People who only apply to top schools?

Applying to College
21

this is at best a semi-viable strategy even at some of the ultra-exclusive high schools (exeter, andover, choate types) but at regular schools, i do not really get it. in a sane list, there should be at least 1 true safety (in-state), 2 low-matches / high-safeties, after that its up to your risk profile. some people have a linear approach with colleges peppered along the spectrum from low safeties -> high safeties -> low matches -> high matches -> low reaches -> high reaches. others use a barbell strategy with 2-3 low/high safeties, a couple of matches and the rest low-mid-high reaches. but having all high reaches is completely asinine.

if someone does want to adopt a skeptical/agnostic mainly mathematical strategy i would suggest finding colleges with varying acceptance probabilities around your SAT/GPA scores using a tool like parchment. So after choosing 2-3 of the safeties, choose a couple with 60-80% predicted acceptance probabilities, a couple with 40-60%, a couple in the 20-30% range, and a couple in the 15-30% (high reaches). Applying to any with sub 15% probability for your profile is pointless. At least this is a strategy that has some logic.

22

Well, @ucbalumnus , nobody wanted to commit to certainty! Our CC was saying that one school that she’d have thought would be a slam-dunk for DS rejected a kid with much better stats last year although they accepted many others with stats similar to and worse than his. (Speculation was that the superb candidate and hadn’t visited, so they figured he wasn’t that interested; that has made me grateful for each acceptance that’s come in.)

I’d include affordability in the definition of happy to go, but you’re right to highlight that – lots of stories on these boards about miscalculations on that part of the equation.

23

Well there are other factors that could influence the decision making. She may be pretty sure she won’t attend anything but one of her “dream” schools. Perhaps she is not adverse to taking a gap year if she does not get in. If she is full pay (and perhaps a legacy to boot) then Wash U can be her safety for sure. I believe Wash U has two almost completely separate pools of accepted students-full pay students who are legacies or who did not or could not (and didn’t try to) get into Ivy+ or top flagships and on the other end of the SAT/ACT/grades continuum there are the absolutely top students requesting financial aid. I would love to see how low Wash U dips in terms of full pay students but they don’t publish a Common Data Set (do we need to wonder why). So Wash U could be a very reasonable safety for a legacy or full pay student.

24

The girl doesnt know anyone ballsy enough to have told her the reality. But she doesn’t have to go to CC. There will be many colleges with rolling admissions, and there is a list that goes out of colleges that didn’t get their yield and are still looking for students. I am sure there are many references to it on CC. Some of the colleges on the list are top notch. I had a look last year and was very surprised.

25

One has to be careful about how assured admission could be. It seems that common mistakes in assuming that a school is a “safety” when it really is not are:

  • When the school has different admission standards for different divisions or majors. A high stats student may look at the overall admission stats of UIUC or Washington and think they are admission safeties, but if the student wants to major in CS, they probably are not.
  • When the school uses subjective criteria heavily, particularly "level of applicant's interest", in making admission decisions. See the school's common data set, section C7, or the admissions tab on its entry at http://www.collegedata.com .

On the other hand, some schools have automatic admission (or scholarship) criteria, so if the student meets them, s/he has a safety if she likes the school, there is no issue getting into the student’s desired major(s), and it is affordable.

26

It’s hard for students with super stats to find match schools. 1 or 2 in-state public can be safe, but for students with like 2300/35 or better sat/act, 800 subjects, 4.0 unweighted GPA with 11/12 AP total, score 4/5, top 5%ranking and some good ECs, maybe they think some of the top 20 schools are match. Really, can someone give some examples of matching schools for those stats?

27

Since it doesn’t seem to have been mentioned at all: is it possible that this girl has some backdoor in at one of those schools (e.g. she’s a legacy whose father has a steady donation record and was roommates all 4 years of college with the current dean of admissions).

I agree that most likely it’s just her being stupid being stupid, but I remember a high school classmate who was an 8th or 9th generation legacy at Harvard (I’m not counting uncles and great uncles and what not, I mean 8 or 9 generations straight up his family tree attended Harvard) whose dad was (and still is) on the Forbes billionaire list. He actually didn’t want to go to Harvard initially so in some sense Harvard was his safety school. He wasn’t allowed to apply early anywhere and ended up going to Harvard even though he did get in to other schools. Not sure if it was because he came around to the idea or the family simply put its foot down after indulging him for a bit by letting him apply elsewhere.

28

iwannabe_Brown, yes my guess is she is legacy at Wash U. And if she is full pay, Wash U will accept her with amazingly low grades and scores. She probably has no worries.

29

In some states, some in-state public universities, or specific popular majors at in-state public universities, would not be safeties for anyone, but may be matches for a top-end stat applicant.

30

College1202, to put your question into perspective, there are probably only a few thousand students out of the millions of high school seniors who have a profile like that. For example, in 2014, of the 1,845,787 who took the ACT, only 1,407 scored a 36, and only 7,175 scored a 35.

Also, adding to the point made earlier by ucbalumnus, “holistic” admissions (and different admissions standards for instate, OOS and international applicants) can produce surprises for students who “on paper” might consider a school like UIUC or Washington (with its 26-31 ACT and 3.78/4.0 average GPA (2015)) a “safety.”

31

One if my kids had very, very good stats. She found some LACs that were not tippy top ranked, but still very good schools to apply to as low matches or safeties, with the benefit of merit aid. It really isn’t that hard to find matches and safeties if you take the prestige blinders off. She ended up getting in everyplace she applied, but it would have worked out if she hadn’t.

32

29 (Cont.) Prospective applicants should note whether the admission stats they are looking at are for students who applied, were admitted or enrolled. Average stats for "admits" are often significantly higher than for "enrolled." Some schools, such as UCLA and UCB, publish all of these stats. Others, such as UW, only publish stats for enrolled (Common Data Set).

33

I’ve been thinking about this thread and others that have been similar and will make a bit of a confession. While I am genuinely saddened when very good students have high visions and aspirations then suddenly have little to show for their efforts 
 I also feel a bit of schadenfreude. To not look pragmatically at the search process shows a degree of hubris (not just on the part of the student) and not just confidence. Most of the disappointments could be alleviated by looking harder at the search process and being more thoughtful and realistic about chances, opportunities and goals. Students like the one the OP mentions put themselves in the position of feeling like a failure even when they are successful getting into a college. They run the risk of being rejected by the schools they identify with and accepted by only the schools they will “settle” for. Just because a university may be a “top” school doesn’t mean it is necessarily the best school for any individual student. I think the latter is what should be sought.

34

What about her approach bothers you? Do you know every one of the 17 schools she applied to? And why are you posting about some random classmate anyway?

Chances are she is going to get into some of the schools. And if she doesn’t there are hundreds of schools she will still be able to apply to after April 1st. My son’s inbox is blowing up every day with schools telling him that it is “not too late to apply AND get merit.” There are plenty of schools you can apply to and get on the spot acceptances even in August. There is no such thing as getting shut out of college.

Keep in mind that a safety school is only a safety if you will be happy to attend. Perhaps she has her sights set on certain schools, and if she doesn’t get into any of them she will regroup and take a gap year. There is a “cautionary tale” from years ago floating around CC about a top stat kids that got rejected everywhere and that is exactly what he did. He ended up getting what he wanted in the end-MIT I believe.

35

These two schools are examples of schools where some students looking for popular majors like CS may see the school as a safety or low match based on overall stats, but then be surprised that the CS major is much more difficult to get into (they may get admitted to the school but not the CS major).

36

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/192395-no-acceptances-one-kids-story-a-year-later-p1.html

Short version:

Student applied to a list that was mostly reaches with no safeties, got shut out.
Took a gap year (with various activities other than just work like most middle/low income people would have to do).
Student applied to a mostly different list (not as reachy, but still no safeties) next year, got admitted to some schools.

I would say that the student got lucky the second time in getting admitted to some schools, since there was still no safety in sight. It probably would have been devastating to get shut out the second time.

*The schools in the lists with lower stats do consider “level of applicant’s interest”, indicating that they do not like to be used as “safeties”.

37

34, UCLA is another school that surprises many applicants who see 26-33 ACT and 3.85/4.0 average GPA (enrolled, 2015) and think "match."

38

@ivvcsf, students are often poorly advised. If their parents and GC push this type of plan, then a 17 year old will often follow it. There are plenty of parents (we see them out here too often) who are completely focused on prestige. We see students with that focus, too, of course – but a lot of times there are parents with the same attitude.

39

Also, sometimes students believe what they read on CC.

Lostaccount said, “ I believe Wash U has two almost completely separate pools of accepted students-full pay students who are legacies or who did not or could not (and didn’t try to) get into Ivy+ or top flagships and on the other end of the SAT/ACT/grades continuum there are the absolutely top students requesting financial aid. I would love to see how low Wash U dips in terms of full pay students 
 So Wash U could be a very reasonable safety for a legacy or full pay student.”

Later, lostaccount says, “if she is full pay, Wash U will accept her with amazingly low grades and scores. She probably has no worries.”

It’s stuff like this that make students think a school is a safety when it is not.

In fact,

“In the fall 2010 freshman class, approximately 5 percent of admitted students had one or more parent graduate from the University.” (Wash U student newspaper, studlife, 2011)

http://www.studlife.com/news/administration/2011/02/11/study-reveals-the-importance-of-family-in-college-admission/

Compare this to:

“Yale has admitted between 8 and 13 percent legacy students, Harvard between 12 and 16, Dartmouth between 8 and 14 and Cornell between 14 and 17.” (Daily Princetonian, May 7, 2015)

http://dailyprincetonian.com/news/2015/05/legacy-status-remains-a-factor-in-admissions/

According to College Board, only 26% of Wash U has below 700, 2% below 600, 0% below 500. I don’t know what you consider “amazingly low test scores”, but it does not seem to be the case that they are doing what you claim.

As for financial aid, they aren’t really very different than some other top schools and they are improving financial aid this year.

(http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/washington-university-st-louis-2520)

Cost and Financial Aid
At Rice University, 39.2 percent of full-time undergraduates receive some kind of need-based financial aid and the average need-based scholarship or grant award is $34,954.

Cost and Financial Aid
At Washington University in St. Louis, 40 percent of full-time undergraduates receive some kind of need-based financial aid and the average need-based scholarship or grant award is $35,555.

Cost and Financial Aid
At Georgetown University, 38.2 percent of full-time undergraduates receive some kind of need-based financial aid and the average need-based scholarship or grant award is $36,878.

Lostaccount, you can actually look some of this stuff up.

40

Let us know how it turns out for her. You may be surprised. If she applied to 17 schools, they can’t all be top 10 (or Ivies).

My guess is that she doesn’t have parents or advisors who introduced her to great schools that aren’t so hard to get into. If she strikes out this year, she has next year to figure it out and she goes to school older, wiser, and more experienced. I’m actually more surprised by people who pay massive amounts of money to send their kids to mediocre LACs. This kid is saying if I go to college, I want to go to an excellent college/university and one that challenges me. She may not have a nuanced or accurate view of excellence yet, but it’s not a bad goal.