In opposition to reach schools

[Anonymous]

My take after going through the college application process with two kids is that applying to true reach schools (ie schools where you’re child has less than 5% chance at admission) is a net negative.

Both of my kids had good grades at good schools, excellent ECs with top ten percent test scores and all advanced classes. This made them competitive for T50 schools but really long shots at T10 schools. But like everyone around here we applied to a mix of target, safety and reach schools. The results were exactly as predicted. Admitted to every school except the reaches.

The prevailing wisdom is - “at least you took your shot.” However, I think that sentiment overlooks the cost of applying to reach schools:

1. Fees. While application fees are small potatoes when thinking about college costs its not nothing- I certainly would have preferred to take my wife out to a nice dinner rather than send Princeton, Harvard and U of C almost $300.

2. Time and trouble. The reach schools’ applications are considerably more trouble than other colleges. I particularly dislike U of C’s zany question. Both of my kids spent hours brainstorming, drafting and editing their essays. All time that would have been better spent enjoying their senior year.

3. Disappointment. Life already has its bumps and troubles you don’t have to go look for them. While my kids didn’t have big expectations and therefore weren’t terribly disappointed each rejection did take the air out of the evening. It also makes for uncomfortable moments with well meaning grandparents, aunts, uncles etc.

4. Waitlisted. The worst position is being waitlisted. It creates all kinds of distractions and makes planning difficult.

Look, of your kid is a good candidate for a top school go for it. But if your kid is a standard issue overachiever save yourself the money, time and trouble.

[Anonymous]

Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

Yeah that’s what makes them reaches. Try to keep up.

[Anonymous]

This is why you increasingly hear the advice to “ED a target.”

[Anonymous]

I agree with you OP. We treated a WL as a rejection which allowed to move on quicker at least.

[Anonymous]

Hear hear! If a kid really wants to go for a reach, that’s great. But for the reasons you outlined, I would not push my kid to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

True but they do accept kids from that range. It’s a longer reach.

Everything else is a fair assessment. For us it was always keep your options open. My kids top choice state school releases their ea decisions late January. I doubt we would have applied to all colleges we did, had we known in mid December.

Deferred Ivy
Accepted 3 ea state options

[Anonymous]

Yes, I wish we knew all decisions in December and then he wouldn't have wasted his time on four more applications in January.

I know we are part of the problem and I regret it, we should have just said no to applying to these schools and the sad part is my kid is above every stat they publish. Doesn't matter when his parents are college educated, upper middle class, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

Yeah that’s what makes them reaches. Try to keep up.

Due to low acceptance rates, T10s are long reaches even for students with top academic stats. Students accepted with scores out of range tend to be hooked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

Yeah that’s what makes them reaches. Try to keep up.

Due to low acceptance rates, T10s are long reaches even for students with top academic stats. Students accepted with scores out of range tend to be hooked.

Some are still TO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My take after going through the college application process with two kids is that applying to true reach schools (ie schools where you’re child has less than 5% chance at admission) is a net negative.

Both of my kids had good grades at good schools, excellent ECs with top ten percent test scores and all advanced classes. This made them competitive for T50 schools but really long shots at T10 schools. But like everyone around here we applied to a mix of target, safety and reach schools. The results were exactly as predicted. Admitted to every school except the reaches.

The prevailing wisdom is - “at least you took your shot.” However, I think that sentiment overlooks the cost of applying to reach schools:

1. Fees. While application fees are small potatoes when thinking about college costs its not nothing- I certainly would have preferred to take my wife out to a nice dinner rather than send Princeton, Harvard and U of C almost $300.

2. Time and trouble. The reach schools’ applications are considerably more trouble than other colleges. I particularly dislike U of C’s zany question. Both of my kids spent hours brainstorming, drafting and editing their essays. All time that would have been better spent enjoying their senior year.

3. Disappointment. Life already has its bumps and troubles you don’t have to go look for them. While my kids didn’t have big expectations and therefore weren’t terribly disappointed each rejection did take the air out of the evening. It also makes for uncomfortable moments with well meaning grandparents, aunts, uncles etc.

4. Waitlisted. The worst position is being waitlisted. It creates all kinds of distractions and makes planning difficult.

Look, of your kid is a good candidate for a top school go for it. But if your kid is a standard issue overachiever save yourself the money, time and trouble.

+100

Schools like Harvard and other ivy leagues could increase seats (supply) as there is more than enough demand for these old institutional brand names. And there's no shortage of highly qualified overachiever wonderful kids that they would have zero dip in quality. But like medical school, they constrain supply of their grads and maintain prestige through uber scarcity.

Personally, I have no interest in contributing to their denominator of rejected students or help them further reduce their acceptance rate from 4 to 3 per cent. It does nothing for our family but cost money and time with no payoff.

Where you go to school for 4 years is not worth this much stress.

[Anonymous]

OP you are stating the obvious. If your kids never had a snowflake's chance in hell of getting into a top 10 you wasted everyone's time applying to those places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

Yeah that’s what makes them reaches. Try to keep up.

Due to low acceptance rates, T10s are long reaches even for students with top academic stats. Students accepted with scores out of range tend to be hooked.

Some are still TO.

Indeed. Back when tests were required, most applicants with scores out of range would simply not have entertained the idea of applying. While certainly many students have been accepted TO over the past three cycles, and this varies by school now that some are back to requiring scores, TO brought a pie-in-the-sky, false idea of what applicants are actually competitive for top schools.

[Anonymous]

My personal favorite is my son got an email from U Chicago saying "even though deadline has passed you can still apply".

Ummm, yeah, not going to add to your pile of denials, pretty sure no one who applies after the deadline has a shot, they just want to pad their acceptance %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 10% test scores are not in range for T10 schools.

Yeah that’s what makes them reaches. Try to keep up.

Due to low acceptance rates, T10s are long reaches even for students with top academic stats. Students accepted with scores out of range tend to be hooked.

Some are still TO.

Yes, the hooked ones. Unhooked top 10% test scorers have a snowball's chance of admission. It's a long reach for the top 1% of unhooked applicants. No reason they shouldn't play the lottery. Below that it's a waste of time and money, as you've noted.