A college that a student has a pretty good chance of getting into is a likely.
I have issues with the words match & target. Match because it seems like you’re looking for a partner that will match you, and if you’ve selected your match but your match doesn’t pick you back, it feels pretty stinky. Also, why can’t a school where a student has a likelier chance of admission be a “match?” To me, the word “match” is more about a “best fit” type of school, and a school’s admission rate is not a “best fit” factor.
With respect to target, it feels as though these are the schools you should be targeting. Why should a school’s admission rate (or a student’s chance of admission) have an impact on with why a school is a good fit for them?
To me, chancing is all about that, the chances of getting into a school. Ideally, all of the schools on the list should be a “best fit” or at least “good fit.” The names of the categories are just ways of saying the likelihood of the student getting into that best/good fit school.
My current classification is:
- Extremely Likely: 80-99+% chance of admission
- Likely: 60-79% chance of admission
- Toss-Up: 40-59% chance of admission
- Lower Probability: 20-39% chance of admission
- Low Probability: less than 20% chance of admission
My methodology for classification is pretty similar as described by @prezbucky in post #4, with the impact of a student’s major also playing a role if it’s an impacted/high-demand major.
ETA: If “safety” didn’t have a negative connation with it based on its usage, I’d be fine with it. But for too many people, they’ve associated “safety” as a “school of last resort” which I’m not a fan of. All a safety should be is a school that is extremely likely to be affordable, accept the student, and that the student would be happy to attend.