WARNING to all future applicants: Don't apply to all reach/dream schools.

Applying to College
1

I’ve been on this thread quite a fair number of times and I always see many eager applicants asking for people to “chance them” or look over their college list. Many of them have great stats (2200+ SAT, 4.0+ GPAs, many extracurriculars) and, assuming they’re not lying (which I don’t think many are), they are in the running for some great and competitive schools. The thing is, these schools should not be the only types people apply to. It seems that there are the people that put down only Ivies and top tier schools (i.e. MIT, Stanford, Cornell, CMU etc) for consideration, thinking that by putting 10+ schools, they will get somehow into 1. (I think there was a thread here that said, statisically, there’s a 99% chance to get into an Ivy if you apply to all of them with a 2300+ SAT…). IT DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT and IT IS NOT SMART TO DO THIS.

One of the main causes students many apply for only top schools, in my opinion, is high schools misleading bright students. Automatically, a 2200+ SAT/34+ ACT becomes the gateway to the best schools, according to guidance counselors. Granted, they are a key component–a very important factor. But when did an automatic 2400 become a guarantee to make a college? Never; I’ve known people who’ve achieved 2400s and have ranked in the top 10 of their class and yet were denied from prestigious colleges that others with 2100 SATs and lower averages got in. Extracurriculars, essays, all this comes into play. If this isn’t a reason to see that high test scores and GPAs are not automatic guarantees for admission, then put into context how many people apply each year to such schools.

Among the ivies and top-tiers (MIT, Stanford), an average of 5-7% of applicants will make it in (not accounting for the lower percentage that comes with RD vs ED/EA and international application). Think about this. About 7/100 applicants will make it into a dream school. 90 of those applicants are qualified, just like you. Let’s say you were to objectively pick 7 qualified people out of 100. We tend to have a sort of bias towards ourselves because we perceive experiences to us as more than what they may be (or what we convey on paper), but if we judge others, we’re quick to be impartial and not put as much worth into what they do vs what we do. We all have the potential to overestimate the worth of our experiences, and admissions officers just don’t share our sentiments. Confidence is good; overconfidence is bad. Thus, when an applicant questions how he/she could apply to 12-13 top schools and get rejected from all, it’s unfortunate because he/she could have taken advantage of his/her hard work to apply to 3-4 top schools, 3-4 target schools, and 3-4 safeties and could have walked away with scholarships.

Now I’m not saying don’t apply to reach/dream schools. If you work hard and want to go somewhere, you have the right to apply. I’m saying not to get lost in the translation–not to think that just because you have Item A, B or C that you’re guaranteed for a school. Be smart. Visit schools, see what you like. Pick your 3-4 reaches, targets and safeties based on that criteria. It’s a smarter play that is more beneficial in the long run; you have more options.

One last piece of advice. Those essays. As the tier of a school goes up, I’d say the value of the essay skyrockets as well. Essays are something you should focus on immensely. I see many threads of applicants asking if they should retake a 2350 SAT or 35 ACT. NO. NO WAY. First, admissions officers, I feel, love to boast about how they rejected x amount of 2400s; IT DOESN’T ALWAYS PAY OFF TO BE PERFECT. That being said, I’m sure many 2400s with qualified resumes provide competent competitors in the application pool. But a 2350 and a 2400 are a question of 2 questions; why retake? You could spend your time volunteering or fixing your essays. Those matter more.

Good luck to all!

2

I think the main thing with applying to ALL reaches is

You don’t have that much time to work on ALL those supplemental essays. Each one of them has to be stellar in order for the average unhooked joe (which is most of us) to be admitted and it’s very difficult to have that much time to make each and every supplemental essay perfect.

The only reason to apply all reaches is if you already know that you’re going to a school (which is an absolute safety) that you would actually look forward going to (Ex: UT Austin or UC Merced and you satisfied their admissions requirements, top 7% of class for UT Austin and top 9% for UC Merced, and you’re perfectly fine with going there and you can afford the tuition without any financial aid).

Applying to so many reaches also generally gives you few options to choose from. If you decide that you really don’t like the rural environment of Cornell, well tough luck as you have no other options to choose from.

Also, this may not apply to everyone, but financial aid is also a factor. People think Ivies/Top Schools are generous, which they are, but many times the financial aid that people end up getting is far less than what they had expected.
So if you apply to all reaches and only get into 1 school, then you have no choice but to pay the enormous amount of tuition.

It’s always better to have more options than less, and by applying to all reach schools, you’re essentially limiting your options when decision time comes in April.

Great thoughts OP, I just wanted to add my two cents.

3

The only people who can even tempt this are recruited athletes or others who have been assured a spot through an early admit path. Otherwise, it’s hubris and stupidity. It happens frequently however

4

So this advice matches what experienced posters say year after year out here. I actually think this comment is something we rarely discuss out here, but it is very true:

One of my kids got in everyplace she applied, including U Chicago, Swarthmore, and Harvey Mudd. Her GPA was 3.7, and SAT 2380 (2 800 subject tests in widely varying subjects, though). I think she came across in her apps as someone who truly cared about learning and the intellectual life of college. Perfectly capable of doing the work, but not a slave to grades or perfect test scores. Colleges are aching to find genuine students who love learning. My kid thinks her record imperfections actually contributed to her application success, and I agree. Now… you gotta clear a minimum bar (and 3.7 is realistically about that minimum). But you don’t need a 4.0 or perfect test scores for admission success, and sometimes I think it can make admissions wonder if there is a “real” person behind that perfection.

5

The UCs care more about grades. Kind of like UT of Texas, top 10%. So it depends on the school.

6

Yes. I think in general public universities (including the UCs) do have more of a stats focus. No stats are too high for most of them. But when it comes to private schools, I think perfection isn’t the name of the game.

7

I agree certain schools prioritize grades over other aspects of the application. For example, Cornell has a high number of applicants coming in (~42k), so obviously a filter to help narrow out the applicant pool would be GPA/SAT/ACT. Yet there’s a difference between getting in for the running and getting in to the school. GPAs and standardized testing are a step in the door, the rest of the app (essays especially) constitute the differences between Applicant A and B.

@intparent Yes, perfection has become something students strive for alot these days. Getting a 2400 is one of the ultimate forms of pride for the eager junior/senior, and can delude the student to either stop focusing on the rest of the application or think that a 2400 separates him/her from everyone else–it doesn’t. The former action is more due to how the individual student really is, but the latter is something that can ruin the confidence of an applicant if he/she applies to all Ivies, for example, and gets into none.

8

An applicant from California has many problems. You need to keep high GPA for the UCs and high SAT for the non UCs like USC and unique and meaningful ECs. Then the last part is the essays. I agree for tippy top private schools, you need to focus on the essays very early on.

9

@DrGoogle, I am glad my kids weren’t in-state for CA from that perspective. @DaedricSaiyan, perfect grades & scores separate them from everyone else… but not always in a good way. For example, that student MAY (not always) end up with recommendations that hint at grade grubbing or serious perfectionism personality traits – that is NOT the student top colleges are necessarily hoping to admit. Of course there is a minimum bar for sorting the applicants, and you have to clear that. I think Cal Newport gets it right in his book, “How to be a High School Superstar”. Interesting and unique ECs will get you a long ways if you meet that minimum academic bar – it makes a lot more sense to focus some energy there than toward perfection in grades, test scores, or ECs that are what everyone else is doing. A 3.8 kid with a 2300 and a unique, fascinating (and clearly heartfelt) EC has a better chance at the very top schools, IMHO, than a 4.0 2400 kid with pedestrian or limited ECs.

10

One of the problems with the UCs is that in the past, they don’t accept letter of recommendations, this year only Berkeley will accept 2 letters of recommendations. That will sort out the whole holistic admission too.

One of my kid is not a grade grabber, but she is slightly more slanted toward a perfectionist, but she has some Bs in college. Because of this tendency, she puts more effort in doing things and managing the group project because she wants that A grade. She doesn’t like the slackers in her group and reluctant in taking more classes with group project, knowing she has to do most work. I think it’s good or bad like most thing. The good thing is she puts the extra effort, doesn’t cut corners, and learn a lot. The bad thing is she may not want to take risk or failure kindly, playing it safe some time.

But everybody is different, I think of it as helping the kid you have to grow, the kid is not quite formed yet, many trials and errors, until she gets there, love the kid on the couch, a CC mantra.

11

CA kids also have a lot of good public options (important for full-pay families). VA would be second in that regard, but they’re not a close second.

So yes, more competition, but more good schools as well.

You could live in a state where none of the publics are all that respected outside the state (and outside the flagship, almost every other public is a directional/commuter school).

12

I’m glad that she goes to a UC. My bank account also happy she goes to a UC. Not complaining. Just offering another point if view regarding grades.

13

Instead of “Don’t apply to all reach/dream schools”, it should say “Don’t apply to ONLY reach/reach schools”. For that, it should be a common sense that unfortunately some applicants are missing.

14

@billcsho good point haha.