iloveham

Hi, I am currently ranked #1 in my class out of 100-ish (private school). I have a 4.7 GPA on a 4.0 scale, and my have a 1430 on SAT with a 12 on the writing, as well as a 34 on the ACT. I would really like to go to Baylor, but that my going there is contingent on whether or not I can get a full ride there. I am not National Merit, so is there any chance in getting a full ride to Baylor based on my academics?

Edit: Also have 3 5's on AP tests taken Junior/Soph year, and am taking 5 AP classes Senior year

phear_me

aim higher than Baylor. With those numbers you should be looking at top 10 - 25.

berryberry61

I have been lurking on this site for a year or so now but just had to register given the reply above. I am sorry, I have seen a lot of elitist posts on CC but to tell someone to aim higher than Baylor is one of the bigger ones and IMO just plain wrong.

I happen to work for one of the best independent PK-12 schools in PA and as a result of my position, I have learned a lot about college admissions. Our school has a tremendous record of helping students getting admitted to their top choice colleges. But you would be surprised to know not everyone's top choice or college that is right for them is an ivy league or "top 10-25 school". There are a host of factors that make colleges right for each and every individual - and believe me, some ranking that has no basis behind it is not one of them.

To Iloveham - while I don't believe anyone can tell you whether you could get a full ride for Baylor - please do not let anyone discourage you for trying to be admitted and earning some excellent merit award there. If baylor is the school that fits you the best, go for it. Please do not be swayed by others narrow views that if a school is not on some top 10-25 list, it is not good for you.

Best wishes

susgeek

If you were my child, I would take you to visit the campus and sit down with an admissions officer with your stats and see what they thought you might be eligible for.

I hope you get all that you dream of *hugs*

iloveham

Thank you all for the replies.

To the first reply: first, I would love to attend a more "prestigious" school; however, money is a huge part of my college decision. I am a Christian and want to go to a Christian school, and my experience visiting and talking with Baylor has called me to apply there. As far as applying to a bigger and better college (in the sight of some) in not really in the cards because I need even a full ride to even attend Baylor, or its off to a public university for me.

phear_me

I suggested the OP aim higher than Baylor not because I am an elitist, but because the OP has scores that will likely allow for scholarships to universities that are flat out better than Baylor, which isn't a top 75 school leaving lots of schools ahead of it.

The OP has a 1430 on the SAT. Baylor has a 1200 SAT average. That's 230 points of SAT difference (a substantially significant statistical margin).

The OP has the numbers for schools like USC, UCLA, Cornell, Notre Dame, Michigan Ann Arbor, Carnegie Mellon, Brandeis, Johns Hopkins etc. with potential for scholarships at all of those schools and I am en elitist for insisting that the OP doesn't sell themselves short?

Furthermore, Baylor is hardy a Christian university these days. I have several friends who attended Baylor and it is just as secular as any other university, with two extremely liberalized religion classes. You would get just as much Christian community joining Campus Crusade for Christ at a top secular school, with a much more orthodox theology, than you will the neutered version of Christianity presented to the student body of Baylor, which is only Christian by loose Baptist affiliation at this point. If you are still incredulous, do some research into the debacle with William Dembski.

Creekland

You'll never know if you don't apply for it and see what they offer. What do you plan to major in?

It never hurts to check out other schools as well... If you've visited several of all sizes (Christian, secular, private, public), you'll know what fits you best. I'd never let top anything rankings decide where I went to school. There's not a lot of meat behind the rankings if one looks at what they are based on and not just the hype about them. However, the average SAT/ACT at a school does give a good indication of the average level of academic intelligence of the other students - hence - the ability profs can teach to. Being a top fish in a 'lesser' school can sometimes be more rewarding than being an average fish in a top school. The emphasis is on sometimes... and schools vary in quality considerably based on major. I'd never recommend a theater major go to the same school as an engineering major.

If finances are an issue, consider that many schools will also offer need based aid - not just loans. You will never know what your financial package will be until you try. In that aspect, try anything that appeals to you.

phear_me

"The ranking of the school you go to doesn't matter" is usually a phrase uttered by people who haven't achieved a high level of success in business or academia. Investment Banking, Private Equity, Consulting, Hedge Funds, Management Consulting, Venture Capital, and law firms only take students from top business/law schools. Additionally, in many divisions of academia you will never teach at a school with top resources/facilities unless you have the appropriate pedigree. The examples of off limits industries are only the beginning. For industries that recruit from all universities, who can honestly say that when looking at a 22 year old's resume with limited experience, that they aren't going to take the computer science major from MIT over the computer science major from University of Georgia?

Sacrificing some prestige for a Christian education grounded in truth to many is worth it, and for many more it is worth it to attend a state school or to receive greater scholarships, but it is foolish to pretend that the choice that these students are making isn't going to have an impact on their opportunities going forward, particularly early on. Certainly one will never be prohibited from achieving because of their academic pedigree, but the opportunities afforded to them as a result of that education will be, rightly or wrongly, dramatically different from those at top universities. And if you're going to go ahead and get the education, common sense says to get the maximal return on that investment. Now that includes quality of life, return on investment, sports opportunities etc. etc. so I'm not making an argument that is slanted and unrealistic. But I would argue that the primary value of a university in the modern world is the education provided to a student and the opportunities afforded through the attendance of a university that screens top talent (it's harder to get into Harvard than Arizona State and employers know that and they know what the differences are). Some schools do a better job of educating, both through resources, student/faculty ratios, and the high standards set by the quality of the student's peers and it is undeniable that some universities afford substantially better post graduation opportunities than others.

I'm not saying it's right, but those are the hard cold facts and any amount of comfort food or disdain for the rankings isn't going to give a recent graduate from Cal State Long Beach the same post graduation opportunities as an alumnus of Baylor, or an alumnus at Baylor the same post graduate opportunities as an alumnus of Princeton, at least in terms of opportunity afforded the graduate solely on the basis of their academic pedigree. There are lots of exceptions to every rule, including this one. We all know the smoker who smokes 2 packs a day for 70 years and never gets lung cancer. But for every exception like this, there are 100 people on oxygen tanks, with cancer, or already dead.

I'm not an elitist, but that doesn't mean I'm going to kid myself about the reality of academic prestige and others would do well not to kid themselves either. Parents don't brag about the fact that their child is attending Devry or a junior college, but let junior get into Stanford and see what their reaction is. There's a reason for that.

Creekland

In my experience (tending toward Engineering), employers (including us) look for a school that is good in that major - not just one that is good in name or rankings alone. We would purposely not choose an Ivy undergrad merely because of the chip we've seen on their shoulders... and we're not alone. The only ones that seem to prefer Ivy grads are those who are Ivy grads themselves (birds of a feather) or those who are 'wowed' by the pedigree with little experience in the real world.

That's not to say we would prefer Podunk U... We want to see someone that can do their job with a realistic view of themselves and the world. If Podunk U didn't have a good department in the chosen major, the student will not have a very good education.

IMO a student should try for the best education within their major (and sometimes lists help there) - that they can afford. Those who go head over heels into debt for any education get what they deserve - years of paying it off.

phear_me

I think there is some merit to this, but the same principle I am alluding to still applies - you're just breaking it down by department.

For example, as a graduate of MIT (not engineering) I can tell you that every top firm in the world throws themselves at MIT engineering graduates at both the graduate and undergraduate level. The curriculum, resources, and quality of students is world class and to this day stands head and shoulders above it's peers (Cal Tech and Stanford, primarily because of the workload/rigor).

Say what you will, but top programs get top students who get top placement for a reason.

Creekland

Of the two MIT Engineering grads I've met (one I knew better than the other), I haven't been impressed. Yes, the education level was there. The personality for dealing with Engineering and the public was not. One told me stories of the 'competition' for grades, etc, at MIT. The place seems to foster a highly competitive atmosphere even in the school - which is absolutely not suitable for working within a team and getting things done in the real world. I can see where it would be suitable for research organizations/departments, but that's about it.

Knowing two does not generalize across the whole population, of course, but I would never send a student there - unless, perhaps, their only goal was future research.

Even for my middle son - who plans to go into medical research (and has the grades to do it) - we're not going to remotely consider a competitive atmosphere school. Having talked with MANY actually working in the field, undergrad is of little importance (other than making sure the school has a good rep in the major as per above - no Podunk). To a person, they all told us to look for a school that encourages and helps students - giving them a good education, but without the need to be competitive to get it. Then, go to grad school based on the specific research that appeals to him. Many undergrad schools have good acceptance rates into grad schools. We will be checking those stats. Baylor is actually one they told us to put on the radar for him. John's Hopkins was one they told us to take off (for undergrad only).

For both of my older sons, most of the schools that are ending up being on our short list are those recommended by people working in the field in their chosen major from forums or from people we know.

Creekland

Since they won't allow me to edit my above post... I should perhaps better word my thoughts. All colleges attract students that are right for them. For some, a competitive highly academic choice is the best (Ivy or similar). Those students would feel right at home at such a school and will get a good education assuming they match appropriate schools with their major, etc. Competitive schools are even possibly the best when one wants to have a future in competitive types of research within different departments - or high level academia (but I suspect top graduate school counts for more than undergrad).

However, not all students are best in a competitive atmosphere even if they have the grades to get there. In the same vein, competitive atmospheres do not prepare people well for all types of jobs. (And, all jobs are 'real world' - pardon the unintended insult above - it was one thing I wanted to edit now that I'm at work, but can't. Our worlds differ, but all are real - and important.)

All students (and parents) should work to find the best match for them. A wrong match seldom turns out well.

Another main thought to consider is finances. Allow me to share info I've gleaned from folks working in majors my sons are considering (BTDT types)... esp the medical research one as that one has been easier to figure out...

A top student going to a 'lesser' (NOT low) ranked school for undergrad has great opportunities for getting a bit of merit aid - meaning less debt at graduation. Graduate schools look for diversity in their ranks. They look for top students from good schools as much - if not more - than they look for average students at top schools. For medical research, there are also often stipends involved. If one chooses wisely, they can graduate with little to no debt and have a great future. If one wants 'top name brand only,' they will get a similar education, BUT have years of paying it off since those schools offer little to no merit aid.

For those with less income, consider top schools as well as slightly under top as both offer need aid. One can be surprised at what is offered. For those of us who don't make the 'less income' cut, they need to choose whether the price paid for the name of an undergrad school is worth the cost. Most feel it is not - actually, ALL of those I've personally spoken to have said it is not. The few that disagree have been on forums.

And... as stated before... this in no way implies that one gets an equal education in every major at every school. Look for the average SAT/ACT scores at a school and then consider what the average will be in ones chosen major (music will differ from engineering but all contribute to the overall average). People may SAY testing doesn't tell the story, but I've yet to see a student that tests well and does poorly academically. Teachers can do more with brighter students. No one denies that and it's important to remember. My goal for my own students is to have them in the top quarter to top third where they go - BUT not so far top that they are out of their league. The worst place to be is in the bottom 25% - or even bottom 50% (IMO).

To each our own.

And as for Christian or not... again... that needs to reflect the desires of the student and their major. My oldest needs a Christian school. My middle son will be open to either. I graduated from a secular school and felt Christian groups were great... but am open to allowing either for my sons based on their desires and needs.

berryberry61

""The ranking of the school you go to doesn't matter" is usually a phrase uttered by people who haven't achieved a high level of success in business or academia."

"I suggested the OP aim higher than Baylor not because I am an elitist"

Not only are you incorrect, you also contradict yourself. Being someone who has achieved a very high level of success, and who never attended one of your precious very highly ranked colleges, I can tell you you are wrong.

First, you try to make the leap from undergrad to grad programs when you refer to "only take students from top business/law schools". The OP asked about Baylor as an Undergrad program.

Second, having a Harvard or Princeton on your resume lasts about 10 minutes max in the real world hiring and work environment. I say this from someone who has been involved in lots of interviewing and hiring in a number of very competitive professions.

Third, you are doing a disservice to students by focusing on one very arbitrary, slim factor (someone's idea of a ranking) rather than guiding them toward focusing on the college that is the best match for them. An excerpt from Mr. Pope's book speaks volumes on this. i quote:

" the criteria most college bound students and their parents and counselors use, such as name and prestige, do not acknowledge the importance of understanding an individual student’s needs and how they “fit” with the mission and identity of an individual college community.

The current record-high numbers of college-bound students coupled with narrowly focused media stories about college admission have led the public, and even the high school counseling community, to believe that college choices are severely limited."

There are numerous common misperceptions among parents tied to ranking. Pope's book, while not perfect, sheds light on a number of them

phear_me

The only career that I listed that is relegated to graduate schools is law. The rest of them recruit heavily out of top undergraduate colleges. If you had achieved "a high level of success" in the areas that I listed you'd know what I am saying to be true.

Also, what is a "high level of success" to you? I know more kids under 30 making well over $500 grand a year than I can count, and everyone I've worked for has been worth well over $10 million, many making that much on an annual basis. If that's not you, we're not talking about the same thing. Aside from entrepreneurial ventures and having special talents such as sports or singing etc. (neither of which normally require a college education) the college you go to can severely limit your professional opportunities (presuming one intends to work for someone else or at a corporation). This isn't a reality that I think ought to be, but students need to know what they are sacrificing when they take the scholarship money at a lower school over paying tuition at the top recruiting centers.

Saving $75,000 to go to Baylor instead of Dartmouth might feel good in the short run, but limiting yourself from ever achieving the private equity job that would pay $90k with bonus out of college (vs. $50,000 doing whatever out of Baylor) with $225k in total compensation after 3 years and a promotion to associate (vs $90k after 3 years out of the doing whatever job from Baylor) that $75k saved starts to seem like a distant memory compared to the gigantic amount of income lost.

This is of course an extreme situation presuming a student that goes into business out of a top 10 vs out of a regional / semi-national university like Baylor, but there is an extremely legitimate opportunity cost that happens when electing to choose a significantly less prestigious college than one is capable of attending.

My chose to study philosophy/theology at a Christian university has cost my professional life dearly, and even with masters degrees from top universities (such as MIT) most of the top firms in my field still won't take a serious look at me because they ONLY take students from top grad/undergrad.

With more and more students going to college, brand will become increasingly important. I am not advocating that students choose colleges based solely on prestige or the opportunities available to them post graduation, but rather students make an informed decision knowing what they may be leaving on the table. Once again, denying that students are limiting their carer choices when attending lesser universities is sticking your head in the sand. Certainly, it's not this way in some fields (i.e. nursing), but if the student isn't completely certain about their future career aspirations they could be playing a dangerous game.

phear_me

Creekland, I appreciate your insights, but I can promise you that the MIT engineering graduates are better for the competition and rigor they experience at MIT. I know that I am most certainly more capable because of it. Despite your opinion, the rest of the world seems to think that MIT engineering graduates are, in aggregate, the best in the world and all of the top companies put that sentiment to rest with their checkbooks.

In a country where 1/3 of people under the age of 25 are projected to have a college degree, the university stamped on your resume will increasingly make a difference.