<p>
</p>
<p>Of course! That’s why <em>I</em> wouldn’t send <em>my</em> children to our state flagship, because we would find the size, atmosphere, etc. a problem. However, I’m a big advocate of fit. I see a heck of a lot of parents who either don’t have that luxury, or just simply don’t think about it – state flagship is affordable, good, everyone who goes there does well, over and done.</p>
<p>“state flagship is affordable, good, everyone who goes there does well”</p>
<p>I agree with two of the three. I dont trust the “everyone” Without knowing too much about U Illionois (and those I know who DID go there did well enough) I am virtually certain among the thousands there were some who had very negative outcomes. Of whom some subset would have had a better outcome somewhere else. </p>
<p>Those who make that choice after due consideration, all power to them.
Those who make that choice without much consideration - well its not particurly mine to judge someone in a different situation.
I will, however, dispute what appear to me (perhaps incorrectly) as glib “they’re right” statements, which seem to disrespect the decision processes of many who make other choices, especially those of us who make those choices despite not being able to easily afford to.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Colleges do say they care about geographic diversity, but the data suggest that Princeton’s geographic diversity goals are exceedingly modest: they seem quite content to have at least 1 student from each state, so they can say, ideally, that the entering class includes students “from all 50 states”—or as close to that mark as they can get. (They also boast about the number of foreign nations represented, but that’s another matter). </p>
<p>For Idahoans applying in 2010, that ended up being 1 out of 52 who applied (or at least sent their SAT scores to Princeton, most of whom probably completed their applications). Now given that Princeton’s yield is just shy of 60%, that probably means they had to accept 2 or 3 to be reasonably confident of getting 1. And even then, sometimes they end up getting none (North Dakota = 0, Kansas = 0), sometimes 2 or 3 (Arkansas = 2, Vermont = 2, Hawaii = 2, Alaska = 2, Nevada = 3, Hawaii = 3, Maine = 3, Rhode Island = 3, Indiana = 3, Mississippi = 3). But often they get the minimum of 1 they’re looking for (Idaho = 1, Utah = 1, Wyoming = 1, South Dakota = 1, Nebraska = 1). And given the number of kids from these states who seem to be applying, based on the number who sent Princeton their SAT scores, there’s absolutely no evidence that an applicant from one of these states is more likely to be admitted to Princeton than a kid from New Jersey. Statistically, just the opposite is true: a much higher percentage of New Jerseyans than Idahoans ended up at Princeton (expressed as enrolled students/SAT score-senders from each state). In short, Princeton gets enough applications from everywhere that it can easily meet its very modest geographic diversity goals without admitting a higher percentage of applicants from “underrepresented” states—and, it’s reasonable to surmise, without watering down its admissions standards for the sake of geographic diversity.</p>
<p>its also possible princetons geographic diversity goals are more aggressive than 1 per state, and that they fail to achieve their goals because the quality of the applicants from those states constrained them. You told a quite reasonable story about why that would not be the case - I think its possible to tell alternative reasonable stories (which could involve relatively high achieving kids from Idaho applying to U Idaho,plus an HYP or two for a lark, while northeast corridor kids carefully examine their peers, and focus their efforts on more likely ivies, on near ivies, etc, except for those kids who really have a chance) </p>
<p>Which story you will pick, will depend on a range of a priori assumptions. The Admissions people presumably know the truth, but I dont think they are going to tell us.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you (generic you, not BBD specifically) don’t live in Idaho or Montana, then what difference does it make anyway whether Idaho or Montana kids are “unfairly” advantaged versus NY/NJ/CT kids? Might as well only focus on those things that you can control.</p>
<p>I also think it’s part of the Northeast storyline to imagine that the only people living in Idaho or Montana must be hicks-from-the-sticks, that no one there is well-to-do, or well traveled, or has done anything interesting besides maybe potato farming. The wealthiest girl I knew in college was from Buhl, Idaho where her family was in the potato processing business. Well, if you didn’t include the other pied-a-terres in Manhattan, Paris, etc …</p>
<p>My son will apply to “top” schools next year as well as other schools. Our school district has a contract with an SAT prep company and so the kids can access a very inexpensive, but brief, SAT prep course. DS took one that was four weeks, twice a week with a couple of mock exams. He scored 2370 and I have no idea how he would have otherwise performed. I think the course helped him to know how to read the questions and gave him some test-taking skills, but it did not deal in any depth with the content being assessed. I think that’s the main purpose of those classes, because the SAT is not as straightforward of an exam as the ACT and it’s helpful to get a feel for the way questions are asked. I suppose it can be done independently, but it’s more fun to do it with friends. </p>
<p>So for us, an inexpensive SAT prep class, we will buy updated versions of books like the Fiske Guide instead of traveling to schools, and mom cruising CC is the private college counselor. The real expense will be application fees. He’ll get in to a “top” school or he won’t. He’ll get in somewhere, because he will have safety/match/reach schools. His older brother got into a top LAC three years ago with this method. His older sister did the same thing, except that we did take a trip to visit east coast schools, which was also a trip to see friends and to travel, and she got into YPS. Honestly, I think the things that matter in this process are often the things that can’t be purchased – a passion that comes across, an intellectual curiosity, a “voice” that comes across in essays, etc. And just plain luck. You can’t buy that.</p>
<p>atomom - I am not in the NE but an urban center in the southwest - not an area of the country known for ultra competitive education overall, but I am in a wealthy suburb. One of the more expensive test prep providers in the area is a recent addition from the Boston area. The more expensive one-on-one folks are typically psychologists holding doctoral degrees who specialize in taking bright kids, analyzing their strengths and weaknesses and coaching them from scores that would be strong at the state U. to scores that make them competitive for the Ivies - highly individualized and from what I’ve seen, effective. Kids who’ve done other test prep, taken the test multiple times and not climbed out of the high 20’s or 600’s have gotten scores in the 30’s and 700+. I used to be sceptical about the ability to raise test scores like this, I’m not anymore. But just because it’s possible doesn’t make it necessary, it might be necessary for a given kid to have a better shot at a particular school or program, but most can do well enough without it, the extra effort and the ability to pay for that kind of support just isn’t worth it.</p>
<p>Those kids who get perfect or near perfect scores without breaking a sweat are the exception, not the rule. Reading about kids scores on CC is not a realistic cross section of the world - they frequently complain about scores that many kids would love to have.</p>
<p>Bookmarked.</p>
<p>“If you (generic you, not BBD specifically) don’t live in Idaho or Montana, then what difference does it make anyway whether Idaho or Montana kids are “unfairly” advantaged versus NY/NJ/CT kids? Might as well only focus on those things that you can control.”</p>
<p>I was not addressing fairness, I was merely speaking of the empirical facts of the case. that could be of use to someone estimating there own odds of admissions vs the published stats, or in the case of someone with a choice of jobs, say, it could even influence (at the margin) where they chose to live. </p>
<p>PG - NOT every discussion of the factors determining college admission is about fairness. </p>
<p>Secondly, while I do not choose to discuss “fairness” now, I do not think “dont worry about fairness, its outside of your control” is an appropriate response to all issues responding fairness. Your response to EVERY mention of fairness is getting rather predictable. I guess its a good thing for the egyptians who wanted Mubarak gone that they did not decide to focus only on what was in their personal control.</p>
<p>"I also think it’s part of the Northeast storyline to imagine that the only people living in Idaho or Montana must be hicks-from-the-sticks, that no one there is well-to-do, or well traveled, or has done anything interesting besides maybe potato farming. "</p>
<p>I dont know what the “northeast storyline is” We are as diverse a region as any. The metro area I live in has plenty of folks from all over the USA. Also, as it happens, the most powerful institution in town, congress, is run by lots of folks from all over, including quite often the wealthiest and most privileged folks from Idaho, Montana, etc. We are quite aware of them. Though many of us ignore pop culture, we are even aware of how parts of Idaho and Montana have become celebrity havens. </p>
<p>I try my best not to make generalizations about southerners, midwesterners, rocky mountain folks, etc.</p>
<p>I would appreciate it if some people would drop the generalizations about northeasterners and “northeast story lines” </p>
<p>I DO admit to liking the fiction of William Dean Howells, and of Henry James. If those qualify as “north east story lines” well count me as a fan.</p>
<p>Generalizations about different areas of the country are broad and often misleading. I think regardless of what state you live in, the greater difference is between urban and rural areas. I suspect there is much common ground in every wealthy upscale suburb from coast to coast.</p>
<p>BBD: I thought that in post #44, you were implying that there would be less high-quality talent in Idaho, thus hampering HYP’s ability to get sufficient representation. Upon re-reading it, I see that I may have misinterpreted, and that you weren’t saying that the % of “raw” high talent in Idaho was any lower, but that the percentage of high-talent Idaho kids who work up to applying to HYP might be lower that the percentage of high-talent NY/NJ/CT/etc kids who work up to applying to HYP. Am I correct?</p>
<p>our kiddo:</p>
<p>did no PSAT prep…we didnt even think it mattered…our bad…</p>
<p>did little SAT prep w a book and woke up</p>
<p>did some ACT prep and found it a better test</p>
<p>did prep for the AP tests, which helped w SAT2s</p>
<p>our 2 school visit trips were fun “vacations”</p>
<p>applied to 3 schools, getting into first choice and state u safety…3rd’s decision will come in weeks…</p>
<p>no tutors, no essay coaches etc etc…
and is
headed for Yale 2015.</p>
<p>We paid for AP books, and an SAT and ACT prep book.
Our student doesnt have the time for all of the extra tutoring/coaching etc…with the rigor of academics, ECs, earned national awards etc …doing what kiddo enjoys and pursuing genuine interests…</p>
<p>Got to wonder how kids can be teenagers and do all of that crazy stuff…
essay coaches? really ??? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>As our country’s cumulative economic pie continues to shrink these behaviors will continue to grow.</p>