<p>
Greensleeves would say “stick it to the man”?? I can’t imagine. :)</p>
<p>I think the OP’s approach is useful, if a further adjustment (estimate) is made for the student’s actual qualifications relative to the acceptance rate at a given school. It’s all just an approximation, of course, but still not a bad idea for approximating how “safe” your strategy is.</p>
<p>The idea of statistical independence or interdependence here doesn’t have anything to do with collusion. It has to do with another element that some have pointed to: common underlying factors that will skew the odds for a given applicant because several schools will use the same criterion to reject a student (say, low test scores, or no “hook”). The calculation that was given in the original post assumes that applicants are just buying a lottery ticket at each school, so their chances of winning or losing are just like all other ticket buyers. But in fact, their odds depend not just on the overall admission rate but also on the qualifications of the “buyer.” Many applicants to a moderately selective school have essentially zero chance of admission because their stats are in the bottom quartile and they have no hook, no other selling point.</p>
<p>When my son was applying, he reduced the uncertainty (the chances of being rejected by all schools) in two ways: first, he used a rolling admission backup at a public flagship, and second, for all of the schools he applied to his stats were in the “top quartile.” He “hit” on 5 of 6. And this wasn’t just dumb luck.</p>
<p>She was totally corrupted by her 3 weeks at Yale last summer ;).</p>
<p>
I’m glad you understand what I’m trying to do, reasonabledad. We’re always shocked when a strong academic student is rejected by every school on his/her college slate. Depending on the list of colleges, the formula can show that this is not an unlikely event. Many students choose a slate that gives them a 1 in 10 chance (or greater) of being rejected by every school.</p>
<p>I like the 2-3 reaches, 2-3 matches, 2 safeties approach. I don’t think the formula replaces this strategy. The formula’s merely a tool to help you decide whether your safeties are safe enough.</p>
<p>I agree that there are many caveats to the formula, but I did the same calculation for my DD early in the spring. She applied to State U (sure admit), then received three accepts, three waitlists and four rejects. Four rejects seem like a lot until you calculate the odds of this outcome (just using the printed stats without allowing for correlation among schools’ decisions).</p>
<p>The three waitlists were from the bottom of her list, and the three accepts were LACs where I think the ‘fit’ for her was best.</p>
<p>The “formula” is perfectly logical, and the thread has done a great service to readers by revealing the statistical expertise of the posting population :)</p>
<p>Of course the outcomes are not independent, because schools behave somewhat alike, and they are all looking at a similar application. The point is that you may (will probably) seriously overestimate your own probablilty of admission.</p>
<p>That’s essentially the message here. You can easily take a few simple steps to stay out of the “all thin envelopes” outcome next year. Pick a school or two where the real probability for you is “more likely than not”…in fact, “way more likely than not” i.e. maybe 85% or more chance of acceptance.</p>
<p>I believe that among the reasons that people overestimate their chances is the non-ranking policies in so many schools. IF you asked at every school, I’ll bet you that 10% of their students believe they are in the top 5% of the class, that 15-18% of the students believe they are in the top 10%, and that about 40% believe they are in the top quarter. Of course, the colleges get a chart that tells almost exactly where the students are, which the students never see. The only way to get to this info indirectly is to use the admissions records of recent classes and focus on those kids with a similar gpa (as yours). Unfortunately, this is difficult to do since the guidance office usually has the data arranged by college rather than by student, (because doing it that way would disclose the rank).</p>
<p>Just curious… do any of your sons and daughters just get to be kids? Enjoy high school without tailoring everything they do to look good on a college app? Follow their true heart’s desires, even if they change from year to year, without worrying how their lack of “commitment” looks to a college admissions office, ie. EXPLORE (I truly believe kids aren’t supposed to know with certainty what they want to study in college when they are sophomores!). How do your kids feel that their parents are mapping out their futures for them; do they ever feel that you don’t trust them to do it for themselves? Yes, having shepherded 2 boys (very bright and accomplished, I might add) through this grueling process, I fully realize they need SOME guidance, especially since many other accomplished kids have parents who are running the show for them. But I wonder if more shouldn’t be left up to the kids, so that they feel a true sense of ownership of the process and where they end up. By the way, both my sons applied to our state university as a “safety” – it wouldn’t have been bad for what they wanted to study, but it’s in our hometown, alas. Son #1 applied to one other school, a selective LAC that he loved and knew would be a good match for him. A risky approach, to be sure, but he got in with a top merit scholarship he didn’t even apply for. I think he looked especially good to them because they knew he wasn’t spreading common applications and easy supplements all over the country. Son #2 applied to 3 and got into 2, all extremely selective colleges. He applied to an ivy only to satisfy us – we’re legacies, and wanted to do an experiment… does being a wonderful person/student with great stats, EC’s, recommendations, and a legacy to boot mean that he’ll get into this hyper-selective ivy just because his parents went there? Absolutely not! And we’re glad. It was never in his heart to go there anyway. Boy am I ever relieved all this is over. Now I need to quit reading discussion groups that only make me worry about the mental health of the generation that’s entering college today. Sorry if I offend. I just worried about what has become of the college search/application/admission process today and that parents fuel the frenzy by buying into it. Most of all, I worry about what’s happening to our kids and what they’re losing out on in their carefully scripted childhoods.</p>
<p>lyricasta, I suggest you spend a little more time looking around this forum before firing shots across the bow. I think you’ll be surprised.</p>
<p>Being interested in application/admission realities is different than scripting a childhood. If I could have scripted my son’s childhood, there would have been a few different acts. </p>
<p>The reason for threads like this one is to keep people from applying to two schools that won’t admit them, or even to ten schools which won’t admit them. Some people don’t need to read this…for a varying of reasons. It is a sad fact that the people who most need to reflect on these issues probably don’t.</p>
<p>You are very astute and fortunate to have the outcomes you have with your sons with only five aplications between them.</p>
<p>Iderochi, believe it or not, I read the entire thread. Not every post reflects my concerns. I just noticed a recurring theme. I’m not “firing shots” – I’m truly sad that our children are in many ways being robbed of the joys and spontaniety of their childhoods by what has become of the college admission process. Believe me, there were many times my kids’ approaches to it made me nervous as hell (not SAT/ACT prep, for example), but I always had to question my own motives and how much they were influenced by the keeping-up-with-the-Joneses effect. Sorry again if offenfed. I merely meant to stimulate discussion and reflection.</p>
<p>Lyricasta, I spend too much time on CC. I enjoy taking peeks at the posts and giving responses. Also my livelihood is related to college admissions, so there is a lot of reason for my interest. My kids, however, have never even looked at this forum, have no interest in it at all. I have copied some very relevant posts and given them the info when it directly could help them, but still they spend zero time on the subject. Most of the parents here are in the same boat. Many of us are interested in the process, got more interested, and some of us just enjoy talking to each other through the boards. Fascinating people here, in my opinion. But though I am sure there are some parents here who are overbearing about the process as there are in many places, these days, I don’t think the parents here are the pushy ones I too often see. The college situation just gives us a common ground to start some discussions with people we get to “know” . And though we are all strangers and this is an internet board, by researching through the archives, you can get a pretty good idea of what kind of people are on here. Someone with 1000 posts over a year or so, does paint a picture of himself.</p>
<p>Keemum, I also like the formula … as long as percentages are used that are applicable for the particular student … of course these are guesses but it gives some guidence of how tough the application process is (just as the USN lists give some guidence to the tiers of schools but are not precise about absolute rankings)</p>
<p>
For me this does not follow. If a student has the stats and other stuff to shoot for top tier schools the formula shows that the 2-3, 2-3, 2 strategy will lead to a match (maybe) or safety … the HYSP/ASW are so tough to get into for anyone that only applying to 2-3 of them has almost no chance to get into one of their reaches. If a kid finds a bunch of reaches that fit in the top tier I think it makes sense to apply to lots of them … because the odds of getting into at least one go up.</p>
<p>Keemum, I also like the formula … as long as percentages are used that are applicable for the particular student … of course these are guesses but it gives some guidence of how tough the application process is (just as the USN lists give some guidence to the tiers of schools but are not precise about absolute rankings)</p>
<p>
For me this does not follow. If a student has the stats and other stuff to shoot for top tier schools the formula shows that the 2-3, 2-3, 2 strategy will lead to a match (maybe) or safety … the HYSP/ASW are so tough to get into for anyone that only applying to 2-3 of them has almost no chance to get into one of their reaches. If a kid finds a bunch of reaches that fit in the top tier I think it makes sense to apply to lots of them … because the odds of getting into at least one go up.</p>
<p>lyricasta,
I certainly agree about the loss of spontaniety in the process. Junior year, in particular, is really a trial by fire for kids that are academically ambitious, especially if that kid has some raggedy bits to his resume, as mine did. </p>
<p>The process of applying a predictive model to one’s child is a little on the appalling side at first glance. I can’t speak for other people, but in our family’s situtuation, my son’s GPA was not what it should have been, in part, due to factors beyond his control. So, he realized that he had some making up to do, and would have to look at those school that might reasonably be expected to cut him a tiny bit of slack in the grades department. He asked me to do the initial research on colleges - his HS sends very few kids out of state, and the expertise simply wasn’t available there. Out of my initial long list (based on the criteria he provided), we selected about 14 schools to visit (with me insisting on matches/safeties in the mix) and he ultimately chose six to apply to. I think he should have applied to a couple of long shots, but he didn’t. His revaluation was that the expected value of the long shots (say one in 20 chance of admissions) did not warrant the time and energy spent on the applications.</p>
<p>My kid posts on CC from time to time, but left the OCD bits to me. My academic background is math-related, so I have been looking at the whole thing from a mathematical perspective. There are many, many factors to evaluate, and for some of us, looking at the numbers in a variety of ways is useful and enlightening.</p>
<p>Sounds like most of the posters like the formula. I hate it. I cannot think on any real situation where it would give a reasonable answer - seems like we’re trying to validate gut feelings, somehow, with “math”. Probably better to stick with the gut feeling.</p>
<p>Sorry to be so cranky!</p>
<p>Hey,
I have not read through this entire thread, but got the jist of it.</p>
<p>To the original poster…</p>
<p>PLEASE, 4 reach schools and 2 safeties? That is not good planning, and gives you no choice if the unthinkable happens and your child does not get into any of them.</p>
<p>My very experienced guidance counselor at school had 2 LACs with about 24% acceptance rates as safeties for me. They told me that the schools would thank their lucky stars to get me. I believed them.</p>
<p>What I learned the hard way? I believe a true safety school should have at least a 50% acceptance rate. I know people will disagree with me here. I also know it is quite easy to say as the parent of a 10th or 11th grader that it will be different for you child because they are special. The hard truth is that unless they are absolutely, fantastically unique, they are not special, there are thousands of other applicants like them, and their application will not stand out.</p>
<p>I came on the parent’s forum before to air my disappointment and got totally slammed, so hesitated coming back. I sent in my depsit to the one and only LAC that accepted me. I still am undecided whether or not I will attend, or take a gap year, or just figure it as freshman year and transfer out ASAP. I still do not want to attend.</p>
<p>Again, words to the wise…have 3-4 safeties, and NO school that only accepts 25% of applicants is ever to be considered a safety school for anyone! I learned the hardway that despite all their experience, GC can make huge mistakes, as my GC did. I am paying the price after all my years of hard work.</p>
<p>
I agree. Most students cannot match the profile of a typical HYPS applicant but if they still want to try, then 2-3 reaches will do. If a student is truly an academic standout and feels that the most selective schools are the best matches, then I would recommend applying to more than 3 reaches but s/he should still apply to several safeties. </p>
<p>(What’s a typical HYPS applicant? I’m sure we can start a long argument about this but to me, that means 1500+ SAT I, 700+ SAT IIs, 3 or more AP scores of 5, XCs on par with editor of school paper plus captain of baseball team plus All-State Honors plus other activities.)</p>
<p>
I wasn’t recommending that for anyone. In fact the point of the formula is to show that it’s a bad strategy. Sorry to hear about your bad GC experience. I’m trying to educate myself so that the same doesn’t happen to my children.</p>
<p>If you really want to educate yourself and help your child, look into the schools with higher acceptance rates where they would be happy, so they still have a choice even if they don’t get into their reach and match school, as happened to me.</p>
<p>I am not complaining that I did not get into an ultra competitive school, but I am upset that after all of those AP’s, straight A’s, good SAT’s, and participating in EC’s that WERE my passions (not just done to pad my application) I felt as though I did not have a choice between just 2 LAC’s. I ruled out the UC’s that accepted me as just too big. The LAC that accepted me is considered very good, so please, parents, don’t go there again and slam me. The issue is that I had no choice because of bad guidance. </p>
<p>keemun is doing the right thing by looking into this before it is too late for her kids. Again, have some TRUE safeties on that list.</p>
<p>
My suggestions for adjusting the acceptance rate to better reflect an applicant’s chances:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Start with a school that’s a good fit.</p></li>
<li><p>Take the school’s published acceptance rate.</p></li>
<li><p>If you have a hook (legacy, URM, athletic recruit, etc.), multiply by 2 (maximum: 100%).</p></li>
<li><p>If you don’t have a hook, divide by 2.</p></li>
<li><p>If your stats fall below 50th percentile for the school, divide by 2.</p></li>
<li><p>If your stats fall below 25th percentile, divide by 2 again.</p></li>
<li><p>If your XC’s are below average, divide by 2.</p></li>
<li><p>If you’re not applying ED or SCEA, you should probably divide again (by 2?).</p></li>
<li><p>The result is a very rough estimate of an applicant’s chances of admittance.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Again, this is an imperfect process. I don’t think these numbers will predict the future, but for those of us who like to estimate probabilities, I think it’s a useful approach.</p>