<p>lurkin’ girl,
sorry that your senior year was so stressful - and the 24% ‘safety school’ syndrome is just what keemum’s formula warn’s against. I hope you will give the LAC a chance this fall. A young friend applied all ivy + mom’s alma mater LAC a few year’s ago. Thank heavens for mom’s LAC. After some initial distress, she ending up loving in, and ending up being accepted to a top med school despite mediocre MCAT’s. Unless you have a really compelling reason for a gap year, I think you will be in a stronger position as a transfer next year if things don’t work out. Best of luck to you!</p>
<p>lurkin’girl, I know you’ll make the right decision for your situation, and I wish you the best of luck. To be fair, while there was a bit of “slamming” over your previous thread, I think that you also received a great deal of good advice, empathy, and sympathy – I think the supportive comments far outweighed the slams.</p>
<p>Iderochi,
Yes, you are right, there were some really nice posters out there last time, and I really appreciated it.</p>
<p>But some of the posters even dug up my post history to find that at one time I considered the LAC that accepted me a good fit. I simply changed my mind midway through the process, and was treated by a few posters in particular as inferior because I am a first generation college student. I should be happy with whatever I receive. It really hurt me, and I just don’t want to hear that same banter again. I just want to help the OP so the same does not happen to her kids.</p>
<p>Also, ohio_mom…thanks for the kind post. That is just what I am thinking, but REALLY have aversion for this LAC right now…
It is really hard when all of your friends are going to schools that they are so excited about, and I just don’t want to go. I am REALLY trying to look at all of the good points, and have even stood up for this LAC in other forums in an attempt to make myself feel better. I KNOW that it has many good points…I just cannot get over this gut feeling that it is not right for me. I am trying SO hard to be excited…I am not there yet…</p>
<p>Don’t want to hijack this thread, because I think it is useful for others to learn…</p>
<p>lyricasta, different kids have very different levels of willingness to play the admissions game. My kids had almost none. They did take the requisite tests, and when they did well enough on the first round, they didn’t repeat. They had a couple of intense EC’s but never even thought of resume padding or doing anything just for the sake of college admissions.</p>
<p>When the time comes around to make applications, however, there really does need to be a strategy at that stage. And that’s the value of keemun’s original post: helping people to think about odds and what they can do to succeed in the application process (whether in the past years they followed a grand plan or were largely oblivious to the process). And that’s the stage when I also became really involved – I’m speaking of the last 7-8 months prior to submission of applications, not a multi-year process.</p>
<p>At no point prior to actually filling out the applications did we think very much about college admissions. Once the process started we took a look at what was there and packaged it as best we could with some what we hoped were innovative twists. It turned out my S’s EC’s were very good, and it just kind of naturally happened. He took the ACT with little preparation and got a high score, took AP courses because he was interested in them, etc. There was some stress in producing a range of applications in a short time (mostly for the parents), but up until that point, for better or worse, not much thought was put into it. We were all very pleased with the result.</p>
<p>mackinaw and idad, I totally agree with your approaches (mainly because they sound similar to that at our house). Yours were not the posts that depressed me. And I wasn’t criticizing individual parents, I was dismayed at what the process has become. Sorry again if I offended. Sometimes it’s hard to convey true intent and meaning via discussion boards where tone of voice, expression, and innuendo are lost. The bottom line is, I’m just sad at what so many of our kids are experiencing. Gosh, no one ever suggested “in my day” many years ago that you prep for the college admissions test or take them more than once. My only guidance: show up with my number 2 pencils.</p>
<p>Now I’ll bow out. I think I’ve interrupted an ongoing conversation where devil’s advocacy is resented. Good luck to all your children. May they find colleges where they can thrive and find their true selves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How would they have known?</p>
<p>lyricasta: I was not in any way offended. I enjoy reading everyone’s point of view. I also wish it could be easier on the kids, but I believe each family has its own way; folks do what in their hearts they believe is best for their kids.</p>
<p>But at many colleges being a recruited athlete is worth much more than URM or legacy status. At serious sports schools, top athletes need only meet some minimum academic standard, that may be quite low compared to the student average. See “Game of Life”. At colleges that do not care much about sports, there may be no such thing as a recruited athlete. </p>
<p>On the other hand, in spite of the arguments about affirmative action, URM is worth something in admissions, but not nearly as much. Legacy, on average, is worth about the same as URM, but the value of both vary widely by college.</p>
<p>Again, the problem is that the probabilities will depend on the college and the student.</p>
<p>
If you have admittance data on specific schools and the value of each hook, by all means, use that information. Most people will not have that data but would still benefit by taking a hard look at their chances of rejection. Many dislike computation in any form so I would hesitate to make the formula any more complicated. As it is, some have misused and misinterpreted it.</p>
<p>I agree that one should try to tailor the acceptance rates to the specific applicant. I caution against thinking that one’s chances are better than average, though. Unhooked, non-ED/SCEA applicants to selective schools should assume no more than half the published acceptance rates. If we apply this estimate to the 8 Ivies, the typical applicant’s chances of being rejected by all 8 is 50%. This is a very rough calculation but useful nonetheless if it causes students to run for some safeties.</p>
<p>No kidding. The Parents Forum is a tough crowd. And restless too, since we are kind of in a seasonal lull in the college search-admissions game.</p>
<p>While it’s been a tough crowd lately, and some posters have been rough on keemun (btw, I appreciate that you have stuck to your guns, and have responded respectfully – I’m not sure I would have done the same with respect to some of the posts) at least it’s calmed down from a few weeks ago. </p>
<p>Keemun – appreciate the formula. It may indeed have too many “kinks” to be workable in a lot of situations, but it’s another tool we’ll keep in mind as we go forward.</p>
<p>Joining w lderochi. I’m a little confused by all the critiques of how the formula doesn’t “work”. As I understand keemun’s intent, the formula was never intended to predict whether one will be accepted or not, or provide a statistical prediction of one’s chances of acceptance. </p>
<p>The formula is designed to indicate how risky a slate of schools is. A major contribution the formula makes to the thought process, imho, is to point out the fallacy in the strategy of applying to “lots” of lottery schools as a way of ensuring acceptance to one. Ganging together a passel of 80%-90% rejection schools still yields a dangerously high chance of rejection by all.</p>
<p>To me, that’s what keemun is saying and I find it useful. When used as one part of a “slate building” plan. Which is all keemun ever meant it to be.</p>
<p>PS I wonder how many of the “critics” are busily using the formula on their own slate of schools? ;)</p>
<p>As a former math major and actuarial consultant, I am a bit formula happy, and like to peruse stats. But through experience in things that affect lives so directly, it really comes down to either 100% or 0% when it pertains to YOU, not the vast sea of large numbers that generate the formulas. It’s fine to come up with formulas, but testing them requires a larger sampling and control factors that are not easily available. </p>
<p>To answer Keemun’s question, yes it is possible that the D could be rejected by all of her schools. In my opinion, unlikely. Near impossible if some safeguards are put into her picks. But, you know, kids throw in all kids of wild cards that skew the process. Getting busted for a senior prank and expelled from high school at the 11th hour might make college a tenuous thing despite all of the stats analyses one does. As I stated before, I have never personally met anyone who was not accepted to any of his schools, but I have met many, many kids who were only accepted to schools they did not want or expect to attend. By adding them on the list, I guess one could say they avoided the total shutout.</p>
<p>
It sure is.</p>
<p>Hopefully, I am not being “tough”. Not trying to be one of a crowd, Keemun. I truly think your daughter will be fine. With some safeties in her list it would be as close to 100% that she will get into a school. The tough part is finding schools at varying selectivities.</p>
<p>At its best, this forum can be most helpful when it fosters a variety of points of view and generates nonredundant information. I think this particular thread is actually a good example. The OP put forward a good idea that became refined through criticism and advice.</p>
<p>afan: I’m not sure how well that legacy thing works anymore. We know of a student where both parents were legacies at the same very selective school who was rejected by the school even though the student had so-called match statistics. The student was accepted at other similar top tier schools.</p>
<p>My use for Keemun’s formula is to help my SIL and DN (new acronym! Dear Nephew) think more clearly about their existing strategy: DN has top grades, very good scores and ECs … definitely a BWRK (and the sweetest DN on the planet!). But I feel that SIL’s harping on HYM as the only options are setting him up for failure and major disappointment. So even if there are statistical refinements to be made to the formula, it’s a good tool for a basic reality check. And numbers seem to be helping my SIL grapple with the fact that her wonderful, but hookless son is one of many wonderful kids who aren’t all going to get into Yale. Thank you all! (My turn is a few years away – DS is in middle school – but coming sooner that I want to think)</p>
<p>idad: You are right that colleges, particularly top colleges, give little weight to legacies these days. When dh and I attended a Harvard reunion, we were told outright that this was so. We also have the sense that having attended a school’s graduate program carries even less legacy weight for undergraduate admissions. Of course this varies by school, but I think it’s probably misguided to think that legacy status changes much. Certainly I wouldn’t multiply my chances by 2.</p>