<p>I am a parent with first child going into 12th grade this fall and so we are looking at colleges. I am avidly reading everything on this site and trying to learn as much as possible. I understand the concept of the safety and the match but why should a student apply to a reach. Isn't a reach a college beyond their capabilities? Are they not more likely to fail at a reach? More likely to be surrounded by students not within their league? Is this not more stressful?
Thanks for any clarification.</p>
<p>No. A reach is a college that the applicant would not have a good chance of getting into but the chances are also not 0. </p>
<p>Failing at a reach is the norm and should be expected. It serves two purposes: 1. Maybe the applicant getting in and 2. Allowing the applicant to have no regrets in the future about not applying to some better/more selective schools.</p>
<p>Let the COLLEGES make the decision of who is or isn't "within their league". Don't try to analyze their decisions or your own capabilities. Just apply to the colleges you like and hope for the best.</p>
<p>PS: For your last question; I'd think it'd be MORE stressful NOT to apply to reaches. You will never know if you could've done better. Why limit yourself? Just pretend you'll be rejected anyways so only good things can happen come Spring.</p>
<p>I could be wrong but I think the OP meant it'd be more stressful when you're actually at the reach school... because you (might) be out of your league.<br>
This is also one of my worries but I'm still going to apply to reaches.. not unreasonable ones though obviously. If I get in then I'll worry about it.</p>
<p>Oh then that goes with the "let the colleges decide because they know what they're doing" part of my post. </p>
<p>Just worrying about your studies is a sign of your ability to do well by putting in the effort and managing your time wisely. </p>
<p>Even at the hardest colleges you don't have to be a supergenius. Intelligence is required up to a certain point and then the rest of your success depends mostly on effort/attitude/time.</p>
<p>^ wow when my dad tells me that i dont belive him.... but coming from you, a complete stranger... my world feels happier!</p>
<p>Yes Sapphire07 that it what I meant and thanks Acceptedalready for the explanation.</p>
<p>The deal is that the hardest colleges to get into aren't necessarily the hardest colleges to graduate from. Some of the hardest colleges to get into seem to assume that by just getting admitted you've proven your academic quality, so they don't try to bust chops and weed out the weak. Going to grad school is sort of the same thing...there isn't much "busy work" and there is an attitude that getting a "B" is a disaster.</p>
<p>Basically so you never have to ask yourself, 'What if?'</p>
<p>I didn't get into my reach schools (i only wanted to go to 1 of the 2 anyway), and I moved on going heh it wasn't meant to be. Now I never have to ask myself what would have happened if i had chosen to apply.</p>
<p>Granted it won't mean much in 10 years, but it's a good thing to know.</p>
<p>I agree 200% with TourGuide446. Many of the top schools that many people consider reaches, notably HYPS, are actually not that hard to graduate from. The trick is, you have to get in. But once you're in, they basically do everything within their power to make sure you graduate. The truth is, at those schools, practically nobody ever actually flunks out. Some people, like Bill Gates or actor Matt Damon, will drop out, but as long as you put in a bare minimum of effort, it's almost impossible to actually flunk out. </p>
<p>To prove this, I would point to our political leaders. Both George Bush and John Kerry went to Yale, and both have freely admitted to having been extremely lazy and unmotivated college students. Bush has freely admitted that he was an extremely lazy and irresponsible young man. Kerry has admitted that he was more interested in learning how to fly planes and other extracurricular activities than in studying. Al Gore too was noted for his lack of motivation while he was a student at Harvard, particularly during his first two years there. Yet they all graduated. </p>
<p>Contrast that with certain other schools that are easier to get into but that are also far less nurturing towards their undergraduates, and in which you can work extremely hard and STILL flunk out. It is therefore entirely possible that by going to a lesser school, you may actually end up with LOWER grades than if you went to a better school. In fact, so much so, that they may not have graduated at all. The truth is, if those politicians mentioned above had gone to lesser schools, they might never have graduated at all. By going to elite schools, they knew they were basically guaranteed a degree.</p>
<p>"By going to elite schools, they knew they were basically guaranteed a degree"</p>
<p>Now I know why they're so smart!</p>
<p>A "reach" school doesn't necessarily mean you're an F student applying to Harvard... It can also mean that perhaps your SAT scores fall within the bottom 50% of accepted students, your GPA is slightly below the average of accepted students, or something of that sort.</p>
<p>Top colleges are essentially a reach for everyone who applies. It almost becomes a luck-of-the-draw, since there are so many qualified students for so few spots. It comes down to what you have that schools are looking for-- it's impossible to know if you have that special "something" until you apply.</p>
<p>As was said before, a "reach" school doesn't imply that getting in is impossible. It just implies that competition at that school is elevated for that student. I'm attending a school next year that my guidance counselor thought was a complete reach for me. The same goes for a few other people I know as well.</p>
<p>The key is not to apply to too many reaches (or at least have enough matches or safeties so that there are plenty of options come April 1).</p>
<p>If your SAT's are at or above median at a school, you should be able to handle the workload there. Unless, of course, you have major laziness or procrastination issues...</p>
<p>I applied to 10 reaches and got into 5 of them. There is most certaintly a chance of your child of getting into a reach school so long as it is not a crazy reach, like applying to Princeton with an 1800 if you dont have any hooks.</p>
<p>filler you can't be coached for all the tests you take in life. Sorry, but your statement is flawed.</p>
<p>well the dean of admissions to harvard stated that around 70% of the applicants could handle the workload at harvard...i figure that 70% of the applicants had SATs around the median score.</p>
<p>I dont' get the point of applying to a reach school. I didn't and honestly look at it as a waste of time, money, and effort. Especially if you don't want to go there.</p>
<p>Apply to schools you really want to go to. Schools that you know fit who you are. Schools that you know you can thrive in. Not everyone needs the IVY or 'So Called Prestigious' schools to succeed.</p>
<p>what about the people who fall in love with a school that has a higher SAT avg than what they have? they should apply as a reach, with the realization that it is very possible they will not get in. believe it or not, many people couldnt care less about the usnews ranking, and just look at schools they think they will be happy at.</p>
<p>Just FYI OP, i'm not applying to a reach school. I'm applying ED to the school I like the most and want to attend, with a safe-match and a safety just in case. Not everyone applies to reaches. I certainly could, but I dont see a point right now.</p>
<p>"I dont' get the point of applying to a reach school. I didn't and honestly look at it as a waste of time, money, and effort. Especially if you don't want to go there."</p>
<p>Applying to ANY school is a waste of time, money, and effort if you don't want to go there. That point seems to be even more relevant with students applying to safety schools that they don't really like, because they doubt they'll actually have to go there. Many of them are in for a reality check come April 1.</p>
<p>I agree that many people get too caught up in prestige and end up losing sight of what they really want. I was probably guilty of it myself to a certain degree. </p>
<p>With that said, there are a lot of great schools out there that become more competitive with each passing year. They have a lot of things to offer that are desirible to students: top professors, great grad school and job placement, etc. </p>
<p>The title of "reach school" doesn't exclusively encompass the "top" schools, either. All universities can be a reach for some students.</p>
<p>There's nothing wrong with wanting to push yourself and take a few chances. You only get one chance to go to college; it's worth it to exhaust all of your options.</p>
<p>It's true that if you visit the school, and really don't feel like you'd be comfortable there and would be over-stressed-out, then perhaps it's better not to apply at all.</p>
<p>But the idea of a "reach" school is that it's a school that you might be challenged at, but you'd LOVE to be there - and unfortunately, is a little more competitive than your abilities suggest. Like someone else said, it doesn't mean you're an F student applying to Harvard. Instead, it's a school that may be out of your SAT and GPA range, but you still feel like would be a great fit for you.</p>
<p>Like someone else as well said - if the college winds up accepting you, then that means they think you're capable of handling their workload, and want YOU there. So it's worth trying! Plus, the prestige factor doesn't hurt, all other things equal between two colleges.</p>