What exactly defines a safety school?

College Search & Lists
21

This depends on the school and in particular on whether it practices yield protection. Midrange UCs like UCSB (admit rate ~30%) can typically be counted on as a safety for top 1% instate students with strong ECs, because they admit several dozen students from the larger high schools each year and don’t care about yield protection. You can see the UC admission figures for your specific high school and can judge if you are safely above the cutoff (although this year will be less predictable now the UCs are going test optional).

Private schools that are more concerned about rankings (and therefore focus on yield) are more likely to produce an unpredictable result for these sorts of students. Some public schools such as UMich appear to have similarly uncertain outcomes.

22

However, some students have been disappointed that their UCD/UCI/UCSB “safeties” rejected them, because:

  • They were applicants whose SAT/ACT was stronger than HS GPA, and did not realize that UC admissions tends to weigh HS GPA more than SAT/ACT.
  • They applied for more competitive majors (e.g. CS and engineering majors), so that overall campus admission stats did not reflect their true (lower) chances of admission.
23

On top of all the comments that other made here, it also depends of the high school.

So, for example, when my kid was applying, UMN (OOS) had an acceptance rate of 45%. However, according to the school’s Naviance, UMN had not rejected any students with stats anywhere close to those of my kid, at least for the previous 3 years. However, there were a bunch of colleges with similar acceptance rates which rejected a large number of students with similar stats.

So a college with a 40%-45% acceptance rate, at which an applicants is in the top 25% of previously accepted students, can be a match, but can also be a safety.

Also, colleges can suddenly decide that they want to increase selectivity of OOS students, and a college which were a safety one year, can no longer be a safety the next year.

The larger the number of applicants to a college, relative to the number it can accept, the less weight stats will have, compared to other factors. Once a private college has an acceptance rate of about 35% or lower, stats alone can no longer ensure admission. Since all other factors are much more subjective and the competitiveness of any changes from year to you, that is around the “selectivity” level at which a college cannot be a safety for anybody. Even very selective public universities often have auto-admits based on various criteria, so they may be safeties as lower acceptance rates.

So an applicant with a 3.87 GPA and a 1580 SAT and strong ECs and a good essay and LoRs would be competitive for any of the Ivies, but still has enough of a chance to be rejected from, say, Villanova, that it could not be considered a safety.

Furthermore, many of the things that can make an applicant attractive to Harvard, would not have the same effect on Villanova, for example, being a legacy for Harvard. Geographic location, minority status, etc, all affect an applicants chances differently at an Ivy than at, other colleges.

Which brings us back to the concept of an “Ivy-league level applicant”. Would one consider the effects of “hooks” when describing somebody as “Ivy-level”? What about the fact that an applicant has become famous for something? Ivies often love having these students, but many other colleges are less enthusiastic.

24

You should consider your chances at the specific school, rather than acceptance rate. It’s also important to note acceptance rate varies quite a bit for different subgroups. For example, in the Harvard lawsuit sample set, acceptance rates for various different groups are listed below. “Good stats” means good in comparison to Harvard’s overall applicant pool – roughly a 2 academic rating. Harvard might be considered a safety for some applicants with a combination of strong hooks (particularly recruited athlete) or other special cases, but would not be a good safety for typical unhooked RD kids.

Harvard Admit Rate: Lawsuit Sample
Overall RD Admit Rate* – <4%
Unhooked RD with good stats – 7%
Overall SCEA Admit Rate* – 21%
Non-ALDC Black RD with good stats – 45%
LDC hook with good stats – 49%
Recruited Athlete with good Stats – 96%
*Only including years during which SCEA was offered

The admit rate for a particular subgroup may be completely different than the overall admit rate for the college. At many colleges, these subgroups with different admit rates can include major or field of study. For example, the admit rate to some of Cornell’s college’s is listed below. Males had a 6% admit rate for Engineering and 24% for Hotel school. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the Hotel School is easier to get into than engineering for a particular male applicant. Instead the different schools emphasize different factors in their admission decision The vast majority hotel school admits have experience working in the hospitality industry and a glowing letter of recommendation related to that experience. A kid who has an engineering type profile and nothing on his app to suggest he is interested in the hospitality industry probably isn’t going have good success if applies to the hotel school, even if he has good stats. He likely has a better chance of admission at the engineering school, even though the overall admit rate is lower.

Cornell Admit Rate: 2018
Business + Male – 2%
Business + Female – 4%
Engineering + Male – 6%
A+S (Both Genders) – 11%
Engineering + Female – 18%
Hotel School + Female – ~19%

Hotel School + Male -- ~24%

Overall Admit Rate --11%

The chance of admission for a particularly applicant is more often than not completely different from the overall admit rate. This can make it awkward for a particular student to estimate his/her chance of admission. Tools like Naviance can offer some clues. If everyone from your HS who has similar stats is always accepted that’s certainly a good sign. Even better is colleges that offer some type of near guaranteed admission policy for particular groups or feedback indicating admission is extremely likely for a particular student. One can also often find clues on the college’s website or CDS.

For example, you mentioned Reed. Looking at Reed’s CDS, they mark demonstrated interest as “important” and have several forms of early decision. Their website also emphasizes “understanding of Reed” as an admission factor, and marks the interview as “important” in the CDS. All of these are not a good sign for a kid applying to Reed RD as a last choice backup, rather than a genuine favorite. Reed is also need aware – also a not a good sign for a safety, if you require FA. Consistent with this, scattergrams show some kids with very high stats being rejected. to Reed.

However, Reed does offer non-binding EA. EA can make Reed a great substitute for a safety. If you are admitted EA to Reed (and able+willing to attend), then you can skip applying to safeties RD and instead only apply to schools you’d pick over Reed. I used this strategy when I was applying to colleges. The least selective college I applied to was Cornell Engineering. I had no need for a traditional safety since I had an EA acceptance.

25

I guess the only “Safety” schools" nowadays are COMMUNITY COLLEGES if you want to apply a direct admission for EECS or CS major. You may get rejected with schools with TUFTS SYNDROME or practice YIELD PROTECTION.

26

Put it another way, any early* admission to an affordable college that you are willing to attend makes it a safety (even if it was not seen as such when you applied), so you do not need to apply to any college that has no chance of being more desirable than that college.

Of course, if you do not get any such results early, you still need to apply to other safeties.

*By EA, early rolling, or ED – obviously, if ED, you are done and are supposed to cancel other applications.

27

Many four year colleges have stated automatic admission by stats criteria, so they can be safeties for applicants who have the needed stats and can afford those colleges.

Regarding yield protection, an analysis of CDS-based information a little while ago found that level of interest consideration was 29% yes / 55% no for public colleges, but 57% yes / 23% no for private non-profit colleges (both groups had colleges that did not fill in that information).
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/22085702/#Comment_22085702

Of course, for the vast majority of prospective college students, money is the main constraint on college choice, so it determines which (if any) colleges can be safeties (or financially realistic matches or reaches).

28

As I have posted before. I like reading comments on CC when decisions come out. There are many like this:
“Why was I rejected by X University? It was my rock bottom safety. I wouldn’t be caught dead going there.”

Adcoms can smell a safety applicant a mile away.

29

When certain colleges become the go-to safety for a school district, this can be amplified. Well, except in those cases in which the university is actually comfortable with this status - being the go-to safety school for some of the larger and better high school districts in other states can increase the number of OOS students, which, for a large university in a state with a small population, can be a life-saver.

30

Until a couple years ago a GC at the local public high school in MA was telling students with a 3.5 UW GPA and 1300 SAT that Northeastern, BU and BC were safeties. When the decisions came back there were a lot of unhappy students…and parents.

That may have been the case 25 years ago but not recently. And yes I know GC’s have a lot on their plate but they need to keep up with reality or keep quiet.

31

“keep up with reality or keep quiet.”

I want this on a bumper sticker!

32

Around our house a safety is an admission in hand by Christmas where your kid would actually attend. If that means Eastern Directional State’s honors program then get moving, but the entire goal is not being empty-handed as April and May decision dates loom closer. Get an ED or EA acceptance or apply someplace less prestigious, but get one on the board early.

33

Data10 is correct. Super-high stats relative to admitted students are necessary, not sufficient. One also needs a hook, which can come in many forms - including, for some schools, the applicant’s family’s ability and willingness to pay full freight - but usually comes down to the applicant’s identity.

As the evidence admitted at trial in the Harvard case showed, one’s identity comes into play for highly selective schools that seek to admit high-scoring members of certain subgroups. If you’re not from one of those subgroups, then it’s likely that you will not find any safeties among those 100 or so colleges and universities that have admission rates below 50%.

There are a few dozen colleges and universities that have early admission rates north of 50%. One or two of those schools MIGHT be safeties for you if a) you’re 100% willing to attend and b) able to pay full tuition and c) have scores superior to 80% or more of the admitted class. Again, you need a hook.

34

Total acceptance rates are very tricky, and may hide tremendous discrepancies between the ED/EA rate and the RD rate. The key questions are what pct of the class is being admitted ED/EA and what is the ED/EA rate vs the RD rate.
With many selective colleges picking close to 40-50 pct of their classes now in ED/EA at 15-40 pct admit rates, that often leaves the RD rate in the 5-20 pct rate, for total admit rates around 35 pct Does that mean that safeties necessarily should be schools that pick less than 33 pct of their class in ED/EA?

35

“Schools with 35-50% acceptance rates are matches, not safeties.”

That’s definitely not true, there are enough counterexamples to prove that wrong. The easiest would be where a particular major has a 30-50% acceptance rate and is auto-admit based on weighted gpa and standardized tests. A local school, SJSU, would be a good example, its CS major is in the 40s, maybe less. But if you meet the eligibility index, you’re in. I agree that would not apply for more holistic colleges.

36

I would have to agree with this.

Many large flagships with acceptance rates in the 40%-50% range are often safeties for students with GPAs above 3.8, and tests which are in the top 1%-5%. For example, UMN, which has an acceptance rate of around 45%, accepted every student from my kid’s high school in the range of GPA > 3.79, SAT > 1500. That entire upper right hand corner of the Naviance scattergram was solid green checks, with nary a red X to be seen.

37

SJSU’s eligibility index thresholds are determined competitively each year, so it is hard to rely on it as a safety for a major as competitive as CS. This coming year, the non-consideration of SAT/ACT scores probably means that recalculated HS GPA will be used instead of the eligibility index (which was calculated from HSGPA * 800 + SATRW + SAT_M). Transfer admission uses prior college GPA and (for some majors) how many frosh/soph required courses for the major have been completed.

SJSU’s past thresholds for frosh and transfer admission are here: https://www.sjsu.edu/admissions/impaction/

38
I agree that many publics can be good choices for safeties, including SJSU and others in the Cal State system. However, one still needs to look at the chance of a particular student being accepted, which may be completely different from an estimation based on the school's overall stats and overall acceptance rate.

For example, SJSU had a 64% acceptance rate in the most recent CDS and admits almost entirely on stats + transcript. In the most recent CDS, the 25th to 75th percentile SAT ranges were 1030-1260 and average GPA was 3.52. Nevertheless, a particular applicant with a 4.0 + 1600 SAT may be rejected, and a particular applicant with a 2.75 + 800 SAT may be accepted. Consider the following 2 SJSU applicants for 2020.

Applicant 1 – SF resident with 4.0 GPA (>4.0 is possible with eligible honors) and 1600 SAT – Only applies to CS. The applicant sees that 4.0 GPA + 1600 was above the EI stat index for 2019, so he considers SJSU a safety. The EI stat requirement for freshman CS increased to 4825 for 2020, so he does not meet the new increased EI and is rejected from his safety.

Applicant 2 – SF resident with 2.75 GPA (no grades below C-) and 800 SAT. Applies to Applied Math: Computational. Meets EI stat requirement for Applied Math and is accepted.

39

And often students don’t breakdown overall acceptance rates. At many schools acceptance rates vary greatly by major and for publics, if you are in or out of state.

Doesn’t matter a hill of beans if the overall acceptance rate is 50% if it’s 25% for your intended major or the school has a mandate to accept the majority of their class from instate.

40

@Data10

“The applicant sees that 4.0 GPA + 1600 was above the EI stat index for 2019, so he”

For 2019, the EI for CS was 4825, so the 4.0/1600 applicant knows they are not getting in because they’re at 4800 unless they took honors/APs or live in Santa Clara County. If they took even 1 honors course, they’re above the 2019 EI but yes may be not a safety. However if they’ve taken at least four honors or AP courses with a 1600 and live in Santa Clara, they have highest EI possible and are in for any major.

Anyway, that’s not typically how it works for CSUs, you list three majors, Applicant 1 would list say CS, Software engineering, Math and gets into SJSU with second major.

“However, one still needs to look at the chance of a particular student being accepted,”

Agree, which is why general acceptance rates are not that useful. If you’re a 1600/4.33, CSUs are your safeties. If you’re a 1200/3.0, they’re not.

“And often students don’t breakdown overall acceptance rates.”

They definitely do, unless they’re not getting good GC support, they know that different majors or colleges within a university have different acceptance rates.