools which she would be happy to attend. Once all the ‘offers’ were in, we saw which was the best value and decided.</p>
<p>I think you should apply to as many schools as you can handle- I think 10-12 would be the maximum, thinking of our sweet guidance counselor (lots of paper to push!). I hope the OP understands this is a very individual thing, you have to see what feels right for you.</p>
<p>Yknow what, off the top of my head, I can’t really think of any. I had a list awhile back but I can’t remember it now. I guess a year at Rice has colored my outlook, because I can’t think of anything that could possibly compare. </p>
<p>Case Western comes to mind, as do Harvey Mudd, WashU, and UChicago, but the acceptance rates at those last three are pretty damn low (I think Chicago dropped below 20% this year?).</p>
<p>“If you … had about 30% chance of getting into Great U #1 … and you had about the same chance at Great U #2 and Great U #3, then applying to all 3 would give you about a 65% chance of getting accepted to at least one (I think).”</p>
<p>Correct. The computation is actually the chance of being rejected by all of them, subtracted from 1. So 1 - (.7 * .7 * .7) = 65.7%. Similarly, if you apply to 10 schools where you have a 50% chance at each, your chance of getting into at least one of them is 1 - (.5^10) = 99.9%</p>
<p>Of course, the problem is knowing your chance of acceptance at any school!</p>
<p>how many feewaivers do a free lunch receiver receive?</p>
<p>My guess: as many as your HS college counselor is willing to submit.</p>
<p>Decrescendo,
Shoot for the moon and you will have a chance to get there. Go for it, man!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The moon is my current destination. 
Thanks man</p>
<p>And I have expanded my list to 10 schools for anyone who replied:
Yale, Stanford, Brown, Vanderbilt, Tulane, Rice, Hendrix, Rhodes, U Michigan, LSU.</p>
<p>Excellent! I see safeties and matches and reaches there. I hear great things about Rhodes, including that they give great aid.</p>