<p>No, GG was saying it was an automatic with certain stats - that’s just not true as the example shows. I said that the OP is a match for Northwestern. A match school means that the student will most likely get accepted - it is not a safety though. As a matter of fact, I think the OP will get in - but NU is not a safety school.</p>
<p>GG- No “most competitive” school can be considered a “safety” FOR ANYONE. That is because all such schools have more qualified applicants than they know what to do with, can only offer admission to a certain number of students, and will therefore often not offer admission to someone who has sterling credentials but who they think is likely not that interested. For example, consider a student who has 2400 SATs, a 3.9 UW GPA in a hard curriculum, has taken 3 APs as a junior and gotten all 5s on the exams, and is taking five more hard AP courses as a senior, with demonstrated leadership and commitment in great ECs. That student is a strong candidate for HYPS, and everyone can figure out that’s probably where s/he wants to go. If a school like NU, Duke, WashU, or JHU reviews this application, they might figure that the applicant is not that interested, so they focus more on other applicants.
I know a kid who had comparable credentials and looked like a shoo-in for HYP. He got in to none of them, and Duke rejected him too. But he’s going to MIT.
The calculus of college admissions at top schools is far too complicated - and they have far too many qualified students for the limited number of acceptances which proven formulae tell them to offer - for ANYONE to consider NU or similarly competitive schools (e.g., Duke, WashU, JHU, Tufts, Cornell) a “safety.”</p>
<p>So I think that elsijfld is right: the odds of admission are strong, but to me “safety” means something else entirely.</p>
<p>And Majman, NU isn’t “4 times the size of an Ivy.” Dartmouth is probably the smallest Ivy, with something like 4000-4500 undergrads. The other Ivies are larger. Cornell has the most, at about 13,000 undergrads and Penn has almost 10,000, with the others being in between. NU has about 8000 undergrads, so it’s not even twice as large as the smallest Ivy.</p>
<p>My college counselor from my HS said Northwestern was (among others) a safety for me. This was at a school with an incredible guidance department (really a glrofied college admissions department) who moved there from another, equally exceptional school’s head of guidance position. He had years of experience, he knew what he was talking about. I in fact ONLY got in to my three safeties, theoretically proving my point. </p>
<p>Statistically from my HS, the trend is similar to the one Gamma describes. NU just is slightly less competitive to get into for the very top applicants, as long as you don’t write your essay about how you enjoy mutilating small animals and vivisection.</p>
<p>
I never said that. I specifically said (if you reread my post) that I can’t say it’s automatic, because it’s not. No holistic school can be automatic. So if you’re definition of safety is that, I can’t go there. But if you’re definition of a safety isn’t something surefire but instead like a 95% chance of admittance, then I can say that Northwestern fits that bill. 50 people (estimate) in the past three years from my high school, all with an UW GPA of 3.7 or higher, have all gotten in. 50/50. Can the 51st be rejected/waitlisted? Certainly. That’s why it’s not automatic. But, if I say that this person has a 3.7 UW GPA, are you going to bet on them getting in? I would. Even with 20 to 1 odds. </p>
<p>
Except these schools are considered safeties by many people. Heck, I know people that apply to only ivies. And it’s not like the GC is giving bad advice by approving that list. They see the data. </p>
<p>Again, if you take my definition (95% chance of admittance) than these schools, Northwestern included, can be considered safeties. There are people at my school with stats that are smack dab in the middle of a huge dot of green on the naviance scattergram. Not guaranteed, and I mention that again because you guys seem to have a hard time picking up qualifications. But pretty darn close. </p>
<p>Honestly just reread my posts. I’m not the monster you all (except arbiter :), because chicagolanders know what I’m talking about) are portraying me to be.</p>
<p>I think there’s a difference between very good chance of admit vs. safety.</p>
<p>Regarding naviance data, one thing to keep in mind is they probably don’t distinguish between which college at Northwestern the applicants were applying to, do they? In the case of my own alma mater this can make a material difference. Besides, that’s only the results of one high school, not the universe. A probability curve will have outliers. Maybe that school is particularly well known by Northwestern.</p>
<p>Also, at my alma mater legacy can indeed be a tip factor, but they make a big point that this is only the case if you apply there ED. I don’t know about Northwestern’s policies in this regard.</p>
<p>It can’t be such a burden to fill out the application to U florida, can it?
Being on CC for a while, one reads the horror stories about the 2300+ kid who got rejected everyplace. It doesn’t happen often, but who needs that.</p>
<p>GG I would think that you meant a 3.7 GPA with a certain level of ACT score or SAT Score. Not anyone with a 3.7 GPA is going to get in - correct? And who called you a monster - we’re having a discussion - a debate with opposing views, but I don’t think of you as a monster. But we have different definition of a safety. A safety is an absolute - a definite - a 100% chance of getting in - NOT a 95 % chance of getting in. Northwestern is a match for the OP, not a safety.</p>
<p>GG,
Your school apparently has done an excepotional job on Northwestern. That 50/50 for those above UW 3.7 GPA is likely not representative, as shown by the stats from the following schools:</p>
<p><a href=“http://tcci.naviance.com/malvernprep[/url]”>http://tcci.naviance.com/malvernprep</a> password: friars
<a href=“http://tcci.naviance.com/wilton[/url]”>http://tcci.naviance.com/wilton</a> password: wiltoncths
<a href=“http://tcci.naviance.com/fc/signin.php?hsid=mullen[/url]”>http://tcci.naviance.com/fc/signin.php?hsid=mullen</a> password: mustangs
<a href=“http://tcci.naviance.com/fc/signin.php?hsid=bcc[/url]”>http://tcci.naviance.com/fc/signin.php?hsid=bcc</a> password: barons </p>
<p>Although you claimed your school might not be representative, you took the position as if it is. You didn’t give any margin/allowance of safety in your analysis. So there’s a bit of an inconsistency in your part.</p>
<p>“safety” is just a label. Basically, people here are divided over whether safety means 95% chance or 80% chance. But in people’s heads, is there really a material difference between those two probabilities? On the other hand, the risk takers would find 80% pretty comforting while the risk-aversed would find 95% not safe enough. At the end of the day, both say that a slight chance of rejection is part of the equation. The only material difference I see would be whether Northwestern is “bird in your hand” and whether a rejection would be an “extrodinary event”. I don’t think Northwestern fits that description.</p>
<p>Honestly, it’s impossible to have a 100% chance of getting into a school unless you fall into a top 10% rule or something similar. A 95% chance is usually as good as you can get, so I would classify that as a safety.</p>
<p>If we have historic data showing that out of, say, 1000 applicants (ideally across difference geographical regions) with stats similar to OP’s, 800/950 of them got in, that would translate to 80%/95% chance, assuming the strength of applicant pool doesn’t vary from year to year. This would be one of the ways to actually get those probabilities. And you could get 97% or 98%. The only reason “95% chance is as good as you can get” is that people are just throwing their estimates without the support of quality data.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, anyone with a 3.7 UW GPA (honors/AP classes) or higher has gotten in the past three years. I think the lowest ACT scores for people with a 3.7 is high 20s or so. 3.7 seems to be the magic barrier. Because lower than that some red starts to appear, depending on the test scores. Now, understand that my former HS is fairly difficult. A 3.7 is very solid, and this GPA commonly gets into the lower ivies. A 3.8 plus puts one into consideration for HYPSM, disregarding hooks and stuff. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay, Northwestern’s not a safety then. But is this really the definition of safety? If it is, then there really can be no such thing as safeties for the very top students who only apply to privates and the top few publics (which is very common). These schools use holistic admissions, and nothing is guaranteed. That’s why a 95% chance, or 90, or 85, or whatever would be a pragmatic definition. Under those definitions, Northwestern is and has been a safety for some people, especially in feeder schools like mine. So it depends a lot on how one defines safety, which will change from person to person. </p>
<p>
Not really. But in forming an argument, these distinctions become important. </p>
<p>
yes it has. So has arbiters. So have a lot of other chicagoland schools which feed into NU. There might be other feeder schools in different states, where the GCs are well connected in some way to the adcoms. So, I’d say that at these few schools, NU can be a safety (depending on definition). A good way to test this is to look on naviance, OP. If you see a TON of green and NO red around your stats, you probably have a fantastic chance. Is NU a safety? Again, depends on your definition. </p>
<p>If I made it seem like I was arguing something for the entire nation based just on my school, I apoligize. I originally posted because some people said NU could never be a safety for anyone (more or less). These absolutes are what I have a problem with. That’s why I try to qualify all my statements properly. If I didn’t, that’s my bad, and I’m sorry.</p>
<p>GG, Just curious. Obviously you graduated from an awesome high school and go to an awesome university. What were your stats, where did you apply and what were the outcomes.</p>
<p>And just one side note - I personaly don’t like the idea of applying to all the ivies and the top publics just because I can. The whole college process should include applying to schools that could be a good fit for the student. It seems as though some of these students are applying to all the ivies and top publics, then seeing where they get in and then deciding where to go. It seems a little backwards to me. When our son was researching schools, we visited schools at all levels, talked to alumni (if possible) and current students so my son could get a good feel for the school and then decided where to apply. I just don’t think it’s a good idea to limit oneself to just the ivies and top publics - jmho.</p>
<p>For the record, my HS was not in Chicagoland, or the midwest for that matter, and while many many students got in every year, few regularly seriously consider attending. It’s generally passed over for UPenn, Duke and Dartmouth (Just to name a few I know of).</p>
<p>First, Northwestern is not just a ‘numbers-driven’ admissions decision. Naviance is a numbers driven tool and cannot be taken in a vacuum. Its one tool that tells you your data fits the prior year. Distinguish yourself in the essays and make sure you are sincere in answering the supplemental question.</p>
<p>Safety? No guarantees here at all. Look at it as a solid target, with maybe a 75% chance. </p>
<p>Do you need aid? Is Northwestern need-blind? Which school at Northwestern? Which major at Northwestern.</p>
<p>Your tennis - unless you are ranked and recruited it really doesn’t get you in. it does show dedication and commitment. Your ECs are strong, your GPA is very strong and your courseload is impressive. </p>
<p>Are you applying ED? Does NU weigh demonstrated interest. Does Legacy matter. Is the alum active? Were signficant alumni donations made? </p>
<p>Some schools will tell you outright that visiting helps demonstrate interest, others don’t care at all if you come. </p>
<p>good luck.</p>
<p>I think the poster is kind of presumptuous and cocky, but then again, that’s a typical northwestern student. When i was applying to Columbia Cornell Penn and Stanford, I knew I’d get into WashU, like WashU was my safety and Northwestern I thought I had a really solid chance. </p>
<p>There are a diverse group of kids at NU but I think we all came here because it was our BEST choice. Like there are kids who this school was their dream school and there are kids who got passed over at HYPS/etc. For the most part though, we’re an overly proud group of nerds that have a lot to brag about. </p>
<p>At first I thought this poster was cocky, but then I realized, so am I. Good luck</p>
<p>Being a legacy only helps a significant amount if you apply early decision, I believe.</p>
<p>It’s best not to be openly cocky about your chances on these forums. If, by chance, an admissions officer remembers your profile, they might be more reluctant to admit you when there are thousands of others with similar qualifications in line. I’m not saying the OP in particular is being cocky… this is just general advice. You guys have to remember that although NU admissions is more predictable than HYP, it has gotten to the point where a 34+ and top 10% will not guarantee you admission anymore (if it ever did) since there are so many with those stats these days. NU might rather give the spot to somebody for whom NU is a top choice but who has slightly lower but still highly competitive stats. Of course, adcoms might not know they’re your back-up, but they certainly will if you EXPLICITLY TELL them. That’s definitely not a good situation to be in if you still want to get in. But maybe you don’t really care, and if so, that could be good for somebody else for whom NU might be their best option. And honestly, if I were an admissions officer, I’d take the latter applicant since a couple of points on the ACT don’t really make a difference to me, especially if I have other high-scorers to pull up the average.</p>
<p>Not a safety for you. You should apply and you seem to be a likely (SAT IIs a little low). But, if you are searching for a safety school, keep searching.</p>
<p>Is Northwestern a safety for anyone? In a word, a big empatic NO.
But you do have solid chances, with legacy and good stats and all.
Good luck</p>
<p>not if you can’t even spell safety correctly</p>
<p>GammaGrozza stated:
“No, anyone with a 3.7 UW GPA (honors/AP classes) or higher has gotten in the past three years. I think the lowest ACT scores for people with a 3.7 is high 20s or so. 3.7 seems to be the magic barrier.”</p>
<p>I don’t think GammaGrozza’s data and conclusion reflected what happened in my daughter’s high school last year. </p>
<p>We reside in the northeast. Not many kids in my daughter’s high school applied for NU because there are many ivies and good colleges in northeast and NU is not as well-known in our area as in mid-west. There was only one student besides my daughter applied for NU in her high school last year. The other student ranked the 4th out of a class of 600 kids, and my daughter ranked only at twenties. The student has 2330 SAT scores and my daughter’s has only 2290. They both took the most challenging AP classes. The student was rejected but my daughter was accepted. My daughter felt sorry for the student because she thought the student was incredibly smart and truly deserved a spot at NU. </p>
<p>The area that my daughter outshined the other student is her extra-curriculum activities. She was involved with diversified activities inside and outside of the school, including music, sports, culture, and community service. Most of the activities took years of commitment and to the level of excellence. These activities demonstrated her a well-rounded person with diversified interests, persistence, and commitment.</p>
<p>To be honest, when my daughter chose NU as the very top choice of her college applications last year. I was really surprised because I did not know much about NU at that time. She was not interested in applying any of the ivies in northeast (which upset me at that time). After I did my own research and gained a good understanding about NU, now I have to admit that she did an excellent job in her collage research and chose a college that best fit her and NU accepted her not just by the number, but a well-rounded student that best fit the university. </p>
<p>One positive impact from my daughter’s acceptance to the NU, more students in her high school knew about NU and quite a number of top students in lower classes are inspired to apply for NU. </p>
<p>NYerr stated it the best
“Northwestern is not just a ‘numbers-driven’ admissions decision…”</p>