I can admit that some users on here are rude AND enjoy being on here. I"m not gonna let a few bitter people chase me away from the help this website can provide.
[QUOTE=""]
However, I have stopped getting on CC for the last few months because all I see are comments like this... "Well your application is decent but XYZ school is a reach for anyone, so don't get your hopes up." That's seriously what we're telling these kids with dreams and many of them with stellar applications that anyone would be proud of...? "Don't get your hopes up." <<
[/QUOTE]
Yes. That is seriously what many of us tell these kids. For the simple reason that this is EXACTLY what we should tell them.
[QUOTE=""]
the first thread I click see a student who has a 10/10 application and people (many of whom did not get accepted, let alone apply to these top schools) telling them to lower their expectations because Ivies are so tough. <<
[/QUOTE]
Well, based on their single-digit acceptance rates, the Ivies are tough. That’s why we advise them to research and apply to a range of schools – including Ivies and other reaches – so they can be assured they have multiple desirable options if the reaches don’t pan out. That’s not “lowering expectations,” that is being smart and strategic.
Do you really think the Ivies accept every student with a 10/10 application? Let’s test that theory. Here is a thread from a student who IMO has a 10/10 application. Why don’t you read what happened with his starry-eyed Ivy-or-bust strategy and get back to us? Don’t you think he could have benefited from the strategy outlined in the preceding paragraph?
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1876770-what-did-i-do-wrong-p1.html
Threads like this are why we advise everyone to temper their wildest college aspirations with a reality check to make sure they have a complete college list that covers every contingency.
I don’t think there are many, if any, long-time posters who are actually mean. I do think that there are some who may not have the best bedside manner when delivering bad news. That’s something that we can all aspire to improve.
@MotherOfDragons , I didn’t want you to think I did not see your reply, but I have no additional comment, as I think it expresses both your views and mine pretty precisely.
Things are quite civilized on the appliance repair forums. Or decorating, gardening, car repair, even computer issues.
Love the spunk, MotherofDragons. I’d like to see the chances forum go into planned hiatus every fall. You get one savvy person giving reasonable advice, then the next claims that 2350 needs to be higher, your nice depth and breadth in ECs looks like padding or scattered, how you just need to focus on passions (which can be the kiss of death, depending,) and more.
I’ve seen so much mis-advice. If anyone prefers general encouragement, they can go to college specific forums, where applicants are usually touchingly supportive of each other, over months.
Respectfully, @lookingforward , who suggested we should have general encouragement at the expense of good advice? And why are facts and civility mutually exclusive?
And why are you being derogatory about people being nice to each other?
This will be my last post in this thread (barring unforeseen events). I wish you all well, even those I disagree with so strongly.
In general I think most CC parent posters really do try to be helpful and respond in a manner that reflects they are trying to assist rather than criticize. Having said that I do think there are a small handful of posters that seem to have a need to “put the student in their place.” But it seems to be the same few so I think it says more about them than the 16 year old who is asking for input.
I rarely respond to those threads as I think I really don’t know enough about the child to make recommendations. And I assume there is a parent who does and who also knows all the other things that are not contained in the student’s post - like financial constraints or special circumstances with that child. I think the few times I have responded is when it is a first generation college applicant who states their parents cannot guide them
The metric I use in any response to a 15-17 year old student is “how would I like my own child to be spoken to?” If my own child is overly optimistic about something or is not looking at a situation in realistic terms, I do not put them down or try to “put” them in whatever “place” I think they should be - we have a discussion. We talk about the possibility of other outcomes.
I think you will find many young teenagers are overly optimistic - they haven’t lived ling enough to experience real failure.
i have to admit, the funniest and most entertaining posts here often come with a heavy dose of snark that may come across as rude to some. but the variety of personalities here are what make CC so much fun to read. i would hate it if CC turned into some endless Care Bears Kumbaya-Fest.
Postmodern, the encouragement of each other is touching to see on college threads. Kids are mutually supportive. The sad fact is that Chances threads contain much misunderstanding. That forum is ripe for that.
I’m not being derogatory about people generally being civil. But I would like people to provide reasoned advice. OP cited telling a kid a school is a reach for all as somehow shattering dreams. Really? You want, say, Stanford, but are crushed because someone suggests it’s a tough ride? What awareness does that show, what resilience?
OP comes on a PARENT thread to complain about how parents respond to kids on the Chances threads? He is implying that the parents are negative? But he himself posts on the Chances threads. Maybe some parents think the uninformed blind-leading-the-blind kids are overly optimistic on that thread!
I assume most people want to be helpful. I also assume most people are funny and attractive and smart. So, congratulations, you are awesome in my book!
I always get and give more on College Search & Selection over What Are My Chances. The draw of outlier threads is inexplicable. The extreme cases – crazy threads with with increasingly pissy-pant responses or super-duper warm fuzzy threads where everyone falls in love with the situation and has a group hug get a lot of attention (granted, the first is more popular than the second). I’d say 90% of the “help me” threads in College Search & Selection look something like this, which again, in my humble opinion is awesome (i.e. helpful, funny, attractive, and smart):
It even includes a random nincompoop. But hey, such is life.
I went to the thread to find the “random nincompoop.” LOL…easy to find!
That’s a good example of how helpful a thread can be, especially in suggesting match and safety schools. It also shows why it’s better to ask the question in the way the OP in that thread did, as opposed to “chance me for Ivies.”
@intparent, it’s useful to read the whole thread. I already acknowledged that I misunderstood @Lindagaf’s intent in her post in which she used that line.
Also, do you think you could give the rhetoric a break? You’re misrepresenting my comments. A couple of points in that regard:
- I said the Stanford admit had a 3.7 "and very good test scores." My point, which I think you missed, was that there were other kids who had better grades in the same program at the same school with as good or better test scores that were not even waitlisted. Interestingly, it seems you making the same point to me in another thread, where you mentioned your daughter's admission to Chicago with a 3.7 - something about doing it the hard way. Of course, a kid with a 3.7, or a 4.0, w/o good test scores is not likely to get into Stanford. The reason I'd offer that example is that his 3.7 was based on a very rigorous curriculum ... not just 2 or 3 AP classes a year. A full IB load is harder than that, and ad coms, most anyway, know that.
- I didn't say my kids' HS was especially challenging. All I said was that they offered a great IB program, which by any objective measure is a challenging curriculum. If you think that anything outside the Exeter, Choate, Deerfield circle makes no difference with elite school admissions then we probably don't have much more discuss. There are schools in the greater Seattle area alone that feed and consistently place students in top schools all over the country. Curriculum and a school's prior experience with kids from that school with a similar academic profile matters. It actually matters a lot. I have been through this twice and am doing it again, I've hired people to consult with about it, I've spoken to ad com members directly, our placement counselor knows many of these people personally - sorry, somebody on the internet isn't going to override all of that for me when I've the experience to substantiate it. Anecdotes are not stats. Go ahead and live your life based on aggregated data. I don't profess to be an expert on the common data set. I know that esteemed institutions are doing crazy things to boost their numbers for US News, and some get caught. Aggregate data of that sort is helpful to get a kid in the general range of reasonableness. But beyond that, we have found it to be a very hard-to-know thing without talking to a person.
- I think you are giving us an instance of the Pollyanna Principle with your example. Come on. The OP isn't targeting "sure, make it one of your reach schools, but apply to matches and safeties too". He's targeting the other delivery style, with which I'm sure you're familiar. And it happens here all the time.
I’ve always wanted to know how to officially spell “nincompoop”!
This thread delivers baby! 
There is a difference between being realistic and being negative. Being in the world of music, this is a very, very common phenomenon and also people complaining about the way people can discourage a kid. There is a difference between being negative and being realistic.
1)Kid loves the violin , piano, etc, parent talks about them wanting to major in music and be a performer. Common response (all negative)…“Why would you want to do that? There is no money in it” “Do you know how many good players there are out there, you don’t stand a chance” and so forth. Negative in that it totally wipes out their dreams or feelings and puts their own garbage on it, like you don’t try something that may be hard.
2)A situation where being realistic is considered negative. Kid wanders onto the music forum, and says “I am a high school senior, I picked up the violin when I was 14 and have been playing it for several years, I am in the school orchestra, don’t have a private teacher, and I would like to go to music school then get into a major orchestra”. This is a hard one, because assuming the kid really loves it, the reality is in the violin world the odds against doing any of that are miniscule,not difficult. How do you tell them to forget about it? What most people do is tell them that they can still enjoy music without necessarily majoring in it, that they could take lessons in school, work hard, while working on another degree, but also be realistic that what they are doing is near impossible. There is a level where it may not be a great idea to even try, where it is so unrealistic they likely are going to get hurt, but you also have to realize the feelings of the person.
However, what is really negative is when the kid might have a chance, and they are basically saying “don’t bother”. First of all, if someone is borderline for a competitive school, what else do they know about the kid besides their stats? Maybe there is something else there, assuming the kid has stats that are relatively high level, not perfect, why not try? The negativism these days is looking at something hard and saying “why bother”…half of it I think is that the person being negative with the kid who has a shot is that they are afraid the kid will get in, and somehow that would make them feel badly about themself (there are people like that, who get bummed out if another person catches lightening in a bottle…). If the kid has half a chance, what is the cost? So they don’t get into an ivy, it isn’t like applying is all that difficult, so why not try? People also have this black and white view these days, that there isn’t any room for kids to be human, and it reflects in their attitudes.
For the record, I for one don’t, or at least tend not to, participate in the “chance me” threads.
I find them stupid and pointless … on both ends.
Many rejected applicants to elite schools are academic one percenters. So yes, these schools are reaches for everyone. My salutatorian, 2340 SAT, LEGACY daughter was rejected from Stanford. I can’t tell you how many well-meaning people voiced their assumptions that she was a shoo-in. (We knew otherwise, so weren’t surprised when she was denied.) Telling people to apply to some non-reachy places is wise, not negative.
I completely agree that the chances threads are silly, unhelpful, and quite possibly, damaging. But they are highly entertaining.
I don’t think anyone is arguing against assisting these kids in getting on a more realistic psychological path. I think what some are arguing is that the delivery is sometimes unnecessarily harsh.
I think the vast majority of posters are helpful and diplomatic in their responses and take into account that they are speaking to a 16 or 17 year old. But there are a few posters that might think about how they would want other adults to speak to their own child before posting a reply.
@Massmomm, anyone who says anyone not named Andrew Luck is a shoe-in for Stanford is just not being reasonable. The main issue here is the tone and the outright enthusiasm with which some posters, as another poster in this thread put it, “sets the student asking the questions straight.”
My other input here is that I’ve seen people offer advice to kids that seemed a little definitive given what information had been proffered to that point. That is all.
I’m not the guy here telling us all to tell the kid with a 3.1 and a 420 on the math SAT to apply to MIT.
I think @Much2learn 's list is a very good one.