<p>As one of those classic high school “brainiacs,” I won’t apologize for wanting / preferring an environment with a high density of smart students and an atmosphere in which it’s fine, not uncool, to be jazzed about your studies. And duh, that’s found plenty of places beyond HYP - so this strawman about wow-is-me-Grinnell doesn’t fly. But it’s not found everywhere and it’s disingenuous to pretend it is. The existence of a few really bright kids on campus is not the same thing as an environment rich in them. And it’s particularly disingenuous from people who put their kids in honors / AP classes. The environment is different, otherwise you’d keep your kids in regular level classes. </p>
<p>Back when I knew lots of kids applying to college, I saw two shut-outs and a few near misses. Neither involved the sort of good student this thread is targeting – they pretty much all knew enough to be realistic and practical. </p>
<p>One shut-out was a student near the top of her class (but, notwithstanding that, a fairly boring person). She somehow got the idea that her grades and test scores (which were fine, but hardly perfect) entitled her to admission anywhere, and she only applied to Swarthmore and Brown. (She also needed significant aid to afford college.) Her parents were space cadets; the counselors at her large public high school were completely un-used to counseling the best students, since the best students more or less counseled each other. The girl’s friends begged her to apply to a safety, any safety, but no. Anyway, she had an unwanted gap year and a much more realistic campaign a year later, and wound up at a famous women’s college, which was great for her.</p>
<p>The other shut-out was a boy who had a disciplinary record (and police blotter) longer than you would like your son to have, and he had been invited to leave two schools. He was a talented musician who had sung professionally as a child, and he didn’t care about much else, so his GPA was in the 2.0 range. Money wasn’t an issue. He ultimately got a degree from Hunter while trying to be a rock star in NYC. (He later moved to Europe where, at least for the moment, he IS something of an up-and-coming rock star.) The sweetest guy in the world.</p>
<p>“They overlook those schools because they are unaffordable for most.”</p>
<p>I think it’s more a prestige thing. Between HYP and the State directionals there is a vast middle with merit and/or financial available to the HYP qualified applicant. One of the colleges sited as being overlooked is Grinnell College, which has one of the highest per student endowments in the country and pays out about $50M a year to students. I think schools like Grinnell are often overlooked because the name lacks the WOW factor to applicants and their parents and peers; not because their not meeting financial need.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s my point. Despite being great schools with tons of bright, intellectually engaged students neither Grinnell nor Reed is among the 100 LACs with the lowest acceptance rates. </p>
<p>@sally305, “I was a 3.5 GPA, mid-500s SAT high school student who was far too interested in having fun to study. Went to a CTCL LAC, then a state flagship when money unexpectedly ran short, and ultimately on to law school, where I graduated in the top 4% of my class. Today I am at the top of my very competitive field, with plenty of Ivy-educated colleagues for company. So be careful whom you disregard, all you 4.0 GPA, 2400 SAT, 20 AP students. You may be working for one of us tenacious late bloomers one day!”</p>
<p>You go girl !! 
</p>
<p>You must mean “people on the east coast.” Grinnell has plenty of wow-factor here in the Chicago area. </p>
<p>^^Agreed. I would have loved my D to consider Grinnell. It’s a great school…was just too far away from home (and maybe a bit too isolated for her taste).</p>
<p>The original question was do kids get shut out of their picks. The answer was occassionally, often due to only picking the Ivies or top LAC, not wanting to even apply to their state flagships as back up. Then we dissolved into whether the flagships were as good as the Ivies and shouldn’t top students get to sit next to other top students? Maybe they SHOULD, but if they aren’t admitted to those schools (and that may be because they are unlucky in the lotto of admissions or it may be that they aren’t as qualified as they think), the student has to decide if nothing else will do or if the flagship is ‘good enough.’ I guess some feel only the top schools or LACs were good enough and would not send their children to a flagship. </p>
<p>I’m kind of amused that students at the top schools are deemed to all be serious students, to all be prepared for every class and eager to spend hours dissecting every word, to be interested in the Brontes and know the difference between Emily and Charlotte. You are kidding yourselves as often some of the great unwashed sneak into those top schools. I have two daughters about to go to college. D#1 is engaged in her classes, interested in literature, art, theater, a little science, and absolutely sucks at math. She’s the B student with okay test scores who would shine at an LAC but doesn’t have any hooks and wasn’t offered any merit, so will head off to a state flagship and have a great experience. She is a possitive person and makes the best of everything, but I do think she’s the type of student and person you all spoke of as being prepared for a European history class, knowledgeable about the subject, prepared for class, able to bring in information from other experiences (religion courses, art courses, a trip to France). She could add to the discussion but since she didn’t score an 800 on the SAT, she won’t be part of your class. D#2 is an A student, high test scores, an athletic hook and was offered awards at a dozen LACs and asked to apply ED to Smith. She HATES all that reading and writing and talking about books. Hates languages. Hates arts and drama and doesn’t care if it is a Roman god or a Greek column holding up the building. She knew she’d be miserable at Smith (as I said, she’s smart!) but there was a lot of pressure for her to go there because of the name, the opportunity, the status, her grades and scores. A top student should be at a top school, right?</p>
<p>Count your lucky stars that D#2 is headed to an engineering school as you might have found yourself sitting next to this intellectual equal with the high scores and good grades. You’d be better off sitting next to her sister at the state school who actually likes discussing the meaning of the 4th paragraph on page 125 of the novel and who knows it is pronounced ‘Bront-ay’ and not ‘Bront.’ (Yes, an actual discussion at our house this week as D#2 moaned and groaned her way through an English paper on which she’ll get an A but not enjoy one second of the work.)</p>
<p>Something kids and parents too often do not know is that even with top stats, and even if some schools on the list are not all that selective, given those stats in particular, is: some programs fill up FAST. At state schools in particular, even Einstein isn’t going to get in, once the program is full. Engineering, nursing, some business schools do have limited seating and with rolling admissions, you can get shut out. I remember a neighbor whose son was not accepted to an engineering program after a number of kids with stat much lower than his were. That’s what happens when you get your app in late at that state Uni. In additions to the numbers generated by test scores, grades/rank, the date is a very important number in the process. Make sure for such school, that you get your apps in early for optimum consideration. </p>
<p>"I’m kind of amused that students at the top schools are deemed to all be serious students, to all be prepared for every class and eager to spend hours dissecting every word, to be interested in the Brontes and know the difference between Emily and Charlotte. "</p>
<p>Actually I agree with you. I’m not suggesting that every student at the top schools is a Serious Academic First and Foremost. </p>
<p>What I am suggesting, however, is that from a social life perspective, it’s a lot easier to forge a social life and feel like you have a “home” if you have a sufficient base of people around you who also think it’s just fine to enjoy your studies or who don’t think you’re a complete nerd because you’re excited about what you learned in XYZ class today or don’t think you’re a loser because you actually feel an obligation to finish your homework and do your problem sets and study for the midterm and not stay out til 5 am the morning before. And I’m sorry, it’s easier to do that at more selective schools filled with people who worked hard to get in, than it is at less selective / directional schools with less stringent admissions requirements. Sorry. It’s a different atmosphere. It’s a different atmosphere at Arizona State than at Smith. And yes, there are party-hearty kids everywhere, but even so - there’s a difference.</p>
<p>@arwarw and @Bartleby007: I totally agree. I work at a state university (not our flagship, but one in the state university system), and I tried to warn my in-laws that they were trodding a risky path. They didn’t want to listen because, as I stated, they had been telling themselves since my nephew was born that he was a genius. (On one occasion at a family function when my nephew was 4–not yet in school–my sister-in-law actually made the statement that “her kids were going to be gifted in something. I don’t know yet what it is, but they will be gifted in SOMETHING.” How do you respond to a person who thinks that way–who believes that you can MAKE your kid gifted?) </p>
<p>And yes, @awcntdb, he is a very bright kid–don’t get me wrong. But I don’t think he’s a genius. I truly think there are way too many parents out there who are convinced that their kids are geniuses. What qualifies as a genius, exactly? An IQ over 145-150? What is that–less than 1% of the population? How is it statistically possible that every other student you meet these days is a genius? Why is a bad thing to acknowedge that what you have instead is a bright kid who works hard and gets good grades and test scores? Mensa stopped accepting SAT or ACT scores as a measure of IQ a long time ago because the tests no longer measure learning aptitide–they measure content mastery instead. The organization clearly states this in its testing policy for acceptance in explaining why they don’t accept SAT or ACT scores: “The whole purpose of Mensa was not to reward high scholastic achievement but to recognize intellectual giftedness. The two are not synonymous.” </p>
<p>For us, my nephew’s situation only solidified our determination to avoid a similar fate for our own son, who is a senior this year. He is a similar type of student: 3.93 UW GPA (his school doesn’t weight); in the top 3 of his class of 51 (his school doesn’t rank, but his GC reported to colleges that he is in the “top 5%” of his class, so mathematically I’m guessing he’s near/at the top); 7 AP classes (the max available at his small school is 9) plus 3 classes completed at a local university; a 35 composite ACT (35 English, 35 Science, 35 Writing, 34 Math); has ECs that include being vice-president of his class for three years and president of the entire student council this year as well as having starring roles in the school’s musical productions and more than 200 hours of community service. His IQ was tested in middle school and measured at 147. Is he a genius? I don’t know. By my sister-in-law’s critieria, probably. But we’ve never called him that, or allowed him to think that of himself. He’s a smart kid, certainly. I’m more thrilled with the fact that he loves to learn, he’s highly motivated to do so and he works very hard without complaint. Those traits will serve him well in college and in the future. </p>
<p>When we sat down at the end of his junior year with his CG, her immediate response was “Which Ivies will you be applying to?” She was a bit stunned, I think, when we said “none of them” and handed her a list that included MIT, Caltech, Case Western, Boston Univ., Carnegie Mellon, WPI, Rensselaer, Univ. of Illiniois, Univ, of Maryland and Univ. of Conn. We had already done the research, done the tours–and done the math. We tried really, really hard to identify schools that offer the major our son wants and where we think he will be challenged academically, have opportunities for undergraduate research and study abroad, and–hopefully–get merit aid so he won’t have to burden himself with crushing debt. There are obviously a few reaches on his list, but the majority are schools to which we anticipated acceptance and possibly merit scholarships/honors programs. (Thus far, of the 6 schools that he’s heard from, he’s been accepted to 5 with merit packages from all of them. He was not accepted to Caltech, and he was deferred in the EA round at MIT.) When we explained our thought process to his CG, she said, “This is the most wonderful, thoughtful and realistic list of colleges I’ve ever seen. I wish everyone’s list had all the bases covered in this same way.” </p>
<p>@twoinanddone
Love your post! </p>
<p>I love that post too…I also have twin girls I can so relate. I just want to add D#1 has the much higher stats but will likely go to OOS Flagship because it offers what she wants. Industrial engineering major with a dance minor ( or a really good dance company) was very difficult to find. That ruled out all those LAC’s that she was qualified for. Its not about the name, ranking or prestige…it is about the fit! </p>
<p>Such an interesting thread. Our girls applied to 15 schools each this year… our goal was two-fold, to attempt the Ivy (and like Ivy - Duke, etc) lottery and to get sig. merit aid at respectable research insitutions (UMD, Pitt, UNC, OSU). Goal was to have at least a few good options financially and potentially an Ivy on the table. So far, so great. But, we didn’t fall into this… we researched and researched and researched. We added Ohio State, even though we weren’t sure about fit, because OSU was clear and generous upfront about their merit aid for OOS. We added Binghamton bc it was in state and affordable. So we knew we would have 2 options at least. And then the rest… wait and see. </p>
<p>My understanding is that 2 years ago, a 34 ACT at Pitt was enough to get full OOS tuition. Today, that same ACT offers about 60% tuition. You just can not count on anything and that’s why diversification is key for families w/ little to no financial aid but not wealthy enough to pay full price. We were very cautious about our girls finding any school that was the be all/end all. Sure, we walked away from very lucrative scholarship schools (Fordham) bc of no fit. But we just replaced it with another like school that was more of a fit. </p>
<p>I had no idea how much research one has to do to get a good list. But when the bill is anywhere from $20K-$60K/year *2, we weren’t about to just willy nilly this decision. I think our best two strategies are thinking of Ivies as lotteries and diversification when trying to get merit aid. Seems to have served us well so far. </p>
<p>I think I just “got it”.</p>
<p>Some of us send our children to college in the hopes they will find a world of different people. People different from those they have known. Different backgrounds, different interests, from different places, headed in different directions, with different abilities and passions. College is seen as a broadening experience.</p>
<p>Some of us send our children to college in hopes they will find a tribe of like people. People with the same passions, the same brilliance, headed in the same directions. College is seen as a refuge, where one can focus like a tiny but brilliant beam of light and find other, sImilarly focused beams of light.</p>
<p>Is that it? Is that why some of us can’t seem understand why a brilliant child should be forced to deal with people who are differently wired, and others of us can’t seem to understand why a brilliant child can’t manage to find friends among people who are not as deeply focused?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Based on the above, could it be possible for some students to find a “match” small school or LAC to be the optimal school for them, based on finding their intellectual peers, but find a large school to be their best “safeties”, since they will be intellectual outliers at “safeties”, so having a large “safety” school means more intellectual peers in an absolute numbers sense? I.e. a small school or LAC that is a “safety” might have too few intellectual peers for the student, and perhaps associated issues with the curriculum.</p>
<p>@3tallblonds, you are lucky your kids were willing to apply to 15 schools. Mine thought 10 was excessive. Our strategy was to put most of the effort into lottery schools, with an application to state flagship where we were very confident she would be accepted. We added one additional state school as an incredibly safe safety just in case. It’s a well-regarded school with strength in her area of interest, and I know the program is solid, but it’s not the school of choice for the very best students from her high school, her SAT’s are about 500 points over their average, going out of our region is somewhat important to her, and I think she’d find fewer intellectual peers there. So, no, she doesn’t love her safety, but it’s a fine school and if she had ended up there I think she’d make do, eventually find a few like-minded friends and she’d get a solid education with good job prospects. But she has other admits, so although I encourage her to keep everything on the table until we see all the offers, I think she’s already crossed that one off her list.</p>
<p>Finding schools which would be comparable or better than the state alternatives but be willing to hand her huge merit to make them comparably affordable seemed like it was going to take a lot more applications than she was willing to do.</p>
<p>With admission information so readily available on the web, and many schools offering early or rolling admission I think there’s absolutely no reason why any reasonably good student should get shut out.</p>
<p>@eascoascrazy,
“Some of us send our children to college in the hopes they will find a world of different people. People different from those they have known. Different backgrounds, different interests, from different places, headed in different directions, with different abilities and passions. College is seen as a broadening experience.”</p>
<p>OK, my daughter very much wants to go to a school with a lot of international students from different countries. She wants that broadening experience. She also prefers to go to a school out of our area, because she wants to experience something different. </p>
<p>“Some of us send our children to college in hopes they will find a tribe of like people. People with the same passions, the same brilliance, headed in the same directions. College is seen as a refuge, where one can focus like a tiny but brilliant beam of light and find other, sImilarly focused beams of light.”</p>
<p>Although she wants to major in computer science, she mostly bypassed the obvious “tech” schools, because she wants to go to school with people who are NOT necessarily headed in the same direction. She wants to take history classes with history buffs, not a room full of engineers many of whom are only there for a distribution requirement. She wants to talk politics with the Gov majors.</p>
<p>“Is that it? Is that why some of us can’t seem understand why a brilliant child should be forced to deal with people who are differently wired”
The “brilliant child” has already spent their entire life “dealing with people who are differently wired”. They don’t need an expensive college experience to learn about this. That was high school. And middle school. And elementary school. And preschool. I can’t tell you how thrilled my daughter was on the occasions she was able to do group projects with kids she considered her intellectual peers. It was a completely different learning experience than working with people who are “not as deeply focused”. Like night and day for her.</p>
<p>"and others of us can’t seem to understand why a brilliant child can’t manage to find friends among people who are not as deeply focused? "
Maybe the “brilliant child” is tired of censoring their vocabulary to avoid getting funny looks from friends who are “less focused”. Maybe the “brilliant child” would like to discuss Congress’s latest doings at lunch but finds that the friends who are not as “deeply focused” don’t follow the news, have little to say about Congress, and prefer to talk about Hollywood stars. </p>
<p>"Some of us send our children to college in the hopes they will find a world of different people. People different from those they have known. Different backgrounds, different interests, from different places, headed in different directions, with different abilities and passions. College is seen as a broadening experience.</p>
<p>Some of us send our children to college in hopes they will find a tribe of like people. People with the same passions, the same brilliance, headed in the same directions. College is seen as a refuge, where one can focus like a tiny but brilliant beam of light and find other, sImilarly focused beams of light."</p>
<p>I think both of those things can be true at once. My ideal setting has a lot of people of different backgrounds, interests, places, etc. - but their “likeness” to me is that they take academics and learning seriously. </p>
<p>But yes, as your typical high school “brainiac” who got lumped in with the nerds, it was tremendously freeing and liberating to not be seen as “nerdy” for taking academics seriously. I cannot express how life-changing that was for me, to be in an environment in which it was cool to get pumped about what you were learning and where you weren’t made fun for taking studies seriously. </p>
<p>I’m sorry, but as someone who lived in a state with an unexceptional state flagship, I would have had a very hard time doing so when on the same floor with all the same people I’d gone to high school with, who were all in the same cliques and who didn’t really care about school. I might have even dropped out, it might have been so dispiriting. Maybe that’s a personality flaw in myself, but so be it. That doesn’t mean I believed the only places with a sufficient concentration of serious bright students was HYP - who would be so dumb as to think that? - but let’s not kid ourselves that it’s found everywhere. </p>
<p>BTW, for many people, the state flagship or directional IS the “same old same old.” Same people, same friendships, same suburbs. </p>