Most students Apply to 4 or fewer schools

edad · February 5, 2006, 7:39am

Carolyn, I do indeed have a hard time understanding you. Your original statements seemed clear. You implied that 4 schools made sense and clearly stated that the applicant with the well-targeted approach would likely be accepted into their first choice.

Later on this recommendation seems to have changed. You offer the truism that the applicant with the well-targeted list is more likely to achieve success. By your definitions well-targeted means realistic, thought out and likely to lead to success. No one can possibly disagree with such logic.

We all know plenty of examples when students have been given bad advice or have not understood the nature of college admissions. There are cases where the student has applied to several ivies and a State school as a safety. They never learn about all of the great schools which would have been matches. Even worse a small number of students don’t include a safety or their safety fails them when they need it. It is clearly important to understand the probabilities of acceptance and to have a well balanced list including safeties, matches and, if desired, reaches. That does not mean the list needs to be short. If fact for many students a very long list might make sense. I see nothing wrong with including a large number of very selective schools. That does not necessarily mean the student should be driven by prestige and submit lots of apps with the blind hope of increasing their odds. Even with a big list, it is best to have done the research and to understand the student’s goals and know which schools are the best fit. I do agree that a big list is not necessary for most applicants. It makes sense for those students with academic achievements that put them in the range of the highly competitive and selective schools AND for those students where these schools match their personalities and goals. My older D is smarter than my younger D. My older D fit the State school and had a very short list and my younger D fits into a very competitive, challenging environment and had a very long list.

carolyn · February 5, 2006, 5:33pm

Edad, no where in my original post did I say that ALL students (or even some) should apply to only 4 schools. I did mention that a national survey said that the majority of freshmen enrolled this year said that they applied to 4 or fewer but I didn’t say that meant everyone should only apply to 4. What I did say was that there may not be a need to apply to 12+ schools if your child has a well-targeted list. Big difference between saying “students should only apply to 4” and saying “may not need to apply to 12+ if the list is well-targeted.”

And, I agree totally with what you are saying – no matter the size of the list, it needs to be well-targeted. If you do a good job of building a well-targeted list, you may not need to apply to so many schools, or to worry as much about getting in. We’re in total agreement there.

By the way, my daughter’s list had 8 schools on it. She applied to 4 EA/rolling admissions schools, including one that was her first choice and a bit of a reach for her. She got into all four and decided she had enough to choose from so didn’t complete applications to the other 8. If she hadn’t been accepted to all 4, however, she would definitely have applied to the others.

But, her list was well targeted, she knew exactly why each of the 8 was on it, and she knew how her special talents and contributions fit with what each school needed/wanted. There were MANY other schools she liked, or that probably would have wanted what she had to offer. I’m sure she could have built a list of 12 or 14 or 16 or 20, but what would be the point of that if she already had a well-targeted list of schools with that match up between her wants and the schools’?

My son, who like your older daughter, is intellectually gifted, may indeed have a longer list than my daughter did. And, his list will probably include some highly selective schools that are reaches for everyone. But, I’ll make sure he understands that there are many great schools at all levels of selectivity where he can get a terrific education equal to his intellect, and encourage him to have at least some of those on his list as well.

mimk6 · February 5, 2006, 7:29pm

I never really considered the UCs as separate applications even though they are (one app to many schools). Although it cost more to apply to several UCs, we considered a few of them as “safeties” when my daughter applied. Even though I was pretty sure my daughter would get into Berkeley and UCLA (which she did), I did not want to be the parent who was so sure that they overlooked applying to schools that were more of a sure thing. So she applied to six UC campuses. I felt OK about doing that because no one else had to write recs or be inconvenienced. In addition, she applied to six reach schools and was accepted into four (three of them YPS), wait-listed at a small LAC and denied at one. When it is my son’s turn to apply, I know he will want to have several reaches. I think he’ll apply to a few very small programs because small might be good for him, but what I learned from last time is that the problem with small programs is that they have such limited space that it can become even more difficult to get into than a school like Stanford or Yale. So if you have a few small schools that seem like a good fit, and a few schools that seem like quite a reach, don’t count on those small schools that seem like a fit. They are often looking for a broad group geographically and may only be taking a very small group of students from a particular region. So, while my son, on paper, might end up looking like a good fit, I will consider all small programs a reach, add to that larger programs that are a reach, add to that several UC applications and that will look like a lot of applications. But I really think it’s better to be safe than sorry. The one thing I would do differently, however, is that after my daughter got in early at one school, we should have dropped some of the other applications. The only reason we did not was that I felt that the teachers had already sent in their recs, etc. and I felt like she needed to finish what she’d started. I’d do that differently now – I’d say just keep the schools you would consider attending over school X. In the end, she did not go to the early admit school so it was worth doing some of the extra apps, but maybe not all of them.

edad · February 5, 2006, 7:36pm

I had some difficulty with your initial statements, but you followup makes perfect sense. I would like to know the techniques you and your D used to target schools and really understand how her special talents fit each school. We had a great deal of difficulty with this. Research was not very helpful. We relied mainly on intensive visits and interviews.

KateLewis · February 5, 2006, 7:39pm

Carolyn, if you don’t mind my asking - which schools with high acceptance rates would you consider a good match for your son’s intellect?

I’m finding the task of getting good, solid safeties for a bright kid (preferably NE LAC’s) daunting. Everything I see has acceptance of 30% or below - regardless of her stats, I can’t see claiming those as “safeties”.

carolyn · February 5, 2006, 9:48pm

Edad, of course there’s no magical way to be 100% certain of what schools are looking for, but I found it useful to get a hold of each prospective school’s strategic plan and see what they were emphasizing in terms of goals and objectives for the next few years. Many admissions offices will give you a copy if you ask, many schools also have it online if you use a few search tricks to find it. Other institutional reports and data can give you similar insights, as can reading the student newspaper, asking well directed questions of admissions and faculty, etc. What programs are being built up, what new endowed seats have just been created, which majors are over subscribed, which are undersubscribed but still very good. Looking at past admissions trends – like who got rejected here on CC or in your community over the past few years — can also yield some clues. And, there’s fair amount of intuition as well. Finally, you have to be willing to look critically at your own child, and see their admission weaknesses (and every applicant has them) as clearly as their admission strengths.

Kate, if you PM me and give me an idea of your daughter’s stats and interests, I’ll share my son’s, and give you some ideas of schools that I’ll probably be suggesting to him to look at as solid bets for his particular interests. By the way, didn’t mean to make him sound like some sort of wunderkid, he has his share of weaknesses too.

carolyn · February 5, 2006, 10:08pm

The only reason we did not was that I felt that the teachers had already sent in their recs, etc. and I felt like she needed to finish what she’d started. I’d do that differently now – I’d say just keep the schools you would consider attending over school X.>>

Mim, this is exactly what happened with my daughter. And, she saw it the same way “Why would I finish the application at School X if I’ve already gotten into School Z and like it better?” Of course, this may not work for those who need/want significant financial aid or are hoping for merit awards. And, I agree with your approach of thinking of the UC’s as one application, no matter how many you apply to. Makes sense to me. Finally, your comment about smaller schools having less places is a very good one, and one I hadn’t considered before. But it makes sense - a 30% admit rate at a school that only accepts 800 kids for 350 places is quite different from a 30% admit rate at a school that accepts 1500 for an incoming class of 800.

macnyc · February 5, 2006, 11:33pm

To confirm what you noted: Our GC said at a recent meeting for parents of juniors that LACs can never be thought of as safeties, just because the schools are so small and you can never predict who’s going to be accepted. I don’t know if I would go that far, but certainly I think that’s true concerning the higher ranked NE ones.

My daughter is going to be limited by her school’s policy to seven apps, as I mentioned before, but all the SUNYs and CUNYs count as one (we’re in state). So she will probably apply to three or so of them. I’m hoping that she likes them enough to “love her safety.”

TheDad · February 6, 2006, 12:31am

I don’t think the admissions odds with NE LAC’s are that desperate…once you get out of the field on the so-called “Top 30” or so. Schools like Skidmore, Bennington, Hampshire, Simmons, Sarah Lawrence, Holy Cross (to name a few off the top of my head, checked with PR) all have acceptance rates in the 40-68 percent range. If female, Smith and Mount Holyoke are something close to 50 percent shots…and are great “admissions values” relative to their strengths.

Now, I’ll admit that I’m biased…my conversion to love for LAC’s might waver with some of those compared to some mid-sized research universities with comparable odds as to which I thought was a “better deal.” But if an NE LAC is what really fits best, they’re there.

carolyn · February 6, 2006, 2:39pm

I agree with TheDad. After reading this last night, I came up with a list of many very good NE LAC’s with admit rates over 30%. And, in thinking it over, I don’t agree with the statement that it is harder in general to get into LACs — I think many LACs tend to take a more personalized and holistic approach to reading applications than many universities and that can often work in an applicants favor. It’s easier to stand out when you’re one of 3,000 (or less) applications than when you’re one of 18,000.

Anyhow, here are just some of the LACs I thought of that have admit rates over 30%. Whether any of these is a safe bet for a particular student, however, depends on the match between what the student has to offer and what the individual school is looking for, so please don’t slam me if you know someone who didn’t get into one of these schools or if you feel these schools wouldn’t be right for your child. I am not going to mention universities here (although there are also plenty to choose from) because the question was specifically about LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES. Note: I have nothing against universities — just focusing on LACs in this particular post. If someone wants to spend the time to create a similar list for Universities, I’d be thrilled to see it.

I am NOT saying these are safe bets for ALL students, nor am I saying that these will be the right schools for ALL students, just that these are excellent LACs with admit rates well above 30%.

Of course, many parents and students have never heard of some of these schools, or looked at what they offer in any close and open-minded way, so please don’t shoot me for mentioning them if you feel they are below your child until you do. And, again, I’m coming up with this list from memory, so please be gentle when you point out any errors I may have made.

<hr>

Northeast:
Dickinson, Hobart & William Smith, Franklin & Marshall, Allegheny, Union, Ursinis, Muhlenberg, Wheaton College (MA), Bryn Mawr, Mt. Holyoke, Smith, Alfred, Clark U, Drew, Gettysburg, Holy Cross, Lafayette, Washington and Jefferson, Juniata, Fairfield, Providence, Marist, Bard, Skidmore, St. Lawrence, Grove City College, Gordon College. You could also probably throw in Villanova, Lehigh, Bucknell.

Just outside the Northeast (Ohio and there abouts or the mid-atlantic): Kenyon, Denison, Wittenberg, Earlham, Centre, College of Wooster, Ohio Wesleyan, Goucher, St. Mary’s College of Maryland, Antioch, University of Richmond, Hollins, Loyola College of Maryland.

Farther afield: Rhodes, Hendrix, Beloit, Trinity U (Texas), Southwestern University, Eckerd, Austin College, Lewis & Clark, Whitman, University of Puget Sound, Willamette, Knox College, Colorado College, Lake Forest, Cornell College (no not that one - this is the LAC), Albion, Alma, Kalamazoo, Hope, St. Olaf, Grinnell, Hanover, Wabash, Furman, Millsaps, Hampden-Sydney, Rollins, The University of the South (Sewannee), DePauw, Ripon, Lawrence U, Scripps, Mills, Pitzer, Occidental.

<hr>

If students and parents looking at “highly selective” LACs can’t find at least ONE school to love on this list, I’ll eat my hat with ketchup. Of course, that may mean looking beyond brand name and the lure of equating “hard to get into” with “the only schools ofering a quality education.” Those willing to really focus on what is being offered with an open mind may be pleasantly surprised by some of the schools on this list — in my mind, these are the true “admissions values” where getting in isn’t impossible and yet the quality of education offered is quite good.

Again, this list is admittedly limited by my lack of total recall, so feel free to add other schools that you know about to the list.

roshke · February 6, 2006, 3:38pm

As Carolyn says, don’t use acceptance rates as the sole means of determining match. Some extremely selective LACs (including the highly ranked women’s colleges) appear to have high acceptance rates, although average SAT/ACT scores and GPAs are also high. To some degree this is because many of the applicants are self-selected. In other words, it’s a very strong applicant pool coming in to begin with in some of these places. That can mean it’s harder to get in than it looks.

quiltguru · February 6, 2006, 4:05pm

Adding to the midwest/Great Lakes list:

Hope College (Michigan), Ohio Northern University, Otterbein (Ohio), and Adrian (Michigan).

curmudgeon · February 6, 2006, 4:06pm

Good job, carolyn you hit all six of my D’s selective but not too selective schools. There are some excellent schools on that list, some very highly ranked. If rankings are your thing, and they shouldn’t be the only consideration- take a good long look at these , in no particular order and from memory:

Grinnell, Kenyon, Denison, Bard, Colorado, Furman, Oxy, Whitman, Dickinson, Sewanee, Centre, Rhodes, DePauw, Scripps, F+M, Bryn Mawr, MHC, Smith, Richmond, Trinity U, Holy Cross, Lafayette, Lehigh, Bucknell, and Villanova*.

The asterisks symbolize something else you may consider, those I count as merit aid granting institutions . (Some others have a few merit and/or leadership awards but not a wide or deep program). My D applied to 3 of these schools and three from the remainder of Carolyn’s list. She could be happy at any of them. Those that fail to look beyond the usual suspects have only themselves to blame.

KateLewis · February 6, 2006, 9:33pm

And with that warning ringing in my ears, I’m off to do my studying!

Thanks all. Great suggestions.

carolyn · February 7, 2006, 1:58pm

Some extremely selective LACs (including the highly ranked women’s colleges) appear to have high acceptance rates, although average SAT/ACT scores and GPAs are also high. To some degree this is because many of the applicants are self-selected. >>

Very good point Roshke. As I said in my post, the schools I listed are NOT safe bets for every student, nor will they be matches for every student. And, even SAT/ACT scores can be deceptive as a measure of quality - there are some schools that provide an excellent, challenging education where the SAT/ACT bottom medians are somewhat lower than the most selective schools. Reasons for this can include that they are located in less sexy places, draw a more regional student body, or have a smaller applicant pool.

So, keep an open mind on all accounts and look at what is offered by each school first, then look at those acceptance rates and SAT Scores. And, by the way, while guidebooks like Fiske and Princeton Review are good starting points, the best way to determine educational quality is to do your own research and comparison shopping.

Now, who’s going to volunteer to do a similar list for universities? :)

roshke · February 7, 2006, 3:44pm

Not including the state schools (which can be ultra selective for OOS students but a great deal for instate), I’d include Tulane, Syracuse, U Rochester, Lehigh, GW, BU, American U, Fordham U, Clark, Drexel and Northeastern for starters.

curmudgeon · February 7, 2006, 3:57pm

UMiami and Case are my new best friends.;)

northeastmom · February 7, 2006, 4:38pm

Carolyn, you have some interesting eating habits: hat with ketchup, cheerio diet… yummy

Actually I am glad that you won’t need to your hat with ketchup for your cc pals, or cheerios for your D!!!

garland · February 7, 2006, 6:01pm

Some of the top state schools like NC, VA, or Cal can be pretty tough on OOS because they have a limit on what percentage can be OOS, but some others don’t. Michigan, for instance is undoubtedly tough to get into, but for a student with the stats to be looking at the top schools, it is a very attractive match. A fairly high percentge of their students are OOS. It was my S’s second choice school, and if he hadn’t gotten into his ED, he would have happily gone to Mich with major merit money.

Most students Apply to 4 or fewer schools

CONNECT WITH US