<p>As an example of paying attention to Naviance, we knew that 70% of EA applicants from S2’s school get into UChicago EA (50% including RD), W&M took 55% (OOS), URoch took 83%, Tufts took 50% last year, etc. Ivies, WashU, American, Mac, McGill, Northwestern also took statistically significant larger %ages of kids from this program than their posted overall acceptance rates. JHU Naviance data showed a <em>huge</em> advantage to ED applicants from S’s school.</p>
<p>We also knew from Naviance that S2’s scores were at the very strong end of things, but that there were relatively few applicants in his GPA band at some of the schools (most notably Swat and Georgetown). We therefore knew to beware the waitlist or to assume it would be a significant reach. </p>
<p>I don’t think one can extrapolate our school’s results to other schools, but checking Naviance can be quite a useful tool. Get your kids to report their college results to the GC at their school so that the next crop of kids and parents can have access to useful data! Our band of kids is the group that is really hard to assess, so these data points are particularly valuable.</p>
<p>my kids applied to a number of schools that didn’t have much data on Naviance, but I was able to place them in a ballpark because of data from schools that would fall into a similar selectivity / stats level as reported by the schools.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, my S’s HS also didn’t have good Naviance data, and I was jealous of those who did. </p>
<p>I looked at Naviance data for other schools wherever I could get it. The Naviance passwords for some schools are available here on CC, and some schools allow guests access to some info. Also, another thing I did was ask a few CC parents via PM to look up some colleges of interest on their HS sites, and send PM me back some data, particularly the ED and RD acceptance rates.</p>
<p>PG: We didn’t have Naviance when my kids applied. I relied on CC, which had its pluses and minuses.
Your kids sound like they are going to have great choices. They should apply to wherever they like (providing the can manage the apps and fees) as long as they have solid safeties. I suspect they (and you) will be pleasantly surprised.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl,
We found LAC info somewhat lacking except for the Amherst/Williams/Swat cohort. Pomona, Reed, Grinnell and Carleton did not have much data on our Naviance.</p>
<p>Our school has Naviance, but with a majority minority population we did use it with caution. It wasn’t nearly as useful for schools in the middle west or way out west. Still it showed us that while Tufts, Chicago and Vassar were all reach-y for my son they weren’t outside of the realm of possibility. Since he got into all three, I have to assume his teacher recommendations and essays made the difference.</p>
<p>Nor other URMs for that matter, agreed? I understand the point, but I think URMs can add to this discussion just as well as anyone else. The same principles pretty much apply to getting in whether “hooked” or not at the most selective schools. In a competitive environment every bit helps. I’d dispense PCP’s list of tips for the “unhooked” to pretty much anyone interested in getting into the top schools, whatever their specific “other” attributes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps, but the strategic nature of the process remains applicable to all. Particularly for those also seeking scholarships.</p>
<p>PCP’s list of tips for the “unhooked” would benefit ANYONE, including those with 4.0 UW GPAs. That is not the point, but rather that casual readers might take false hope from Obstinate’s results (he did not disclose URM status, nor TASP as a possible tip, nor low-income/first-gen) when they are really not applicable to an unhooked <3.6 GPA applicant.</p>
<p>This entire thread gives that potential. It’s about strategizing among those who might be less likely to be admitted to a T-20 right? Many here have been successful. The majority won’t be. I’d also proffer to guess that very few URMs with only a 3.5 GPA get into Colimbia as well, unless like others here, they are bringing something more to the table. That seems to fit well with the theme.</p>
<p>^An ORM from my school, male engineer, got into Columbia ED this year with a 3.4 UW, 3.6 W. Certainly it’s possible. He was well-rounded but no national-level achievements.</p>
<p>Obstinate is the perfect example of hooks–both intentional and unintentional–being more important than stats. He fits in this thread, but just as PCP disclosed his S’s exceptional achievements, I think full disclosure of significant non-GPA factors is important.</p>
<p>Nearly all successful applicants to T-20, particularly those with lower GPAs, are likely to have something distinctive to offer, hooked, unhooked, whatever. As such, I don’t have any issues with full disclosure. However, Obstinate’s comment was fairly generic and did not need any specific disclosures to be just as valid as if a non URM stated the same. </p>
<p>I am reacting because he/she clearly felt summarily dismissed and discounted by having his/her statement immediately qualified by another poster, as coming from a URM, when that particular fact was completely irrelevant to what was being said.</p>
<p>What do we think a male with 2200 SAT(first time) and a 3.1 UW & 3.4-5W with minimal EC’s is going to have a shot at. His school goes by number grade he has an 86 where highest is 94- no grade inflation here; but poses a problem with merit criteria at most colleges. His CR/M is 1460 and he is going to take it again to hopefully raise the M so he is close to 1500, but not sure if that is going to help much. Unfortunately if he had prepped himself as well prior to the PSAT perhaps he would have had a shot with merit at one of his dream schools - USC, but now I have no idea and he is #5 so we need some merit. He is thinking of psych/cog sci/neuro- wants CA, possibly FL or Northeast. I know you are thinking slacker - but I prefer to think of it as very young for his grade and lack of confidence at a super competitive private school Any ideas? We just visited USC, Pitzer, Oxy, LMU, Pepperdine & Chapman- a couple of these I think are possibles.</p>
<p>on this thread, no one is thinking slacker!</p>
<p>Being a male may help at some schools. Check the male / female admit ratios through Common Data sets, for those schools that have them available.</p>
<p>My husband and son just visited Lehigh last week and one of the papers that they brought home stated only 34% of the schools submitted class rank. For those on this thread, did your school submit class rank and do you think it had anything to do with a waitlist or rejection. For the top schools - they post accepted students being in the top ten percent of the graduating class (of the apps that sent in rank) at 90-99%. While I understand it is just a small piece of the application puzzle, I still can’t help wondering if a school did send in class rank for a student (say a 3rd decile- currently where my son is at), that the class rank may influenced a decision if almost 100% of their accepted students that sent in class rank, ranked in the top decile.</p>
<p>If he’s #5 in his class, I doubt he’s much of a slacker. Has he talked to his GC? The GC should be able to address the issue of how well the school is known and how clear they make it that he’s taken a demanding curriculum and done well relative to other students. I think my B+ kid was helped enormously by the fact that he just missed being in the top 5% of the class. </p>
<p>The lack of ECs however may not help when he’s applying to private schools. You don’t need a long list - it’s better to have done less, but done something interesting. I don’t know the CA schools well enough to suggest anything specific, but as another poster said, boys often get a bit of a break at the girl-heavy schools. I’m sure it didn’t hurt my younger son at Vassar!</p>
<p>I think people on here tend to have this idea that all people at top colleges with less than a 3.7 must be a URM, which is certainly not the case. Whites and Asians with >3.6 GPAs have gotten in, and conversely 4.0 GPA/high SAT score URMs have gotten rejections. I know minorities that’ve gotten rejected with top stats that should’ve been a-shoo-in for top schools. But maybe there was some sort of lack seen in their application? One may never know.</p>
<p>Regardless, as I’ve said, all you can do is present yourself in the best possible case and weigh as many cards as you can to your advantage, things that set you apart from the competition.</p>
<p>I agree about the point that if a student’s school reports rank, then that kid better be in the top 10%, but there is very likely leeway for students whose schools don’t. For the LACs at least, outstanding achievement / talent in an EC will trump grades anyway.</p>
Any ideas? We just visited USC, Pitzer, Oxy, LMU, Pepperdine & Chapman- a couple of these I think are possibles.</p>