<p>@Pizzagirl - Maybe I am misunderstanding your point, but I am not to sure I agree with your analysis of fit versus grab attention. I do hire people, and a person who does not grab my attention, never gets to the point where I even try to decide if he fits. One comes before the other, so the distinction you take never happens. </p>
<p>I posit that grabbing one’s attention is part of being a fit in the end. That is why it takes only 2 minutes with a resume to decide if someone should be interviewed - either you jump out and grab attention or not. Fit is decided after you jump out. And given the thousands of applications, I bet adcoms can do the same thing in 5 - 10 minutes with an application.</p>
<p>Another way of saying it is the people who do fit do grab my attention precisely because they do have a high probability of fit, which is usually the case. In the committee, I bet the students are all fits and the issue is very specific qualities, not the grabbing of attention relative to another candidate. I highly doubt any admin officer would waste time presenting a non-fit student to committee who did not grab his attention first.</p>
<p>NewHavenCTMom - What you hear about double legacies and ED appears to be correct, and was factored in by my DD. She did not apply ED to the double legacy school (Cornell). We had heard the same thing about “we’ll love you but you have to love us back”, i.e., you have to show the love in ED, so her decision was made with eyes wide open Moreover, many of our classmates friends’ kids over the last few years, and my S1, had applied ED and gotten in – so she had seen the flip side work. She simply liked other schools better and, with full recognition of the odds – all the “room in the Volkswagon” metaphors and the like on this post – elected to apply to schools that she liked more. </p>
<p>I never expected this cautionary tale to create such a discussion; reading through these posts for the past hours so leads me to believe that we’ve moved way beyond the original student but if you’d like some further information to fill in the blanks…
There is no agenda in leaving EA off at U Chi. paradoxically, it was the only school she didn’t visit and to those others who believe otherwise, it’s 1300 miles away, and we know no one from Chicago. When daughter was researching schools most of you are correct in that it seemed like a “fit” for her which is why she did apply. Money is also an important factor – which is why we left off the original post – who knows whether this middle-class family can afford it? As I indicated earlier I have 3 children to educate and there is no bottomless pit from which I can extract the available tuition/other dollars.Her plan was to apply early to MIT, Boston College, UCh, and the financial safety NMF school.Well, she never applied to Boston College because the vibe she got from her visit ruled it out. She got deferred from MIT (then denied) and obviously got into the NMF school.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Thank you to the posters/contributors who truly understand the issue; we can debate all day long about the analysis and the possible rationales and many of the posters on the side are very prescient-There are some people on this site who have thought deeply about this process. Our family also thought deeply; and went into it with eyes open except in 2 regards – or perhaps should I say we ignored 2 main factors. I have researched college data, college navigator, the US education statistics, and the CDS – we understand there is only a certain number of spots for persons of our demographic – I guess we put more emphasis on “the meritocracy” and less on the other factors.</p></li>
<li><p>Some of the schools are very transparent – Williams College is to be commended for this. Anyone can find their press release that details down to the actual slot who is going to their college.Google their press release- My daughter loved everything about Williams and thought that perhaps she might be one of the ones that would get the slots reserved for her demographic. Knowing all the slots that must be filled, it didn’t come down to many – maybe 50 or 60 When you get right down to it– Ah well, it didn’t happen.</p></li>
<li><p>For those of you debating Davidson – It had nothing to do with her guidance counselor-She was recommended and did receive the Belk scholarship nomination from her school. However, her school is not a feeder school and the admissions counselor from our region does not visit her school – she had to make a special appointment at a Starbucks to meet with her – when we did visit, my wife commented on the enormous amount of private prep school students from the high-power/high prestige schools that dot the East Coast who were matriculating there. In a question that proved to be very transparent later on she was asked by the admissions counselor – do you think you will apply E.D. I or II?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I guess In retrospect, that should have been the harbinger of things to come.</p>
<p>5.It’s impossible to respond appropriately to advise posters who spent part of their day looking through and contributing to this threat – I will only say that her essays were looked at by a friend who used to be a college counselor and he/she agreed that they were authentic; in addressing the “You’re an ovrachiever/grind who’s trying too hard”-The only thing I can say is, Really??</p>
<p>My daughter had excellent reasons for not applying to other schools, despite visiting Boston College, Wake Forest, Penn, Amherst, Middlebury,and others – she couldn’t see herself there – and thought they would not be a good fit for her. She is not 17 going on 45- some of the schools felt that way to her.The ones that made up her list she focused onand felt comfortable at. She actually visited Bowdoin – if any of you out there ever want to visit, prepare to spend some time in the car – it’s a full 3 hours plus from Boston let alone New York or New Jersey – if you’re from Pennsylvania you better make better plans.Each area she did visit we felt comfortable with and have either close friends and/or close family members living nearby. I guess what it comes down to is we thought we would get at least one.</p>
<ol>
<li>YoMaHa-You may be right about the focus of the essays – but the authenticity of what makes my daughter who she is was her community service which culminated in her Girl Scout gold award project which is what she chose to write about. Paradoxically, these schools continue to sweep the issue of sexual assault and harassment under the rug – which was exactly what she was trying to get through to some of these girls with her program. For those of you who thought she was premed or at least on that path as opposed to Engineering TEM or computer science you were right.But then I ask why does MIT during their student led to or bring you went to the newly renovated Jim and spend 15 minutes in the “humanities” building?</li>
</ol>
<p>Now, despite all the appreciated congratulations the 2 schools our daughter did get into are quite far away.We spend so much time and effort raising these kids up, hoping for the best, preparing for the worst – some of you might say this is melodramatic or worse – ultimately it is just one parents process of letting go.</p>
<p>sorry I did not read through all the posts, but after the first page wondered how financial aid application might have been a factor. D has since graduated, but it was curious that her results included WL at three top LACs (which were her top choices) but acceptance at an HYP school that she ended up attending with aid. She did get lucky, but I’ve wondered if aid applications scared off the smaller LACs. Friends with similar stats were getting in ED, full pay, at the LACs. </p>
<p>Congratulations to your D, sounds like she has great perseverance and talent and will do well. We had one go far away to school and I still miss that state and the college. Logisitcs are easier when they are close to home, but this is an age for exploration and when it comes time to decide where to accept that first job, nice to have experience with another region.</p>
<p>YES! Bowdoin WAS a match for this student. A “match” is not a safety. It doesn’t mean you are definitely getting in. It just means that your chances of getting in should be decent, looking at the profile of the student and the school. Those chances, as I have said repeatedly, are affected by the acceptance rate at the school. If your matches have 15% acceptance rates, you may have a problem. The results tend to be even quirkier when you are dealing with a LAC, simply because their are fewer places. Perhaps this is just a matter of semantics, but I don’t think so. For a kid with a 36 ACT and great courses and GPA and ECs like the OP’s D, the matches will ALL have low acceptance rates. </p>
<p>Look, I live less than 30 minutes from Bowdoin. I actually go to events on campus quite frequently. (They have a couple of very active theater groups, and the OP’s D would have been a great fit.) I’ve been to the info session there, done the tour, etc. FIVE kids from my S’s HS class were accepted to Bowdoin: my S, who chose Dartmouth, a friend, who chose Harvard, and 3 athletes who were also excellent students, although not all in the very top group in the class. I know a number of other kids from our area who went to Bowdoin. I’m familiar with their qualifications. I’ve known a few of them since they were 4 years old. I also know about kids from OOS who went to Bowdoin, one of whom was our next door neighbor in CT. I have friends who are alums whose kids applied and attended. I’ve known international students there who were proteges of a friend.</p>
<p>Maybe this is a matter of semantics. Some people think that a “match” means that you are definitely getting in. I don’t.</p>
<p>Chris46, the U of C is an extraordinary school, and I think your wonderful D could have a superb experience there. I hope she decides to go there, and that the finances work out for you. The opportunity to be part of the intellectual community at the U of C is a gift.</p>
<p>I agree, Consolation. Being right in the “zone” for admissions (statistically speaking, anyway) is what makes a match a match.</p>
<p>On the other hand, maybe it’s different now. If I were an adcom at a place like Bowdoin or Davidson I would probably be overwhelmed and mystified by the growth in applications. The schools don’t change that much year over year. But the frenzy of admissions is getting worse and worse–in part due to the Common App, as others have noted, in part due to more kids being better prepared for competitive schools. So the adcoms have to work a lot harder than they used to to put together the kind of class they want, and I imagine seeing genuine interest in a kid’s application is more important than ever.</p>
<p>I do agree with Pizzagirl about “grabbing attention.” What is remarkable about an upper-middle-class kid who has great test scores, really? We all know that tutoring and repeated testing can improve SAT/ACT scores by hundreds of points. Kids from more affluent families in many cases have more time to work on practice tests than those who have to work nights and weekends, take care of siblings, etc. A kid who has gone to an excellent private school with tons of AP/IB/honors classes at her disposal might not stand out as much as one who went to a crappy public school and had to make the most of a lesser set of circumstances. The latter kid might display more genuine intellectual curiosity than the former, who might just be going through the motions as a means of taking her rightful place in the “meritocracy.”</p>
<p>@consolation when an acceptance rate is under15% how does a student think he has decent chance (as you define match) of getting in? I am just curious as I am about to begin this crazy process again by helping my brother’s child. His counselor said Bowdoin and others should always be in the reach volumn no matter how stellar you are because the chances are slim for the best of the best. Period. Is this analysis incorrect? @chris46 what has your D decided? Are you happy with the choice?</p>
<p>Okay, then how would people define a “match” for this kid? Apparently it has to be a school where she is almost certain to get in. (I call that a safety, but oh well.) There are various midwestern LACs where I think she would have a better chance because she represents geographical diversity. (That is, if we have agreed to stop denying that being a middle class white girl from NE is a detriment when applying to LACs in the NE? Or are we supposed to keep that pretense up?) One that springs to my mind as a “match” for this girl is Carleton. The last time I looked, their acceptance rate was roughly 30%. But then Carleton doesn’t like to be taken as a safety by kids from the NE and their admissions can be very quirky. My S got in there, without ever visiting, but I’m sure if this girl–whose stats were a bit better than his–applied and were denied, people here would be confidently stating that she didn’t get in because she didn’t “show the love” by visiting and complaining that she shouldn’t feel “entitled” to get in. (I wish there were still a rolls eyes emoticon.)</p>
<p>BTW, when considering admissions to Bowdoin, one must remember that they are test-optional. So, since only those with excellent scores will submit them, the published ranges are actually going to be HIGHER than the reality. (Which ought to make a girl with a 36 even more of a standout for them…)</p>
<p>@calmom - my kid #1 didn’t end up applying to Davidson but looked at it. At the time the required essays (and there were many) were of the kind that would be tough to recycle from another app. They required a recommendation from a peer as well. I don’t remember if it was for the general application or for scholarship consideration. At any rate, they just wanted more than some schools and more in a way that seemed VERY directed towards their stated values of character and service. D decided that she didn’t want to go south so it went off the long list early, but my lasting impression was that students who completed the application and scholarship process would be pre-screened in a way just by virtue of wanting to go enough to put the effort into the application. It seemed less about the numbers (after benchmark adequacy) and more about real fit. This was several years ago, so my memory could be fuzzy and it could have changed. Bottom line is that it was not the kind of app that a kid could decide at 7:30 on January 15th that they wanted to make an 11pm deadline and whip out another “Why X?” essay and hit submit. </p>
<p>edit: ^^^ this is all a response to several pages back and a general comment - not an implication that the young woman in question didn’t give enough attention to her app. With her GOld Award etc. it sounds like she does share those service values and has demonstrated that amply. After reading through see that this particular student was quizzed about ED - it sounds like they wanted to know that she wanted them most. That is good to know for the general public out there who is thinking about Davidson or another one of those highly selective LAC places with very small student populations. Of course, ED is tough if you are on a budget and need to compare packages - particularly if your EFC is someplace in the middle rather than rock bottom. Having read OP’s follow up that might be one of the take away messages for those who are strategizing for future years.</p>
<p>further edit: In our case my D’s favorite school was and ED school and I wasn’t prepared to commit w/o FA packages in hand. She showed lots of interest but just flat out said in the “what else should we know about you?” short answer that she would have applied ED if we didn’t need to consider FA. It worked out.</p>
<p>I’ve read here many times that for high stat kids, often there aren’t matches, just reaches and safeties.</p>
<p>While a high stat student certainly has the scores and grades well within the 25 percentile -75 percentile rage, with acceptances rates below 25%, no one can say that s/he will have (using 3togo’s definition) even 50% chance of admission. So, yes the student can be a match stat-wise but not a match in terms of acceptance likelihood. </p>
<p>When a college has an acceptance rate below 20%, well, there is no way to say those are matches in terms of acceptance chance. Even if they throw away half the applications immediately, the college will be denying more applications than accepting. </p>
<p>@Chris46: Had I been in your shoes, I would have posted something that was more rant and less cautionary tale. Fortunately for us, our kids were on the other side of the coin. D1 occupies the same demographic as your daughter, but her interests were in computer science and engineering, which made all the difference in the world. D1 took the SAT as a junior, scored just under 2200, and promptly announced that she had better things to do with her time than prepare to take the SAT again. We did not press the point, in part because we knew she would not budge, but also because we knew she was already well-positioned. She applied to 10 schools and was accepted at all 10. (She chose Brown, turning down higher-ranked schools.) The rest of her application was very strong, but she would not have had the same success had she been a prospective biology major. (At my own institution, a female applicant who is a prospective biology major is reputed to be the toughest admit.) </p>
<p>D2’s interests are in the pre-med area, like your daughter’s. The difference is that D2 was a recruited athlete. Once the coach decided he wanted her on the team, admission was a foregone conclusion. So, both of our kids benefited from filling a particular need. (Both have done extremely well in college, but their entrees were made easier.) It does not bother me particularly when someone suggests that female computer scientists or athletes get a leg up in admissions; to me it is undeniable. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with your assessment. Confirmation bias is alive and well (along with some out-and-out nastiness). I just wish some posters could adopt the view that changing one’s mind is a victory not a defeat. </p>
<p>We found that our school’s Naviance was good at predicting admissions to research universities, at least for frazzled D. D was admitted to 50% of schools with a history of admitting 50% of candidates in her Naviance block, including schools admitting fewer than 20% of applicants. I would be interested to know if this outcome is typical, was typical until a year or so ago, or typical only if admit rate is above 10% for most schools on the list.</p>
<p>Ha ha, was “contributing to this threat” a Freudian slip? @chris46: Sorry, I know its a favorite activity to blame the essays when someone doesn’t get in. I didn’t mean that they were something wrong with the essays or that they were inauthentic, only that my suspicion is that ones with a certain tone may not resonate with the admissions committee. I made this mistake myself; in fact, in retrospect someone should have told me that I needed to pick another topic. One of my essays, even though it was probably one of the best I had ever written, probably had a poorly-chosen topic in retrospect. And neither the GC nor the high school teacher that read it mentioned that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, you’re right. MIT does take plenty of premeds, but most of the time these people have more math and science ECs in high school. Some who are admitted don’t have math and science ECs, but it makes you a little different than the profile they tend to look for.</p>
<p>The philosophy about admitting people with primary interests different than math/science has changed over the years; right now, according to the Dean of Admissions, they are back to admitting people with strong evident interest in math or science. They do show off their humanities building and gym because many people interested in math/science also have interest in other things in addition to math and science.</p>
<p>I have nothing to add other than to say that, Chris, this is an excellent post…with excellent insights…you sound lik e a great parent and your daughter sounds amazing. We just returned from Boston last last night…touring 4 of the colleges that we all talk about here…i am trying to view it as an anthropologist…an interesting thing to observe but a alien culture indeed. </p>
<p>My impression from observing the students at my LAC at the time I attended and others I know of was “fit” wasn’t that narrowly defined or determined in that way.</p>
<p>If anything, defining fit THAT narrowly would actually be counterproductive to their goals for creating a viable and vibrant campus community/culture. Some diversity is critical for this to work. </p>
<p>It’s possibly as bad as admitting a pool of students where a critical mass are social shut-ins and/or weren’t really happy attending as they applied because it was a match/safety or parents/relatives told them to without due consideration of the school’s strengths, campus culture/community, and the applicant evaluated the fit for him/herself. </p>
<p>I think the “fit” factor is more thought of along the lines of “Does this student show through his/her application package…especially essays and LORs” that he/she’s really interested in attending and is there a high likelihood this applicant could contribute meaningfully towards building and maintaining that viable and vibrant campus community/culture? </p>
<p>For instance, my LAC would actually welcome more applications from conservative applicants as their perspective would increase the vibrant campus culture of a politically vocal and activist/debate-prone student body which existed when I attended. Especially considering the political spectrum of most of the student body back then seemed to be such that being Green Party…not to say even left-leaning democrat would be considered right-leaning by many of them. </p>
<p>However, most who are conservatives or who are right-leaning centrists tend to self-select themselves out from applying along with those who do so because of other factors such as my LAC’s relatively rural location. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You may be surprised at the high number of “Type A high achievers” who do put together what turns out to be a slapdash application package due to reasons ranging from being overwhelmed/stretched for time(somewhat understandable) to being exceedingly cocky(a.k.a. “I’m so great they’ll overlook that.”)*. </p>
<p>Saw plenty of both types in HS and heard about them from friends and HS teachers I’ve had who served as GCs and a relative and some friends who worked elite college admissions have had similar observations. </p>
<p>What’s more interesting is how even putting together a slapdash application so long as the essay/LORs are good doesn’t necessarily eliminate one from contention either. The LAC I ended up attending received application forms with ink smudges from a pen which burst whilst I was completing it during lunch/study periods due to academic workload, EC, and long commute each way. </p>
<p>I surmise my LORs and essay must have been reasonably good for the unexpectedly great admission outcome. The application forms themselves and HS GPA certainly weren’t. </p>
<ul>
<li>This cocky attitude also manifests itself during adcom/alum interviews. A friend who does alum interviews for an Ivy has recounted many instances where she recommended rejection of an applicant because she felt he/she was too cocky and had a degree of entitlement to admission she felt was completely unwarranted based on stats, uncovered red flags, and attitude displayed during interview. </li>
</ul>
<p>Look, the process is subjective- in both the best and the worse senses of the word.</p>
<p>It’s a process of selection: No one gets in without good reason. I agree with that. The question they are asking is, "what does this applicant bring to the school that other applicants won’t.</p>
<p>It’s not always what one brings that others won’t. They don’t really “need” a harmonica player just to have one. They do need some variety, but mostly kids who fit the self-image and the perceptions of what keeps “college X” what it is. And that is more than the grades, rigor, scores, a few leadership titles or activities. It’s more than being poor or going to lousy hs bit still getting A’s and taking AP calc. It IS a sum total. </p>
<p>OP, your recent post shows you did try to consider various aspects- both what was right for your D and where her chances were decent. Glad you posted that. And I hope you know the way this thread is morphing isn’t about your girl, specifically.</p>
<p>But (back to the morph,) that “sum total” reaction is very variable. When culling through thousands of apps that make it past first round, just as in life, it is sometimes some ill-defined “one thing” that gets in the way. </p>
<p>I have a family friend who is looking at the very top schools for his son. SATs, nearly perfect, probably a NM candidate as his PSAT score is above what it usually takes in all but a year or two in that history. Currently #1 or 2 at his very rigorous prep school where about half the kids get into ivies and such highly selective schools, and taking very rigorous courses. ECs are average, however, for a kid at his schools. Not a huge leader. Nothing that stands out as a hook. No legacy, no celebrity, no development, no URM, no athletic or anything to take him out of the pool.</p>
<p>Stats wise , he’s a match , and likely way up there for even HPY which is what his parents are salivating for him to achieve. Anything else is going to be a disappointment of sorts. The kid really does do a lot in ECs, just that they are mostly school related and nothing that makes your head turn. So what are his chances? </p>
<p>They should be good looking at numbers, but the fact of the matter is that will be a stack of kids with exactly what he has that will far exceed the number of seats the school has. With those numbers and a legacy parent., well, that might, just might increase the odds as the number of seats will be larger for that group. The school wants their athletes to field their team (Ivy is, afterall, the term of the SPORTS league), and they will also scrutinize those who have such stats and come from less privilege and adversity. DIversity is also an issue, and all things equal, the kid from Idaho with those stats will bring some of that to the table whereaas the North East kid will not. Some kids will be picked from that stack where his app will be sorted but how many will depend on how many get into that category, and be a matter of luck. That does play a role in this sort of thing, you know. </p>
<p>As for Penn and legacies, it is NOT true that legacies HAVE to apply ED to be considered. Absolutely not. I know two legacies who did not apply ED this past year, applied RD and were accepted RD. Legacies have to apply ED in order to get the legacy preference conferred on them. They will be put in a legacy pool, and some preferance will be given, as well as getting the ED bump up. Penn’s accept rate for RD this year was a mere 7%, so applying early decision was an admissions advantage to all and legacies got still some added consideration. You apply ED as a legacy, the legacy status does not come into the picture at all. But your app is certainly still considered. It’s considered equally with everyone else’s. The two young men I know who were accepted chose to apply early, probably single choice option to other schools as those were their first choices,and chose to give up their legacy pool consideration at Penn for the increased probablilty of acceptance early to even more selective schools. They did not get into their first choice early action/dec schools, but were accepted RD at Penn. They can honestly say legacy there did not have an effect on their admissions; they got into Penn solely on the strength of their apps with no regard to the fact they had parents who went there. </p>
<p>This is a very important point to qualify, and it applies to other colleges that openly admit to giving legacies a boost in the ED round as well (such as Cornell). Legacies can certainly choose to apply RD, and many do. </p>
<p>I don’t think it’s so much a case of only reaches and safeties for a high-stat kid, as that the categories don’t work as well for them. It’s easy to say, and it’s true, that Brown (to take an extreme example) is a reach for everyone; but kids with 2400 SAT are admitted at a higher percentage rate than the applicant pool as a whole. There might be a bunch of reasons for that, correlation rather than cause, etc., but the fact is, a higher-stat kid probably has a better chance of acceptance than a lower-stat kid does. It’s just that, once the other factors come into play, the unknown is still so very unknown that there remains no predictability about it. A match school, in my opinion, ought to be one that has some pattern, some element of predictability, to its acceptances, so that one can say that the kid has a pretty good chance of getting in. No school with an acceptance rate under, say, 30 percent, ought to be considered a match, no matter how good your stats; but there are schools that might offer a choice for a high-stat kid that is neither a reach nor a safety. It’s just that there aren’t many of them, and they are, I really believe, subject to Tufts’ syndrome. For a kid with c. 2300 SATs, a solid class rank/rigor/GPA, and reasonably interesting ECs, a school such as Kenyon–an excellent school, with about a 40% admittance rate, in a somewhat-less-desirable location, ought to be a match. Doesn’t mean he can apply there and feel certain of admittance, just that if he applies there, he ought to have a better-than-average chance of acceptance, assuming he “fits.” You can’t say that about Brown, no matter who’s applying; Brown is “a reach for everyone.” But Kenyon is undoubtedly a reach for some, but a match for others, as I understand those terms. In the current market, however, that kind of match is harder and harder to come by.</p>
<p>This is where I think kids have to use ED and ED II for match schools as well as or instead of for reaches more and more, although there are really obvious problems (especially for FA) with that strategy. You could combine one reach and one match: Dartmouth, say, ED, and if you don’t get that, Colby ED II, with your RDs teed up as well. Unnecessarily restrictive, it seems to me, and especially tough on kids who need more time to figure out their choices, but given how wretched the results we’re seeing are, a better shot at getting into even a match.</p>