The opaqueness along with many applicants at the easily comparable stat ceilings can make it look “random” to outsiders, even though it is not random from the insider perspective (insider means inside the admission office). Most outsiders have no way of seeing or comparing how various applicants’ essays and recommendations compare within the entire applicant pool.
4 Likes
Everyone is different.
For some, one is enough. If you are going to your regional or state flagship and know up front that you’ll be in, that’s all you need.
Or one can ED and apply no where else til after, if rejected.
Others want 20 - they just feel the need.
Others have the dream, like yours, but then decide later (because they are 17 and life changes) - that the dream wasn’t the dream.
Happened with mine - first he loved Wash U after the tour, but then he loved Purdue more after their tour and they admitted him with $10K merit. It was a done deal - Boiler Up - wore the t shirt everywhere.
Then he visited a school with friends because the high school required a college visit or job shadow day - so he went to Alabama with his friends, came up that night, and it was game over. Applied - didn’t even tell us.
When I suggested Alabama many months earlier given their large Jewish student population and strong merit, he scoffed at me.
So you never know.
With kids, life changes in an instant.
But it isn’t quite true - that people need a balanced list. They need an affordable admit. The rest is icing on the cake.
It’s also not true that people need to go to reaches - but some think they have to. They are looking for balance and they would never attend School A, a safety, over School B, a reach.
Yet they prefer school A - so why wouldn’t they?
Oh, and many do - choose safeties over reaches.
And then when people say they got into a reach - was it really a reach?? Those words are all perception and guessing - to begin with - safety, target, reach. And people seem to project targets as safeties - assumptive they’ll get into the targets.
So the entire admissions thing is really diverse, all over dependent upon the person - and that’s a good thing.
I agree with this in principle, but I’m finding that with my D26 there’s a lot of uncertainty on what she wants out of a school, what major she wants, etc. So, I think there can be value in the optionality side of applying. Right now, D26 has a couple of favorites, but I wonder if that’ll change in a few months. She’s applying to a couple of schools just because I’ve asked her to in order to have a couple of options when April hits.
Back to platitudes, the one that’s not quite a platitude, but is a question that we hear CONSTANTLY is “What’s your dream school?” I’ve spent the past couple of years prepping D26 for the question and given her ideas on how to answer (I am a very staunch “NO DREAM SCHOOL” believer). But it’s still annoying every time it comes up and D26 struggles to not roll her eyes every time someone asks the question.
2 Likes
ugh I am sorry.
Don’t think either of my kids have gotten that framing, thank goodness! How crazy! They get “Where are you looking?” or maybe “Do you have a first choice?” I don’t even really love the latter, but far better than “dream school.”
That said, I had a dream school and got in (and loved it, still don’t regret it). I do despise the idea that kids SHOULD have a dream school or that any kid can only be happy in one place. I do think I had a clear favorite, it was right for me, and I still think it was the best place…Could I have been equally happy somewhere else? I am sure, but even knowing all I know now (a lot!) I don’t think anywhere would have been far better… (though obviously no way of knowing!).
1 Like
Even this framing bothers me, personally. It’s asking to be let down. If the student doesn’t get into their first choice, then what? Everyone’s sad? That sucks. D26 has gotten “Where all are you applying?” which is usually met with a list of schools that range in selectivity. It tends to throw people off a bit. “Why are you applying there?” has come up more than once and by pretty close friends. That ability to understand what a kid is going through when they put themselves out there for a potential rejection seems lacking at times.
And I’m not averse to having a first choice and choosing to apply ED because it’s a clear fav. I just object to people asking about it. 
ETA: The question that I do like and think is ok is, “What are you thinking about studying?” That lets a kid say everything from “Dunno yet, gonna explore” to “maybe something in STEM” or even more specific. And I think it’s easy to talk people down from a specific major. So it doesn’t have to be “I’m planning to study chemistry” it can be “I like the sciences, so something in science.” Lots of opportunity for ambiguity, but still lets you relate to a kid. Anyway, that’s just, like, my opinion, man.
4 Likes
Parents who have their kid begin a unique sport or instrument…junior year….thinking that doing so will help them get into a high reach school (despite not having the grades, etc).
8 Likes
I agree with all you wrote! IME older folks - like their grandparents or people their age have NO idea what it is like now and thus it comes out like “first choice” etc as it is so much less high stakes in their mind.
Also, my kids have no problem saying “I don’t have one” or “I am applying lots of places” etc. and being very vague - they both seem to have no qualms about being vague. Nobody seems to have pressed the matter when told they won’t know where they get in until ABC date and then a decision will be made with all the options on the table etc.
4 Likes
This is the crux of why the “need a balanced list” platitude bothers me. You identified what people actually need. An affordable admit that they like enough to be satisfied attending.
3 Likes
And many have that - whether the local community college or regional school.
But people either expect more, are trained to want more, or both.
And there’s even some that want to be able to say - I got in here.
You have to remember - those on this website are not likely the norm. Many come on here because they do want that highest ranked, affordability be damned. This website is a small, likely non reflective snapshot of society.
There’s a college counselor on Long Island who calls them Born Again Juniors.
Juniors who havent done anything and their parents harass them to stop playing video games and do an EC for college admissions.
6 Likes
That doesn’t bother me so much (it’s their loss) but I get peeved by (usually) new posters on here – parents – who seem to think that an additional 10 points on the SAT will make or break Ivy admission, or that score and GPA are all that count, and because their child’s are excellent, they are a likely Ivy admit.
6 Likes
I’m confused by this response. This thread (which I am the OP of) is about annoying platitudes. You perfectly explained why one of my original annoying platitudes is annoying. I responded by crediting you for identifying precisely and succinctly why it is a problematic platitude. And then, you respond by telling me I have to remember that people here are not the norm, many want the highest rank, etc.
The whole point of this thread is to highlight platitudes that are not universally true but are said (not just on CC, but more broadly) like they are. I highlighted one, you explained why it was a problematic platitude, I commended you for that, and then you responded as if I was missing something important when I commended you for identifying the issue. Why?
7 Likes
Reminder that this thread is not in the cafe so debate is not permitted. Please stick to the topic and do not challenge the OP.
3 Likes
A little late responding, but I agree there is no reason to be dogmatic with people who have at least one great option, including thanks to rolling/early admissions. Indeed, some kids only apply to one college that clearly makes the most sense for them, and that is not inherently problematic.
Still, I do like to mention in such contexts that I think having choices can be nice. Even if they do end up choosing that one great option, I think knowing it was a choice is potentially beneficial. And I think occasionally people do find a non-obvious option they end up taking, to their surprise.
Again, not something I would be dogmatic about, just something I think usually worth mentioning as a possible consideration.
2 Likes
In fact part of my point is these are good conversations! Starting with the idea a balanced list “can be helpful” may elicit some discussion of individual cases where it wouldn’t be helpful, but I think these are good discussions in the sense kids and parents can then evaluate those cases and gain whatever insights are useful for them.
3 Likes
I have two of those, both one and done. We researched the summer before senior year and they each picked just one. One was an athlete so that played into it. Money played into it (a lot). And honestly, both were pretty easy to please, found schools they liked and that was enough for them.
5 Likes
I do think that some of the platitudes made it easier for my kids to pick as the tour guides often said the same things. “No major you like? Design your own!” “We have 437 clubs, but if you don’t like any of those you can start your own!”
Schools started to look the same to them so they were happy with the ones they liked the best.
3 Likes
I’m going to add a platitude that is starting to annoy me even though it’s tangential to admissions. It’s usually cited as a reason why “it doesn’t matter where you go to college because “everyone” knows that getting a job in ABC field just depends on who you know”.
This is both true and not true. But the “not true” bugs me. Can a kid at a non-target school with a B average in finance get a job in private wealth management at a mid-tier regional bank based on having played golf with EVP’s son in college? Yes. Can that same kid get hired at DE Shaw as a quant based on having played squash with an MD’s kid in prep school? No.
Many posters on CC don’t bother to understand or differentiate the role of nepotism in hiring in certain fields, and that leads to a bunch of annoying platitudes generalized across entire industries.
In a town near where I live, there is documented evidence that nepotism has been real (and led to some very questionable hiring decisions) in a bunch of government functions. So when you see a clearly overweight firefighter struggling to climb up the ladder of the rig, you see this nepotism in action (with potentially dangerous consequences to the public).
You can’t see it- but MANY large companies are meticulous about preventing nepotism, even though the public isn’t at risk per se. But it’s still an outmoded practice for many, many reasons– including the risk of losing lots of money, or reputation, or violating the law, by hiring unqualified people who happen to know someone important at the company. And there are companies where the barriers to “round one” are very low (you want to take one of the tests administered for quant roles at a bunch of financial institutions? Great. Doesn’t matter what you majored in, where you went to college, or who you know). But the bar is so high for the steps after that, the notion that someone can skip to the head of the line based on Uncle Martin’s BFF from 30 years ago is ludicrous.
Rant over.
2 Likes
I don’t know what quants do or anything about their work, so am not qualified to comment on that. I will say, that many governments (local, state and federal) have pretty strict rules and policies against nepotism in hiring and many on favortism as well. In such places, which is every one I’ve worked in and many I’ve represented as an attorney, there can be dire career consequences for violating said policies. That is not to say it doesn’t happen in government, just that where it does, it is often in violation of policy, which can be reported, investigated, and pursued. I point this out merely to note that the government generally isn’t a bastion of nepotism in case some get that impression from your post (not saying that was your point, but it could be read that way). My experience is there are a lot more places in the private sector where nepotism and favortism are rampant and unchecked than in the government.
Edit: that said, I think the platitude you raise is close enough to admissions to make sense for this thread.
I did not mean to imply that it was a large scale problem in government so thank you for your clarification. I know situations (local, state and federal) where key decision-makers had to recuse themselves during interviews even when the “relationship” to the candidate was tangential at best. Most government bodies are very careful in this way- and the ones that aren’t, often come to regret it in very public and damaging ways.
My point was that the folks on CC that like stating ‘it doesn’t matter which college you go to for this career because who you know is more important than what you know” generally confuse and conflate several things– and therefore state some inaccurate and dumb things. I know people who hire and oversee hiring at DE Shaw and Citadel and some of the other top quant shops. They are VERY well paid and work VERY hard and have done so for many years in order to get to where they are. Not a single one of them would risk their career fast tracking the resume of a friend’s kid, a relative, a neighbor.
Assuming that nepotism is rife at top tier financial institutions is 1950’s thinking when any white guy who played tennis and graduated from Princeton was assumed to be a financial genius.
3 Likes