Your kid takes the top scholarship instead of the top school. What's next?

Parents Forum
161

<p>It may be interesting to look at this from the view of marketing to get a handle on some of the issues. If one thinks of colleges as offering differentiated products appealing to particular niches, it might provide some clarity to the discussion.</p>

<p>Every college has SOME differentiating factors. It might be a particular program, a particular professor, a particular approach to an honors college, proximity or distance from potential customers (students), or the color of the dorm rooms. But there is always something and, usually, more than one something.</p>

<p>For the average undergrad, however, most of these differentiating factors won’t be important. If large state U has a Nobel Laureate in chemistry, that will make not one iota of difference to the undergrad who plans to stay as far away from the chemistry building as possible, or to the potential chemistry major who will never get close to this man. And if the Nobel Laureate lectures chemistry 101 in an 800-person auditorium, one might as well be taught by a TA or view the great man on video.</p>

<p>Because most of these factors aren’t important, I believe that most colleges are, essentially, “McSchools.” It is very difficult to tell one from another in any way that has real meaning for the educational value one buys. Other differentiating factors, such as big-time sports, weather, hot babes, hot guys, parties, architecture, etc. do attract some students, but they have little or nothing to do with what goes on in the classroom or, in the words of my business friends, the “core competency.” </p>

<p>There ARE exceptions, of course. There are schools that are strongly differentiated. Evergreen State, Antioch, St. John’s Annapolis/NM, Deep Springs, Berea, and Chicago, come to mind, and there are others. These schools tend to attract a particular kind of student that wants a particular kind of educational experience. The administration and faculty at these schools have strong opinions about what an educational experience should be, and what sorts of skills and knowledge comprise a superior education. They may be right or wrong, but they are not “Mc” anythings.</p>

<p>In the absence of strong, differentiating, educational factors at most schools that apply to most undergrads, prospective students and parents tend to turn to proxy data that they believe have an impact on educational quality, however one defines that. My own proxies for this are: quality of faculty, quality of students, and size of classrooms. I feel, with some justification, I think, that when one puts great faculty together with great students in small classrooms, good things are more likely to happen than when one has mediocre faculty with mediocre students in large classrooms. I tdoes not mean that good things always happen. It’s simply a matter of playing the odds.</p>

<p>Clearly, if one finds differentiating factors at a college that apply to a particular student with particular needs, passions, or goals, then one should strongly consider such a school over a school where one is depending on proxy factors like faculty renown, student quality, and class size. Certainly, one of those factors could be affordability in many cases.</p>

162

<p>I know this is really OT, but does anybody else find these numbers distinctly odd (from my Rhodes CDS post)? </p>

<p>SAT Critical Reading 590 690
SAT Math 590 680
ACT Composite 26 30
ACT Math 24 28
ACT English 27 33 </p>

<p>690 CR is to 33 Eng as 680 math is to 28 math ? :eek: What’s that all about?
Is there really that much difference in the two math tests? (Whereas the 1370/30 cumulative is almost spot on what it “should” be. ???) D didn’t have that kind of difference. There was a difference, 740 to 36 , but this is the opposite direction. ??? I always said she was wired funny. But what is going on with Rhodes kids? Is it possible that the truly and deeply southern kids from Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama - big ACT states have distinctly lower math scores than the SAT kids from “other” states? Remember that 75% of Rhodes kids are OOS.
I looked at some concordance research at college board , here’s the link, </p>

<p><a href=“http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Ov_78N2pioQJ:www.collegeboard.com/research/pdf/concordance_between_s_10502.pdf+collegeboard+ACT+concordance+Math&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&ie=UTF-8[/url]”>http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Ov_78N2pioQJ:www.collegeboard.com/research/pdf/concordance_between_s_10502.pdf+collegeboard+ACT+concordance+Math&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&ie=UTF-8&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>and it shows that the concordance suggests that it should be Math 680 SAT “is comparable to” Math 30 ACT, when at Rhodes its 28. Is that significant? </p>

<p>Carry on. I’m enjoying the thread. I just have been puzzled about this seeming anomaly. </p>

<p>BTW, Now completely OT. LOL. That link actually says there is a difference in the skillsets tested (or is it really just content tested differences?) by the two tests. (D’s GC makes a game out of predicting which test her students will do better on and says she’s accurate most of the time. I do not know her secret. :wink: I think we all “know” that but there they are in black and white. It also says you can only compare Composite to M+V, and Math to Math. Not Eng to CR. Kind of interesting in a depressing OCD way. I think I need xiggi to bail me out of this. Or more sleep.</p>

163

<p>We’ll probably end up paying full (or almost) price and haven’t smoked anything lately. But we just have one kid and the money saved in an education trust. Somebody has to pay so that others can get the (well-deserved) scholarships.</p>

<p>I tend to agree with Loren Pope that some range of ability level can stimulate a different kind of discussion in a learning community. For my kid, it’s much more about the intellectual curiosity, and I think that exists across a range of ability levels and has nothing to do with SAT scores. A place where kids are sitting in rows taking notes for the test–he could survive, but would not thrive.</p>

164

<p>am I beginning to notice that tendency to characterize high scorers as one dimensional? We all know the elite schools use more than test scores. Those just get you into the arena. Test-taking aptitude doesn’t crowd out being interesting and unique. Stop the Stereotyping!</p>

<p>Funny though that stereotyping means seeing people in a simplistic way. Shouldn’t it be called mono-typing or monaural-typing?</p>

165

<p>rorosen:</p>

<p>I agree with you. It’s a matter of probability. There is no doubt in my mind that, given a class with test scores averaging 1500 and a class with test scores averaging 1200, the class averaging 1500 will be far more lively, talented, and interesting.</p>

<p>But, of course, not every individual will be that way.</p>

166

<p>Tarhunt^^^are you serious?</p>

167

<p>

No, but using test scores as a filter for admissions screens out lower scorers who also happen to be interesting and unique. </p>

<p>If some college decided to only accept people who were at least 5’6" tall, it is quite possible that they would end up with many very interesting and wonderful tall students. But they would also be excluding many very interesting and wonderful short students – and there may be some short students that would have added value to the college because of their specific gifts and talents.</p>

168

<p>“I agree with you. It’s a matter of probability. There is no doubt in my mind that, given a class with test scores averaging 1500 and a class with test scores averaging 1200, the class averaging 1500 will be far more lively, talented, and interesting.”</p>

<p>Tarhunt, I’m not sure about this.</p>

<p>A class made up of artists, musicians, cross country runners, drama majors, extroverts, well traveled students, curious students, and… with 1200 SAT scores might be more talented, lively and interesting than a class made up of 1500 scorers.</p>

<p>Of course, I’m cherry picking.</p>

<p>I don’t know if you can use SAT scores to come up with lively, talented and interesting.</p>

169

<p>SAT scores have been found to be indicators of how well a college student does in his FIRST year. NOTHING MORE.</p>

<p>okay, I think it’s time for some college hoops action.</p>

170

<p>

And where pray tell would that class be? LOL You don’t have a big list there boss. ;)</p>

<p>And lets narrow it down to let’s say an avg of 1450/(edit)1300. What’s your take then? Is the liveliness getting closer in your mind?</p>

<p>Quick, tarhunt . Go research Ivy SAT averages. You’re about to fall into a trap you can’t get out of without gnawing something off. ;)</p>

171

<p>I think the answer depends on the field of study. In engineering (my occupation) where the bachelor’s is enough for solid job prospects (and paid graduate school), the alma mater can be critical in the initial hiring process and reputation has to be considered over most lifestyle decisions. In the liberal arts or law or medicine, I think the real reputation issues should wait for graduate schools, and the undergrad decision should be more flexible and less based on the school’s reputation than the personal fit.</p>

<p>My D is a NM finalist with Ivy-caliber scores and grades and ECs like many on this board. She chose Sewanee, because of an almost ideal personal fit – and because they were absolutely clear how much they wanted her even after the admission letter arrived, and not only with money.</p>

172

<p>Sax, obviously SATs need to be considered in context like everything else. What they measure is a melange of aptitude, preparation, luck, and artifacts of bias. High scores from private prep school kids probably mean far less than high scores from kids from more challenging backgrounds. The idea that it’s a context-free metric is debunked. The idea that it’s useless in context is probably wrong.</p>

173

<p>I’m not saying that high scorers are more interesting just that they are not necessarily less interesting which is very often suggested</p>

174

<p>And I’m not saying that they are less interesting as individuals - I am saying that the range of different types of individuals is narrowed when you apply arbitrary standards like a standardized test score. Consider it, fine – but when someone opines that the student body at X school is better or more stimulating because the SAT scorer are higher… I don’t buy it. I see that X school probably is somewhat less diverse than Y school with the lower scores, because X school is drawing from a narrower range of talents and abilities. Narrower because in the real world, people often have very lopsided profiles, often pursuing some passions to the exclusion of others.</p>

175

<p>Oldolddad – what you said in your 4th point sounds so much like my situation.</p>

<p>A quick background with my S who is in 12th grade: ranked 4th in his class of 500 at a medium to large public school, 1500 SAT (CR+M) on his 1st and only sitting which he didn’t put much studying time into, National Merit Commended (NY was a tough state last year), received the RPI medal for his school this past year, loves physics particularly the mathematical aspect of it, is not too thrilled with the engineering field, and wants to combine philosophy with his physics concentration in college plus add religious studies to the picture. And definitely wants to go on to graduate studies for an academia career.</p>

<p>So…he’s done his own research into colleges the past 9 months, and does not have any desire to use the CC website as a regular resource (go figure), and came to his own conclusions on what “he was looking for”.</p>

<p>His desires made the choices actually somewhat mangeable: he wanted to be in the northeast US, near a major city with a diverse studentbody, which offered expanded choices in the departments of physics, math, philosophy, and religious studies. We won’t qualify for financial aid, so I went over with him the financial realities of the true cost of repaying loans on a monthly basis with what a net take home salary would look like. Since I don’t have the assets or cash flow to afford a $200k 4-yr college education without major loans, I told him that it would be both his and the family’s responsibility to shoulder the repayment over the next 20 yrs. I’m in my early 40’s and I still have 10 more years to go in paying back my undergrad/grad student debt.</p>

<p>So last year we went looking at various schools, and he already was consolidating his list, which strikingly was absent of all the Ivy’s except Brown. Interestingly, his lack of interest in HYP and some of the others was based on observing who in his school (and in other high schools that he was acquainted with) were strongly considering mostly the Ivy’s. He said he really doesn’t get along with most of them, and the people he enjoys being with at school are looking to attend other schools (which us parents would consider below Tier 1). In some ways I can see his point of view, because my observation with many of the students that frequent this website the application list includes every single Ivy league - why, because it’s an “Ivy” school. A lot of the kids don’t appreciate that the schools that constitue the Ivy league are very different among each other, and to apply to all of them implies that the strengths and unque qualities of each school is not being looked at - just the “name” IMO.</p>

<p>So my S narrowed his list down to 5 schools: Brown (because of the open curriculum and the liberal atmosphere, RPI (because of the scholarship), a SUNY, a tier 1 LAC, and a tier 2 university. </p>

<p>He did an overnight at Brown and sat in on a physics class and was actually turned off from Brown after the visit. He felt the freshman physics class was larger than he thought and not very interactive. The student that was to walk him to this physics lecture because he is a student in the class decided not going to the class and sleep instead - mind you he was a physics major. The freshmen dormitory my son slept in smelled of pot he told me. He said the kids were more interested in smoking, drinking, watching porn movies or getting “hooked up”. He did a total of two visits to Brown, and he said he won’t take it off his list but it’s definitely not number one.</p>

<p>We visited RPI and have a relative who currently attends there. He thinks RPI is nice, but it really doesn’t have what he’s looking for.</p>

<p>The tier 1 LAC is probably #5 on his list. Just something didn’t give him that “warm and fuzzy” feeling while visiting.</p>

<p>The SUNY accepted him and offered him a position in the Honor’s College, which probably would have made this school his second choice.</p>

<p>His #1 choice and where it looks like he’ll attend is the tier 2 university. I mean he literally fell in love with it. He did a summer class last year in one of the freshman liberal arts core courses and immensely enjoyed it. He sat in on 2 physics classes and 1 philosophy class and was taken back by the high professor-student interaction in all the classes and their relatively small size. He’s spoken to various professors in the departments that he’s interested in and had a good feeling with all of them. He’s researched the course catalogue and doesn’t find anything lacking in the departments. He spent an overnight there and had a great time - no negative comments at all. On top of it the school has been very generous to him – he’s being offered a full-tuition merit scholarship, and has been accepted in their very small Honor’s Program. It was really being offered the Honor’s program in the past few weeks that closed the deal for him.</p>

<p>So, I think my S went into this college process with his eye’s fully open, and I hope he has no regrets as these next 4 years go by. But it definitely goes to show you that “no size fits all” when it concerns this process.</p>

176

<p>I’ve read through this thread hoping for some insight and direction - but still hopelessly confused.</p>

<p>My son is a junior. He has the “package” - stats, EC’s, etc. - to be competitive for admission at HYPS and for merit money. Obviously. I realize, having the “profile/package” doesn’t insure admission or merit money. </p>

<p>He’s fortunate enough to be at a large suburban school where he has found “like minds” and which has offered him insight into the top kids and their decisions. He has seen previous graduates struggle with HYPS versus merit scholarships. BTW, almost all chose the “merit school” over HYPS, MIT and CalTech. Those that don’t “follow the money” usually have grandparents who paid the tuition. </p>

<p>I realize each kid is different - in ability and personality type (temperament) with different needs. I am not judging other kids’ abilities/needs and I hope others won’t judge mine. </p>

<p>My son is happiest in the company of kids who are very “gifted”. He and they succeed at the top levels due to natural ability probably more than hard work. He has found that the unprepped aptitude test performance - PSAT - is the best predictor of such. If he were composing his choice of class - he would definitely choose the highest SAT score over the highest GPA score - provided the SAT score was earned without using prep classes, review manuals, etc. He would also chose the highest SAT scores over the highest ACT scores. </p>

<p>He’s in classes all day with a mix of stratosphere GPA kids taking all AP classes. Some are there because they are just “brilliant”. Some are very smart and work very hard. He totally understands the value of “hard work”. He, nor I, is attempting to downplay such. We all realize that these “hard workers” will be the “success stories” in life - the published researchers, etc. Many of the naturally brilliant will accomplish less. </p>

<p>But, there is a difference, and he sees it, between these very high achieving kids who work harder and those who just “get it” but might not choose to work to “perfect it”. </p>

<p>For, his personality type, he prefers to be in the company of the “naturally gifted” - whether or not they capitalize on such is less important to him. He’s more interested in the immediate response to comments made in class - not in what can be done after a night of studying the professor’s lectures. He loves the brainstorming, the discussions, etc. that occur within this group of kids. </p>

<p>The kids he knows that chose HYPS have told him that they haven’t found kids there to be any “smarter” than the kids in their highschool. They said, the biggest difference is that the students at the elites are all very hard working - in every area of their life - academics, extracurriculars, service, etc. while the top kids in highschool were not always the highest achievers.</p>

<p>Can anyone give me some insight into the “ability” levels versus “achievement level” at the various levels? Without insults and flames?</p>

177

<p>i thought that bwrk(bright well round kids) were considered cannonfodder at elite schools and that in designing the mysterious class the chosen had to stand out with a single dominant pursuit or talent. They do claim to consider students who have scored above 1200,…or is it 1300? In any case, that can be achieved with a little effort and a pair of 19 dollar books. Can’t blame them if they prefer to accept the stilt-walker with the 1500 over the stiltwalker with the 1300,… though both stand tall.</p>

178

<p>What I think my own D would find depressing (because not challenging & not interesting) is sameness, but particularly mediocre sameness. There are private colleges where about 80% of the students are average-ability graduates from local public high schools with questionable grading standards. But some of these students have “high” test scores, and in fact they may have closer to 1500 than 1200. </p>

<p>Regarding the comment about engineering programs, I know for a fact that MIT has discovered that high scores <em>in themselves</em> are not the predictor of cutting-edge engineering promise that some people (esp. many students) assume scores to be. It’s been found that students with only scores & grades as indicators of potential often miss the mark in the creativity realm, and there’s a surprising creativity component in engineering ability. (For those of us who follow the local robotics contests, that fact just screams out.)</p>

179

<p>reflectivemom, from what you say your son should probably look at colleges like Reed and U. of Chicago – it’s really about school culture more than SAT scores, but both Reed & Chicago tend to end up with very high scorers.</p>

180

<p>epiphany, it would be nice if you would name names. I promise it won’t affect your acting career,…</p>