Your kid takes the top scholarship instead of the top school. What's next?

<p>As an added note, don't assume that your student will be at the top of the class just because he caught the big one. There are a lot of extremely hard working, just as deserving students at these schools that will give your student a run for his, literally, money. My son entered as a top student, but I don't think he would be ranked there now.</p>

<p>jmmom, it really is a matter of opinion. Many would see a vast difference between Harvard and Tulane.</p>

<p>
[quote]
. But I would stop short of saying that I would find the same percentage of stimulating (I'll leave out the word "wonderful" because there are many ways to be wonderful) students at Idaho State as I would at Swarthmore.

[/quote]
But it isn't the percentage that counts. In the end, the kid will will probably have about 5 good friends at any given time that he or she spends a lot of time with, a somewhat wider circle of casual acquaintances. So the real question is, where are the other like-minded kids and will the kid be able to find them?</p>

<p>We're doing great folks. Let's just keep it going with the respectful postings.</p>

<p>I'm jumping in to respond to the post about comparing schools not so high up the food chain. Coming from extremely humble circumstances, the kind of debt ya'll are talking about taking on seems unfathomable to me..... but because I found this web site, we are actually considering it.
Accepted with full tuition scholarship at regional master's level university - felt good during visit, but not academically amazing VS the chance at a top 10 LAC that feels like a true "fit" but will cost 30- 40k in debt. And this for a kid aiming for humanities-type field (think low income producing).
It's a situation I have no paradigm for considering.</p>

<p>Also - in response to the talk about how kids feel about being wooed - my S sometimes has the "If they want me for a member, how good can the club be?" problem, to the honestly good feeling of being valued for the incredibly hard work he has put in through HS.</p>

<p>I don't know the answers, but I'm loving the discussion.</p>

<p>This is an edited PM that I sent dstark on the pros and cons of accepting the scholarship over the top school.</p>

<p>"Pros- Being wanted is a wonderful thing. He has been given a confidence and independence in being able to pay his own way. It has given him financial freedom not to be working when he would rather be studying (or socializing). Although most of his friends do not know about his scholarship, it gives him inner strength. We will be able to send him to Europe this summer just for fun and to study abroad next year also.(Which we would not have been able to otherwise). He gets to be a top scholar instead of being in the middle. He is not stressed. He can take upper level classes and only be a little worried about doing well as a Freshman and Sophomore. He can almost take any class he wants. He has all small classes, in which he gets as much discussion time as the rest of the class can stand. He is getting to know a wide variety of people - all classes and a spectrum of abilities. Did I mention no student loans? Challenged? As much as he wants to be.</p>

<p>Cons - The first year was too easy, but this could have been avoided by less cautious class choices (he just did not know professors and classes yet). But this also gave him a chance to settle in socially. Lack of name brand recognition. As a parent, I am getting very, very tired of explaining why my bright son is attending college in the middle of Arkansas (Hendrix College)</p>

<p>Now, let me tell you the make or break issue - your student's attitude. My son was very happy with his choice and was determined to make it work. There was a little grumbling last semester and a little talk of transferring, but I think that is normal. If your student goes into it thinking he has compromised too much, I wouldn't let him/her do it. They have to have a lot of confidence in their choice to overcome the fact that their peers might have more bragging rights. They have to have confidence in the school they have chosen. They have to be realistic and informed about the school they have chosen. They need to be proactive in getting the most out of the school and not one to sit back and wait for things to fall into their laps. They need to understand that they can have a great experience at any school or a poor experience at any school and that they have the power to make each happen.</p>

<p>As far as regrets, students who have bonded with their school leave that list of choices behind pretty quickly. If you feel that you are a Hendrix student or a Rhodes student, it is hard to contemplate being anywhere else."</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I agree. A critical mass of kids to push the envelope with, to push, and to be pushed by. That's what D wanted. At her school she has found it. Does she consider herself at the top? Well, yes. But she'd have considered herself that at Yale, too. ;)</p>

<p>Her statement after coming back from her scholarship weekend and BEFORE knowing anything about a Bellingrath (although they had already given her $21K/yr) , was that she felt that the 19-20-21 kids assembled (I forget) were the most accomplished group of students she had ever been around. About half came to Rhodes. Almost all were uber-elite (or elite) admittees who chose Rhodes. They were making pacts with each other while they were there and exchanged e-mails so that they could keep track. :) </p>

<p>D immediately jettisoned every LAC except Colgate and Amherst, and every uni except Yale and UMiami where she was awarded a Singer, Miami's highest award.</p>

<p>I will say that she does not believe the bottom 1/3 , however that would be calculated, of Rhodes students are academically as stout as those at her top schools. She said this : "20% are as smart as the smartest kids anywhere. 60% are the kids who made A's or mostly A's in high school and gave a crap about their education. And the other 20% aren't stupid." There is a difference, but what difference does that difference make? I guess it depends on the kid, how they learn, assimilate, socialize. I agree with calmom that campus culture is very important and I don't believe a serious intellectual who desired nothing but a book and a lightbulb would feel that Rhodes was a very good choice. Now a serious intellectual with a bent toward community service or International Affairs discussions? Probably do fine. </p>

<p>Rhodes , like calmom discusses about Barnard and others say about Penn , has a pretty fair share of career motivated folks. Some of which are very motivated. I'm sure not to the Hopkins level that jmmom talks about but D says the pre-meds are gunners. That may be everywhere. </p>

<p>Rhodes is a difficult school and kids are being challenged and tested. Including mine.</p>

<p>My issue isn't whether my kids will find like minded friends, I think they can do that most anywhere, it's about what goes on in the classroom. Who the profs are teaching to.</p>

<p>Many bright kids will be happy and do well anywhere. I don't think anyone should sweat it if money must guide a college decision. IMHO, if you can afford the best as you define it, it's worth every cent.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Ah, but then there are the kids who are high scorers on the SAT without any study at all....no "drive or determination" to improve their scores...just kids with naturally high aptitude.</p>

<p>Perhaps they are less ambitious, but they also may be more naturally intelligent, at least some of them.

[/quote]
Yes, those are probably the students my daughter is talking about when she says things like, "I can't believe how stupid these kids are..." My daughter is speaking mostly about behavior, not measurable IQ -- but she happens to perceive the kids who behave stupidly to be intellectually lacking, even if they may very well be high aptitude students. </p>

<p>Example of behavior my d describes as "stupid": females who go to frat parties every weekend and get incredibly drunk and then have sex with males they hardly know. My d's question: "why would anyone be stupid enough to put herself at such great risk?"</p>

<p>Or the kid who pees all over the dorm room floor because she is so drunk that she thought she was in the bathroom. </p>

<p>Or males who get drunk and then have sex with females who are obviously so inebriated as to be incapable of consenting. (And thus put themselves at risk of being subsequently accused of rape... not to mention the high STD risk entailed in all of this)</p>

<p>What was the SAT score? Who knows? Does it matter? </p>

<p>My d. thinks that the smartest students overall are the Columbia School of General Studies students. Average age of a GS student= 29. Average SAT score? The figures are not released, and GS students have the option of taking a Columbia administered exam rather than submitting SAT scores, so I think it is safe to assume that the typical scores at GS would be lower than the average of entering students at Barnard or Columbia college. (I guess the staff of US News would assume at least one standard deviation lower).</p>

<p>Now, obviously my d. is conflating emotional maturity with intellectual potential.... but I'd tend to do the same thing. My son's first experience at college was more in the 'naturally high aptitude' and 'let's see how drunk I can get before I pass out' mode, which is why his second college is not nearly as selective, but with an average student age of 23 arguably has "smarter" students... now that the novelty of substance abuse has worn off for many of them. </p>

<p>I certainly don't mean to say that a majority of the students at my d's college fit that mold -- on the contrary, it is a very small but very visible minority. But the point is that the "naturally" high aptitude student often comes with poor judgment and poor study skills, whereas the kid who got the idea years before that their ability was a result of the effort they put in ends up doing better.</p>

<p>orjr, in my opinion, you have to really look at your situation and not somebody else's. Kirmum and JHS can afford the schools.</p>

<p>From your posts, it looks like your kid is down to two schools? Correct?</p>

<p>preironic, even with the edit, I still like your post. :) It looks similar to Curmudgeon's posts.</p>

<p>But think, from among that "other 20%" may come your student's best friends or contacts - they may be among the most interesting students and were accepted for interesting reasons. We all have among our most fascinating friends those that were in that "other 20%". I believe that we both seek and need a balance in those that surround us.</p>

<p>What is the "vast difference", kirmum. That is the question.</p>

<p>What is the vast difference between teaching to an average 1480 SAT and an average 1320 SAT? When the kids in both groups have been the top achievers in their (academically good ) high schools? Have taken all Honors/AP classes? </p>

<p>What is the difference?</p>

<p>Actually, not yet. He has four admissions, one full tuition scholarship with other amenities, two significant scholarships, and one competitive weekend coming up. He also has three schools he hasn't heard from yet, however only one of them is still on his "favorite" list. So what he has in hand - at this time - may be different than the ultimate outcome, but he is giving alot of thought to the big $$ at the not-so-prestigious school, and I admit, I started having thoughts of replacing our '97 car w/150k miles on it!</p>

<p>"and I admit, I started having thoughts of replacing our '97 car w/150k miles on it!"</p>

<p>lol</p>

<p>I hope he finds a school that is affordable and challenging.</p>

<p>


That could be an issue at a small, less selective college -- but it won't be a problem at a larger university, because of the range of courses offered. My son has found that to be a big issue at his CSU for the lower division courses that are required for his major (which, as a transfer, he has to make up) -- but not at all a problem in his upper division classes. When I was an undergrad at a big university, I discovered very quickly that it was possible to enroll in upper level classes in the humanities and social sciences, and bypass the lower level courses -- which is precisely what I did. Lower level science classes did not have the same issues; on the contrary, at the bigger universities they tend to be the weed out classes where the academic bar is set quite high.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Who the profs are teaching to

[/quote]
</p>

<p>well, I downloads a podcast of the esteemed Harold Bloom lecturing to a real yale class on Poems of Our Climate by Wallace Stevens and he seemed to be talking to himself. The 'children' as he called them were fairly blank slate. He was begging for input. Might be because this master of delightful digression so loved his own amusing voice that they sensed it was wiser to play dumb. Might be that his take on the poem(that day) was bonkers(because he was trying to scare down the class size) or it might be that everything but science and math is hooey,..nevertheless, could be that all liberal arts professors stare into the faces of the younger generation with horror, though they might confess this only after the second glass.</p>

<p>I truly appreciate the respectfull tone, and insight being shared here. I am a mom of an only child. Bright, did extremely well on her standardized test/SAT/APs,# 1 rank, involved with her passion....attends a large public hs in urban area. She is a big fish in a big pond...so with that in mind..IF one were to forget the money involved.why wouldn't it be better to be attending HYP vs top LAC or even top UC, so that she could finally be in a place where she could be in a classroom of bright/creative students-instead of just 3 or 4 students. It would be a forum for interchange of ideas and creativity.
What are your thoughts from this vantage point?</p>

<p>APOL - I think this was exactly something that curmudgeon's D was looking for, and that she was coming from an experience where she did not have academic "peers" at her hs.. She felt that she found it in a number of the schools she visited, not just HYP - not at all.</p>

<p>Do I read your question correctly, that you fear she would not find a "classroom of bright/creative students" in a top LAC or top UC, but only at HYP?</p>

<p>I think a big part of the decission is to spend as much time at your top choices and sit in on as many classes as you can. The mistake I think I made for my son who now has rejects (he's at UCSD) was taking him on part of my DDs (she's at Columbia) college tour. You don't know what you don't know until you see it</p>

<p>jmmom, I may be wrong and am only speaking from my own perceptions.</p>

<p>Well, of course, any of us may be wrong, kirmum. But I am interested in waht you see as the differences between teaching to those two populations.</p>