<p>Community college would make a lot of sense if what you’re shooting for is the state system, where the system allows for easy transfers. Isn’t that the case in California, for example? I don’t think it would make nearly as much sense for somebody whose preference is a selective private college, or a selective out of state public. At such places, I think it would be better to apply as a freshman from a gap year than as a transfer from a community college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you from the UP? - I’ve never, ever encountered a single kid in the lower peninsula that has done that in Michigan (apply only to UofM and choose community college because they didn’t apply anywhere else).</p>
<p>My take is that it is extremely difficult to get “shut out” unless like at Vladen’s HS and kids only apply to 1 college OR they simply apply too randomly with little investigation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I went to Pioneer. It was fairly common, obviously not everybody did that but a lot of people did. I would assume it’s still common but that was about 5 years ago. </p>
<p>It is very hard for the good stat kid to be shut out if it is not of their own making.</p>
<p>Most kids with good stats get requests to fill online apps free of charge, some requiring almost no paperwork and provide a turnaround in just a few weeks because they have rolling admissions.</p>
<p>Iowa State for example has a process that lets you submit an online app and give you a result within 48 hours - no need to submit a single piece of documentation until you decide to accept their admission. If anyone wants to claim they may not be all that good - a professor there won a Nobel prize 2-3 years ago.</p>
<p>One of my son’s teammates moms was talking about school lists, and every single college on that list was a private school. When I said something about the SUNYs, that was not going to happen . 12+ years of private school was not going to end up at a state school. Ok. I know the kid, and the schools on that list are not ones likely to give merit money, and the family is like mine. In a high cost housing area, living in a high cost situation and not exactly rolling in the money. Not for a quarter million dollar nut for college, but I doubt they will qualify for fin aid. </p>
<p>The next statement was that the schools had better come up with at least half the cost or the kid get scholarships in that amount because no way could they afford full freight at those schools–ridiculous what they cost.</p>
<p>I didn’t say a word.</p>
<p>My nephew wanted to go to UT Austin in the worst way, but his private high school did not participate in that 7% thing , and he did not get accepted there, even though he was an excellent student and his test scores were pretty danged good. He did not want to go to A&M where he was accepted, and he really was luke warm on any of the private schools that accepted him, all of them fine choices. His parents did not want to pay the full price for college that he really was moping about. One thing to pay the $60K for a kid all hot to trot there, another when it’s with deep sighs and settling. So he’s going to another state school and apparently will get an opportunity to transfer to UT, sort of like Penn State and the satellite campuses. Don’t know exactly how it works. But, that is how some kids do end up in certain state school, community colleges–to take advantage of a guaranteed transfer to the prized flagship. I know this has happened in CA to with the UCs, in particular.</p>
<p>Schreyer’s is pretty competitive–20% acceptance rate this year. Pitt less so, I think. </p>
<p>^^I was wondering if Schreyer could really be a “safety”. It’s one thing to say Penn State is the safety school but using Schreyer as a safety? That’s asking to be shut out.</p>
<p>It just depends on the student. </p>
<p>I read a baseball story where Reggie Jackson’s manager was trying to get him to make some changes in his approach to hitting when he came to bat with a runner in scoring position. Jackson looked at him and said "Coach, when I’m at the plate there’s *always * someone in scoring position.</p>
<p>“I define an “overly optimistic” application list as one that does not have a safety that the student is assured of admission and affordability, and which the student likes.”</p>
<p>easier said than done, if they are picky.</p>
<p>Well, the kid I described above was genuinely shut out, IMHO. He was outright denied at every school he applied to by April 1st. And I do not think that he over-reached. At most, he applied to a bunch of matches and a few that should have been safeties. Since he was considered a possibility for merit at some of them, one would think that they would have not been reachy matches. I do not recall if he applied to the local branch of the state U–probably not, because I cannot imagine that they would not have accepted him.</p>
<p>He eventually decided to apply to Eckerd after the list of schools with spaces came out, rather than taking a gap year, was accepted and did very well, receiving some kind of merit money from the school in subsequent years. I’m happy to report that he is doing very well in life. :)</p>
<p>His initial results are still a head-shaker. He remains the only kid that I definitely know of who was shut out of a list of reasonable choices (other than the legendary Andison). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True, picky students (or parents) can eliminate all possible safeties. A trivial example is if they are prestige-obsessed and find only super-selective reach-for-everyone schools acceptable. But other restrictions or combinations thereof (geographic, academic majors, etc.) can also eliminate all possible safeties. So can the “dream school” attitude that will result in a huge let-down if the student has to go to any other school.</p>
<p>And so can financial need. A kid whose family has an EFC of 0 has slim pickings when it comes to safeties. Most of the “guaranteed” money schools do not cover everything, or even everything but the minimal federal loan. The best financial bet by far are the most selective schools. This is something that is perpetually overlooked in these discussions.</p>
<p>The vast, vast majority of kids with very low or zero EFCs, at least around here, go to a local state school, or if not careful can get “snared” by some of these for profit schools that will loan them up to the whazoo if a fool with a pen will sign with them. Except for a very small number of very selective schools, getting a package that is affordable for them is not going to happen. I know kids who had to drop out of even those generous schools as the student contributions were more than they could manage. If a thousand dollars can be too much when a family is not making ends meet and if the area is arid when it comes to jobs.</p>
<p>
Note that student the document has typos, leading to some students having their acceptances listed as one number student and rejections listed as the following student number. For example, student #91 was not a shut out. He was accepted to UCB as student #90. Similarly #229 also was not a shut out. He was accepted to UCR and UCSC as student #228. #346, #354, #405, #and #429 were also not shut outs. Of the remaining, the reasons appear to be as follows. Note that some students are listed in multiple categories. For example, #403 applied to only one college, had no test scores, and had a GPA near the bottom of their class. </p>
<p>Only applied to 1 college – #306, #352, #403, #416, #443, #465
Only applied to 2 cal state, with lower stats – #355
Only applied to 2 selective universities in Japan – #446
Low GPA, near bottom of class – #403, #416, #485
Weak application (2.7GPA + 1380SAT + no ECs) – #264
No test scores? – #298, #403, #465</p>
<p>The most common cause at this HS seems to be only applying to one college, which was by no means a certain admission. UCLA was a common choice for the only college since the HS is located near LA. A local teacher in my area of SD mentioned that their valedictorian was rejected by UCLA last year, but accepted to Harvard. UCLA is obviously not a certain admission, particularly for students in the range listed above. One might find a reduced rate of shut outs in HSs located near less selective public colleges. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UT Austin has something called CAP, where some rejected students are offered the opportunity to enroll at a different UT school with guaranteed transfer to UT Austin upon meeting certain course and grade requirements.
<a href=“http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/cap/current”>http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/cap/current</a></p>
<p>Some UCs do have guaranteed transfer programs, but not Berkeley or UCLA.
<a href=“http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarantee/”>http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/transfer/guarantee/</a></p>
<p>My own experience–with my own, and with my friends’ kids–is that trying to come up with a safety “that you’ll love to attend” is harder than you’d think. A true safety, as defined by CC, is one with over 50% acceptance rate. Kids with SATs over 2200 are going to have a hard time finding such a school that fits them, at which they’ll feel happy and with their people, where the high SAT score is 500 points lower than theirs. Such a school is likely to feel like their high school. One often hears advice about applying to state schools, but if the kid really wants a smaller, more intimate, more intellectual atmosphere, he or she’s not going to “love to attend” a state school. Granted, they may well learn to love it, but they’re not going to go into the experience loving it, which is supposed to be the criteria for a safety. I think the result of that is a kid with a list that doesn’t have a “real” safety, and if such a kid doesn’t get into his other choices, even if he has a safety he’s going to feel shut out, unhappy, disappointed. For those kids, suck it up is really the only course of action, and while it’s easy to criticize him for being “picky,” it’s a little hard, when the emphasis has been on finding his “fit,” to find that suddenly fit is an indulgence he wasn’t supposed to take that seriously.</p>
<p>UT CAP essentially nominates the students to go to other UT locations.</p>
<p><a href=“http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/cap/admission/schools”>http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/cap/admission/schools</a></p>
<p>I have seen students like where they end up and choose not to leave. Some partners also have higher aspirations and are refusing to be part of CAP. I believe UT Dallas dropped out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Speaking of 50% rate, UT has about 40% acceptance rate but they admit mainly students in the top 7-8% of the high schools in Texas. Couple of years ago, one student with 2400 and two with 36 from a single high school ended up there. Competition is fierce in some of the majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Admission rate is not a reliable indicator of safetiness. For example, UT Austin has an admission rate under 50%, but is an admission safety for those in the top 7% of their Texas high school class, meeting the HS course requirements, and not applying to an impacted major. However, it is probably an admission reach for all others, even though its admission rate is not as low as other schools commonly thought of as “reach” schools by high stat applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One can also pay attention to whether the school has a “wide” or “narrow” student body in terms of ability and motivation as measured by incoming stats. Some schools are not very selective at the low end, but also have a significant number of top students attending. But others, while more selective at the low end, have most of their students in a relatively narrow band, with few top students attending. A safety school with a “wide” student body is likely to be a more academically fulfilling experience, since there is more likely to be a similar cohort of top students there than at a safety with a “narrow” student body.</p>
<p>The student’s major can also matter. If the student’s major happens to be a “hard” major at the school, the cohort may differ from the case where the student’s major happens to be a “gut” major at the school (and what may be a “hard” versus “gut” major can differ from school to school).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You probably won’t like hearing this but perhaps parents of high-achieving students need to stop encouraging their children to think that state schools are beneath them. I think a lot of these kids have contempt for these options because they are seeing high school classmates whom they consider to be academically 'inferior" being admitted and being happy to attend. I have personally found this to be very unattractive on the part of these kids but you really can’t blame them; the adults around them encourage them to feel that because their grades and test scores are so high, that somehow they are superior to the more average students and can’t have a worthwhile academic experience in college unless they can be surrounded by “their people” (sorry, I hate this trope).</p>
<p>I suppose it’s not a problem as long as the high-achievers can count on being admitted to top 20 schools but when that doesn’t work out, it’s expecting an awful lot of a 17 year old to have the maturity to see that their future isn’t ruined by having to attend a school where everyone isn’t exactly like them. I happen to believe that excellent students who haven’t been crippled by the notion that they can only soar when they are surrounded exclusively by other excellent students can gain a great deal by learning to negotiate a more egalitarian environment to find the opportunities where they can be challenged and shine. In fact, that experience can teach them an awful lot that they may never learn in an intimate hothouse full of people who have all scored in the 98%+ range in their SATs and GPAs. If college is supposed to prepare them for the “real” world, maybe they can actually benefit in ways they and their parents have never imagined.</p>