Timely Advice for Veteran College Counselor in SF Bay Area re: Applying to REACHES

Parents Forum
1

<p>COLLEGE BOUND
A weekly guide to higher education
Joanne Levy-Prewitt</p>

<p>Sunday, September 30, 2007</p>

<p>How many colleges should students apply to? </p>

<p>These days, that’s a tricky question. It is difficult to predict where one will be accepted, so students need a list with a range of schools. I used to say that the highly selective colleges were reaches for even the top, top students. Now I call them unreachable.</p>

<p>Students should spend as much time as possible identifying colleges that spark an academic and social interest, but also have an appealing location and class size. That means visiting, reading, researching, asking questions, attending meetings with college representatives and using Web sites. Then, choose three or four in each level of selectivity: safety (you can’t imagine a scenario where you wouldn’t be admitted), match (you’re fairly certain you’ll be admitted) and reach.</p>

<p>This final category requires a warning. Do not apply to a reach school simply because it would be amazing if you miraculously got in. Miracles do not happen in college admission. If your grades and test scores are not squarely in line with the profile of the most recently admitted class, or you do not have an unusual talent or come from a particular set of circumstances, you are wasting your time.</p>

<p>My answer is apply to eight to 10 colleges.</p>

<p><a href=“http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/30/BA39SDUCH.DTL[/url]”>http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/30/BA39SDUCH.DTL&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>This article appeared on page B - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle</p>

2

<p>Sorry, title should have read From Veteran College Counselor</p>

3

<p>Mpm-are you Joanne? If so…I have read the articles religiously, and found them VERY helpful during my DD’s Jr & Sr years in HS. Thank you for your counsel and insight…if not…then…I know this article will prove helpful to other parents. Remember everyone…breathe…it does all seem to work out best. Sincerely-APOL</p>

4

<p>No, I’m just a mom in the bay area. But Joannes’s advice has always been “right on” IMO.</p>

5

<p>

Yep, that’s what the “veterans” told my daughter, too. </p>

<p>The best advice I got was from some delighted cc kid who had managed to be accepted at a dream college despite scores 100 points below range for her school: You can’t get in if you don’t apply. </p>

<p>I think the counselors get jaded because they work with groups of students, so they see the big, statistical picture and not the exceptions. They are also probably frustrated by having to deal with prestige-obsessed parents and students with unrealistically high expectations. So I understand why they might say, “don’t bother”. </p>

<p>But from the point of view of the individual with high aspirations … that’s dumb advice. The “include safeties” part is excellent advice. The idea of making it an equal distribution between safeties/matches/reaches is questionable since (a) the odds of getting into a true safety are so much higher that there is no particular benefit in applying to many - two are plenty to hedge bets unless the student is hunting for merit aid, and (b) as between matches & reaches, there is no guarantee of being admitted at either, so it makes more sense to simply apply to the colleges that the student most wants to attend. </p>

<p>I suppose my d. fits the “unusual talent” or “particular set of circumstances” exception in the veteran counselor’s statement… but only because she created that circumstance through her own efforts through high school. So that exception is big enough to eliminate the rule, which might be better stated: “don’t apply unless you can articulate a compelling reason why your dream college ought to accept you”.</p>

6

<p>calmom, congratulations to your daughter. She must be something special.</p>

<p>But, on the other hand, I wonder why a student would WANT to go to a college where the SAT score range is 100 points above hers. Wasn’t your daughter terrified that she wouldn’t be able to do the work once admitted?</p>

7

<p>As I said in the other thread, by this author’s definition of safety (which I think is a good definition), it’s silly to apply to three or four safety colleges. Apply to the very best safety college you can find, preferably early in a rolling admission round, and then apply to more speculative colleges that fit you. Miracles DO happen to applicants every year–or at least every year students on CC tell about them–but the way to avoid disasters is to build the list from the safety up.</p>

8

<p>

marian, I’d guess that was totally dependent on the kid. In calmom’s case her very creative, opionated, self-assured kid who was already an excellent writer is kicking butt and taking names at Barnard. Devouring the school work and spitting out the bones. Another kid , maybe not as accomplished or self assured may flounder but I think her kid’s lopsided nature plays heavily into this also. She may have been bottom 25% math and top 25% critical reading and have a major that does NOT require any more math. In that instance , it’s no wonder she’s a top student at Barnard in her fields of inquiry. It’s also possible that a top math/science kid may do very well if she can get herself into Fu at Columbia even though her critical reading skills are substantially below the norm.</p>

<p>Or it may be that the SAT doesn’t adequately measure what she brings to the table .</p>

<p>Or maybe both.</p>

9

<p>Thanks for all of your reasoned and interesting perspectives. I am just going through the admissions process with my oldest D. While I think that we are pretty well-equipped for the journey and she is making good choices, I have been fascinated by the often conflicting advice as well as by the mix of procrastination, indecision and confusion that seems to govern the lives of her high-performing classmates as they try to navigate this process. </p>

<p>The problem with general advice is that it’s, well, general. Kids often fall outside of the lines, like to think they do or figure “what the heck.” I do think that they are at least hearing that they need to apply to a safety they like and not just a throwaway choice.</p>

10

<p>Pffffft. </p>

<p>Eight applications? With eight thoughtful essays? For a boy? Dream on–unless one of the apps is the UK UCAS app–six schools in ONE app, woot woot.</p>

<p>Even with a four app limit, a boy can throw in a reach school IF he has one absolute safety (+60% acceptance) and two solid matches (+40% acceptance) in the mix. Both of mine made a run at super reach schools. One now attends his super crazy reach and one attends one of his matches.</p>

<p>You can’t get doubles if you don’t roll the dice, baby.</p>

11

<p>Re post #6, If the kid is likely to be a substantially worse student than the vast majority of students at that school, then I would agree with Marian.
It seems like you would be setting yourself up for a pretty miserable and disappointing four years.</p>

<p>At one school I’ve been following, a current student posted that certain academically underwhelming athletes there routinely searched for the very easiest courses, took the minimum class schedule to stay enrolled, and then took courses over the summer at easier schools to stay afloat. What kind of an education are such people giving themselves? And who are they ultimately fooling?</p>

<p>On the other hand, sometimes a low aggregate is applicable to a lopsided individual, who is in fact not at all weak at one end (quant, verbal) or the other of the academic continuum. To the extent that such an individual intends to, and is able to, stay focused on playing to his/her strengths in college, and avoid their areas of relative weakness, they can do just fine and are really at no disadvantage.</p>

<p>A number of engineers I’ve known over the years would have done quite poorly in a curriculum focused on writing long term papers. Instead, they elected programs of study where this issue would not come up.</p>

<p>At the other end, a poor aggegate score could be applicable to an outstanding writer who is abysmal at math. If such a person attends a school with minimal quantitative requirements, and fully intends to minimize their education in this area, then this relative weakness may not ever materially impact their college experience. In this case there ought not be undo concern about ability to handle the work.</p>

<p>It’s occurred to me that maybe this is why SATs have some predictive ability for first year, and then less thereafter. In the first year many people are taking care of distribution requirements, and therefore are taking some courses that they aren’t that intrinsically good at. Whereas later on they are in many cases playing more to their strengths.</p>

<p>Also some people just are diligent pluggers with great study habits and always do better than their standardized test scores would predict. Such people know who they are, and might consequently be calm about entering such an environment.</p>

<p>But for the majority of low-testers, I too wonder why they would want to put themselves in a position where they may well get hammered.</p>

<p>I well remember a kid like that who transferred into a demanding college at my university. He’d done well at a very undemanding school, where he’d earned outstanding grades. However despite this, the truth was his real level of academic capability was far below the norms for this new school. His standardized test scores reflected this, accurately in this case, but they accepted him anyway. The poor kid had his dreams of law school completely blown up, as he was barely passing in his new environment. Near as I could tell, he had a terrible last two years of college.</p>

<p>(oops I guess this just duplicates post #8, which I didn’t read before; sorry)</p>

12

<p>"But, on the other hand, I wonder why a student would WANT to go to a college where the SAT score range is 100 points above hers. "</p>

<p>The best predictor of college gpa is h.s. gpa. When I taught college, I saw several students with high high school gpas, low SAT scores outperform students with very high SAT scores because the former type of student was more disciplined and motivated. </p>

<p>Also a 100 point difference in SAT score doesn’t mean that a student is unqualified for admission at a college or would have to struggle a great deal to keep up. Depending what they major in and what their work ethic is, they may get stellar grades.</p>

13

<p>I have an issue with telling kids a school is “unreachable.” Whatever happened to telling kids to aim high? And there are “miracles” in college admissions all the time. This website is full of stories of very bright kids who did nothing particularly extraordinary, other than working hard and being involved in relatively standard ECs, who got into “unreachable” schools. I’ve personally known many such kids. There is nothing wrong with dreaming big and aiming high as long as a kid understands that it is a dream and is realistic with other choices.</p>

14

<p>Mim,
I’m sure you mean within realistic expectations. If my S had perfect PSATs, I’d be OK encouraging him to aim high. If his scores didn’t approach that range, I’d focus more of finding realistic reaches and matches, as well as the imp safety. Why have kids fill out unrealistic applications?</p>

<p>I’ve had clients with SATs in 1400 (old test) who put all their efforts into HYPSMC applications. Sometimes the parents are more realistic, sometimes they are the ones woefully unprepared for denials. Finding safeties and matches and appropriate reaches that one’s child likes and can afford takes effort.</p>

15

<p>A great fallacy I’ve seen posted on the board of my alma mater a number of times is the canard, “if they accepted you, you must be able to do the work”.</p>

<p>Thing is, I lived through the place, and personally knew a number of people who they accepted but actually could NOT do the work. Such as the guy I mentioned previously, and my freshman roommate who flunked out.</p>

<p>I would not put the onus for making this judgement completely in the hands of the admissions office. When its you, and not they, who will be living with the consequences.</p>

16

<p>Does 100 points really matter? I cannot imagine a 100 point separation makes the difference between a student making it and struggling. My kid had a 110 point difference bewtween his first and second SAT, dropping on the latter test. Obviously, that 100 points means nothing as far as his ability to get work done in college. If it did, then we would be reading about kids with high SAT’s and okay GPA’s getting into schools ahead of the ones with okay SAT’s and high GPA’s- and we all know that it’s the GPA that counts the most or schools would change their systems. I wish it were the high SAT’s that got kids in as it would benefit my child in the admissions game!</p>

17

<p>I don’t think that 100 pts will make or break an acceptance decision. I think what Joanne was trying to get across in the article was the need to be realistic in terms of what is truly a reach for an applicant, vrs what would be a “miracle” acceptance. I think this phrase sums it up best-
“If your grades and test scores are not squarely in line with the profile of the most recently admitted class, OR you do not have an unusual talent OR come from a particular set of circumstances, you are wasting your time.”
“Squarely in line with the profile of MOST recently accepted students” is the key phrase for most applicants, IMO. She has been a private college counselor for many years in the Bay Area, and I believe what she is trying to do is make students, and their parents think before encouraging them to send in the “hail Mary” application. Yes, nothing ventured, nothing gained, but these days, as admissions at many colleges have become very competative, students should be paying particular attention to applying to colleges where they are likely to be accepted, instead of applying to schools where they are most likely to be declined. Just my 2 cents.</p>

18

<p>Calmom–your D definitely brought something special to the table and fit within the exception!</p>

19

<p>“I’m sure you mean within realistic expectations. If my S had perfect PSATs, I’d be OK encouraging him to aim high. If his scores didn’t approach that range, I’d focus more of finding realistic reaches and matches, as well as the imp safety. Why have kids fill out unrealistic applications?”</p>

<p>Yes, I mean within reason. But if you are in the ballpark with previous entering classes, the chances might still be very slim, but nothing ventured, nothing gained. I guess I just think that if the word “unreachable” is used, the kids who should be reaching, won’t.</p>

20

<p>OK, weighing in here.</p>

<p>I think the questions and discussion about my d’s test scores and choice of college simply illustrates a myth about the value of those standardized scores. </p>

<p>To start with, my daughter’s SAT scores were not 100 points below the 25th percent mark at her school. They are 120-160 points below.</p>

<p>D’s Math: 580 - Barnard Math range: 640-710 - Columbia Math range - 670-780
D’s CR: 620 - Barnard CR range: 640-740 - Columbia CR range 670-760</p>

<p>I’ve included Columbia figures because the issue I am responding to is Marian’s question, “why would a student want to attend a school” where the score range is 100 points higher, and my d. keeps signing up for classes at Columbia as well as Barnard. And I want to show that it isn’t a case of a kid who simply is lopsided - here scores are significantly below range no matter how you slice it. </p>

<p>However, the numbers don’t matter. SAT is not an IQ test, and even if it were, the notion of IQ as a fixed expression of ability has pretty much been debunked by current cognitive research. Assuming at least a normal level of intelligence, effort & experience generally wins out over supposed innate talent. And a lot of those high end SAT scores are more a reflection of experience than innate ability in any case – my d’s scores are well above the mean scores for her high school (around 500-550). </p>

<p>As Northstarmom pointed out, GPA is far more predictive. Another far more predictive & significant factor is EQ – that is, kids who show an early ability to defer gratification do better in the long run that the kids who lack that ability. </p>

<p>My D is not a “diligent plugger” – she is highly creative and she works fast. I don’t know what the 7 habits of highly efficient people are… but I’ll bet she has them. She doesn’t work particularly hard, but she plans and she sticks to her plan. She doesn’t procrastinate, and she doesn’t get sidetracked. </p>

<p>The point is: if my daughter were at a college where her scores were mid-range – she might be equally challenged, depending on the college. (For example, her scores would be within range at the excellent LAC that Curmudgeon’s d. chose over Yale). The high SAT band at the elites is not a reflection of greater academic ability or intellect – it simply reflects a selection process that allows the schools the luxury of selecting for a high score range. But SATs simply are not the type of tests that really can tell very much about the intellectual ability of the student who takes them.</p>

<p>I don’t think kids should have unrealistic aspirations, and SAT score ranges certainly are useful in discerning overall likelihood of admission. But I don’t think any kid should be slotted as somehow less capable because they don’t happen to score well on a test, and I’m sorry if any kid is deterred from applying to their dream school on the false rationale that their low-end scores mean that they wouldn’t be able to compete at the school. It’s sad that SAT’s, with their well-documented economic & ethnic bias, have become a sorting hat that becomes part of a feedback loop of diminished expectations. (that is, if the thought process is: “I was hoping to go to Yale, but I can’t seem to do better than 1900 on my SAT’s, therefore I must not be smart enough”… its unfortunate. Whether the kid with the 1900 has a chance of getting into Yale is a different issue than whether he would be smart enough to do well if he did get in.).</p>

<p>I’d note that my d’s college participates in the HEOP program which literally requires that SAT CR score be 620 or below in order to qualify. See <a href=“http://www.barnard.edu/admiss/support/heop.html[/url]”>http://www.barnard.edu/admiss/support/heop.html&lt;/a&gt;
It would be cruel indeed if those students were brought into the college with the expectation that they would fail because their SAT scores are required to be below range.</p>