<p>Right, over 700, not 200. Der. In my defense, I took typing at a community college.</p>
<p>I think every kid needs a safety, or at least a strategy that’s very safe. It may be that some kids can feel sufficiently safe with a number of match schools that are likely to admit. Our kids didn’t do this, but I don’t think it would be crazy for a kid with really good qualifications.</p>
<p>I just think “love thy safety” may be too much to ask for some people. “Choose thy safety wisely,” though, should be for everyone.</p>
<p>Agreed. And it varies by program, too. I might expect to have a more interesting discussion with an anthropology major at Beloit College than I would a business student at Wharton.</p>
<p>There is a certain income bracket which I think precludes all schools from being true safeties unless the kid can get one of the four or five full ride merit scholarships. An EFC that is 25-30% of your income isn’t reasonable for a lot of people. Even Northern Michigan is $19K/year so that’s not truly a safety. A CC might be a plan for two years, but then what? You still have to come up with $32K for the other two years, right? And, as I’ve mentioned in other similar threads, you have to have reliable transportation to get to a CC in some areas where there is no public transportation. Even if you buy a fairly reliable used car, you’re talking about at least $5K. Then $2500/yr in insurance. Add that $7500 to your $3000 CC tuition that first year and it isn’t so cheap. Add the $40-60 in gas a week too. And the car repairs. There really aren’t cheap options out there.</p>
<p>My bigger frustration though (because I’ve accepted the cost thing) is that there are no small public schools. My S’14 really wants a school with less than 3000 students and he doesn’t want to stray too far from home (easy to get home at least- direct cheap flights, train, a few hours drive). He could probably earn a good merit scholarship at some of our state schools but they all have well over 20,000 students. He’ll go to one if he has to, but he won’t ever feel comfortable with that many students.</p>
<p>Of the above, some are relatively low cost, even for out-of-state students, like University of Minnesota - Morris. However, if $19,000 per year is too expensive, then even the low cost ones are likely too expensive unless one gets big merit scholarships.</p>
<p>There are also some non-LAC public small schools like:</p>
<p>South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology</p>
<p>These two are also relatively low cost, though again more than $19,000 per year at list price.</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, how do the numbers if SAT 2100+ kids at H,Y,P compare to the numbers at, say, Penn State or Ohio State or UMichigan or UTexas or UCLA or name-your-other-favorite-flagship? </p>
<p>Maybe someone with good data-mining skills could provide those numbers for us. Then we’d be able to assess how peer-deprived a kid at a state flagship might actually be.</p>
<p>Simply go to section C8 of each school’s Common Data Set. There it lists the percent of incoming freshman who scored 700-800 points in each section of the SAT, and the percent of freshmen who scored 30+ on the ACT. Even at schools like the University of Wyoming, around 10% of students got a 30+ ACT, indicating that an academically minded student can find around 1000 peers.</p>
<p>I’m sure you’ve considered this, but are there public schools near you that have honors colleges or, perhaps, residential colleges? They may also be programs within his major that have smaller groups where he could find his place (I was in a small research class my first year offered by my department). I always imagined myself at a small school, but I ended up going to a large public school and ended up grateful for that decision. Large schools feel as big or as small as you make them, and my 22,000+ student body didn’t feel that big to me. Joining a team, program, honors college, fraternity, etc, gives the “small family” that I wanted at a small school, but with the cost and opportunities of a large public.</p>
<p>I don’t understand the animosity toward this hypothetical kid. Readers on CC, and elsewhere, get the advice to find the right fit, but if a student feels that right fit means being somewhere that the majority of students are high achieving academically, they get branded as a spoiled prince/princess?
Students (and parents) on CC also learn, as has been noted on this thread, that a true safety is one where the student will be happy to attend. A student who is seeking an environment where the majority are like minded is not going to happily pick a school that doesn’t seem to fit that description, and I don’t know why anyone would expect them to be happy about it.
That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t apply to a sure thing, and that they would refuse it, or not be able to make it work, and possibly even grow to like or love it, but it makes perfect sense that the student wouldn’t view the ‘sure thing’ as a true safety that they’d happy to attend during the initial application/acceptance process.</p>
<p>My experience has been that students who claim to prefer high-achieving peers are typically insecure and/or narcissistic - they don’t feel appreciated in high school and want something radically different. </p>
<p>If they truly believe that only highly selective schools will be good fits, then I agree with shoboemom. However, few 18 year olds can find something they like and stick with for an extended period. I am also highly skeptical of anyone who lists a dozen schools as their top choices that have absolutely nothing in common except that they are the most highly selective universities in the country.</p>
<p>More common is the student who can adjust to a situation, emphasizing their likes and avoiding their dislikes.</p>
<p>That student needs to apply EA/SCEA to one of those highly selective schools so that, if they don’t get in, they work hard at finding a couple of other schools (Flagships with honors Colleges and rolling admissions would be a good choice) and don’t find themselves completely disappointed in April.</p>
<p>So if a student takes all APs, finds himself bored by the level of the courses, and wants to go to a school where someone of his intellect is the norm, not the exception, is he insecure and narcissistic?</p>
<p>I understand wanting to be in a stimulating environment with other bright students, but to say a student can “only be satisfied with the type of student peer group found at super-selective schools” is a bit like saying one will only date super models. While you wait for Gisele Bundchen to call back you’re going to miss out on a lot of wonderful and very pretty girls.</p>
I’m with you on this, whenhen. Sometimes it is the exact opposite; they want to have to work harder to keep up with their classmates and have a (surprisingly mature) sense that things might have come too easily to them.</p>
<p>I’m relatively new to this forum, and I’m surprised (perhaps naively so) at the anger directed at these teenage students.</p>
<p>Something I haven’t seen mentioned, and what drew me to this thread, is one aspect that might mean that some students have a difficult time finding an appropriate safety. I’m referring to the “yield management” issue of schools trying to not accept students who they think won’t attend. My student has high SATs, loads of APs, very good GPA, LOR that would probably make me blush if I could read them, a rigorous course load, I’m sure he’ll write good essays, we can pay full freight, etc. Regardless, he is in the lottery of unhooked strong candidates that might or might not be accepted. I’m worried that the adcom for the next tier of school will say, “no way he’s applying here because he wants to attend, we’re a safety to this kid, he’s going to reduce our yield, reject.”</p>
<p>So, unfortunately, we’re going to apply EA to 4 tiers of schools: dream/match (they’re a match in terms of fit, but a dream because of the numbers at highly selective schools), match, safety, uber-safety in case the match and safety schools are managing their yield to the point of denying a strong student.</p>
<p>A 30 composite on the ACT is 95th percentile. A 35 is about 99.5th percentile. If you convert percentiles to standard deviations, the difference between 95th percentile and 99.5th percentile is the same as the difference between 50th percentile and 95th percentile. So saying a kid with an unprepped 35 can find a good peer group if the top 10% of the class is 30+ is the statistical equivalent of saying a kid with an unprepped 30 can find a good peer group if the top 10% of the class is 20+. </p>
<p>Fish-out-of-water smart kid from high school is likely to be fish-out-of-water smart at a university where only 1000 kids scored 30+. “Optimally gifted” kid (say, top 5% and 31-32 ACT), I agree is likely to find a comfortable group of peers. As a parent, I’d encourage my fish-out-of-water kid to cast a broad net across schools which accept a higher percentage of applicants because smart kids self-select for them, and make up for the lack of guaranteed admission with volume. But we have the luxury of having lived below our means in a low cost-of-living area, so cost is less of an issue (we can afford more than our EFC at a less-generous meets-need-no-merit school). If cost were more of an issue, I’d be feeding her a steady stream of “suck it up.”</p>
<p>“Academically undistinguished kid whose parents can’t or won’t pay their EFC” is who I see as most in danger of having no good options.</p>
<p>I think when people say they are bored, they often seem to be looking out through a narrow perspective.
This thread hasn’t done anything to change my opinion.</p>
<p>I just wanted to say that you don’t need hosts of academically equivalent peers to find a good peer group. My peer group in college was of vastly different skill sets and academic prowess, and I don’t think I was any worse for it. I also don’t think it necessarily spoke to their intellectual ability or lack thereof. I understand wanting to have an environment where academics are valued, but that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with a small private or a large public (nor does it necessarily correlate with ACT score).</p>
<p>“If they truly believe that only highly selective schools will be good fits, then I agree with shoboemom. However, few 18 year olds can find something they like and stick with for an extended period. I am also highly skeptical of anyone who lists a dozen schools as their top choices that have absolutely nothing in common except that they are the most highly selective universities in the country.”</p>
<p>Good lord! Strawman alert! We are not describing “I can only be happy at the tippy top schools” or “It’s the top dozen schools or bust.” We are describing someone who, all else being equal, prefers a dense concentration of other students with intellect and purpose. No one is claiming such students can only be found at the very top. </p>
<p>Your local state flagship may or may not have such a dense concentration. My state flagship 30 years ago didn’t. Maybe it does today. I don’t know. My kids’ state flagship (a different state) has a denser concentration than my state flagship did. </p>
<p>The extent to which one can socially find like-minded peers in a big school varies. For me, it would have been difficult. Maybe that’s a failing of mine. Oh well, never claimed to be perfect.</p>