Why even waste the effort to apply to the top colleges at this point?

[Anonymous]

My numbers are rough, but they illustrate the point.

There are 37,000 public and private HSs in the USA, today including 26,000 public and 11,000 private. The number of public HSs has gone up from about 22,000 in 1980 but the sizes of freshman classes most likely have as well.

Harvard's freshman class is 2100 students and Amherst's is 470. If the average freshman class size is 1500 over the top 25 schools, there are roughly the same number of valedictorians as there are spots. Since a significant fraction of those spots are taken up by athletes and international students, being valedictorian HAS NEVER really been enough to ensure a spot at a top college.

Similarly, there are about 16,000 national merit semifinalists and 34,000 commended students competing for the lets say 32,000 non-athlete spots at top 25 schools. That leaves about 18,000 high scoring students out.

[Anonymous]

^ agree but these outstanding students are the pushed down to the next tier - the Notre Dames, Vanderbilt's, etc. THey will still excel academically and in life. Not the end of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was linked to this profile by Amherst College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a 14% admit rate: https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/669797

According to this,

75% of applicants with SAT critical reading scores of 750-800 were turned down.
78% of those with SAT math scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with SAT writing scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with ACT scores of 34-36 were ultimately turned down.

It becomes worse on the lower end (85% of 700-740s or 30-33s ultimately turned down).

What's the point in wasting $60-$80 in applying to colleges like Stanford, Ivies, U'Chicago, Amherst, Pomona, etc. when doing the absolute best you can isn't enough to get in? When so many of the slots are taken by athletes, legacies, students of color, or low-income students? I just find this appalling, honestly. I know test scores aren't the best predictors, but most of these kids rank in the top of their class and have great extracurricular involvements to boot. Is the average valedictorian just not good enough for the top schools at this day and time?

If you know that test scores aren't a good predictor, don't make yourself crazy by focusing on the test scores. There is so much more that goes into selecting kids for these types of schools. The key is to avoid ONLY applying to these types of schools. Use the college common data sets to see where your kids falls with test scores, grades, ranking and even geography. Then select a range of schools and include schools where your child's stats fall squarely in the average or above. IMO that's the mistake families make, not applying to a range of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was linked to this profile by Amherst College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a 14% admit rate: https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/669797

According to this,

75% of applicants with SAT critical reading scores of 750-800 were turned down.
78% of those with SAT math scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with SAT writing scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with ACT scores of 34-36 were ultimately turned down.

It becomes worse on the lower end (85% of 700-740s or 30-33s ultimately turned down).

What's the point in wasting $60-$80 in applying to colleges like Stanford, Ivies, U'Chicago, Amherst, Pomona, etc. when doing the absolute best you can isn't enough to get in? When so many of the slots are taken by athletes, legacies, students of color, or low-income students? I just find this appalling, honestly. I know test scores aren't the best predictors, but most of these kids rank in the top of their class and have great extracurricular involvements to boot. Is the average valedictorian just not good enough for the top schools at this day and time?

Omg, the unfairness of it al!!!! The truth is that people are putting kids in SAT prep to study to the test. So SAT results are inflated. Schools hand out A's so parents don't complain about them. So grades are inflated. Every A student is not ultra bright, they are average. In fact most of them haven't had an original thought in their lives, they have been taught to cram and regurgitate on tests. This is why lower income and minority students are getting those slots. So if you want junior to get in, make a donation to the school- 50K min.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are forgetting the millions of foreign students, especially from China and India who are coming to the U.S. to study. They apply with perfect scores and get in because the colleges want diversity.

Amherst only admitted 5% of international students (https://www.amherst.edu/admission/apply/international/enrollment)

But 10% of their freshman class (and most similarly elite colleges) are international students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was linked to this profile by Amherst College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a 14% admit rate: https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/669797

According to this,

75% of applicants with SAT critical reading scores of 750-800 were turned down.
78% of those with SAT math scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with SAT writing scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with ACT scores of 34-36 were ultimately turned down.

It becomes worse on the lower end (85% of 700-740s or 30-33s ultimately turned down).

What's the point in wasting $60-$80 in applying to colleges like Stanford, Ivies, U'Chicago, Amherst, Pomona, etc. when doing the absolute best you can isn't enough to get in? When so many of the slots are taken by athletes, legacies, students of color, or low-income students? I just find this appalling, honestly. I know test scores aren't the best predictors, but most of these kids rank in the top of their class and have great extracurricular involvements to boot. Is the average valedictorian just not good enough for the top schools at this day and time?

If you know that test scores aren't a good predictor, don't make yourself crazy by focusing on the test scores. There is so much more that goes into selecting kids for these types of schools. The key is to avoid ONLY applying to these types of schools. Use the college common data sets to see where your kids falls with test scores, grades, ranking and even geography. Then select a range of schools and include schools where your child's stats fall squarely in the average or above. IMO that's the mistake families make, not applying to a range of schools.

FWIW, my DC got into one of the waste-of-an-application-fee schools mentioned above, but was excited about and would have been happy attending other schools on her list that were much easier to get into. There are lots of excellent universities that aren't highly selective. The challenge in this process is to find "safety" schools that look great to your child. And if you focus on interests rather than prestige, it's not that hard to do -- at least for people like OP whose comments about low-income students suggest that her DCs' choices aren't economically constrained.

[Anonymous]

This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My numbers are rough, but they illustrate the point.

There are 37,000 public and private HSs in the USA, today including 26,000 public and 11,000 private. The number of public HSs has gone up from about 22,000 in 1980 but the sizes of freshman classes most likely have as well.

Harvard's freshman class is 2100 students and Amherst's is 470. If the average freshman class size is 1500 over the top 25 schools, there are roughly the same number of valedictorians as there are spots. Since a significant fraction of those spots are taken up by athletes and international students, being valedictorian HAS NEVER really been enough to ensure a spot at a top college.

Similarly, there are about 16,000 national merit semifinalists and 34,000 commended students competing for the lets say 32,000 non-athlete spots at top 25 schools. That leaves about 18,000 high scoring students out.

Yes a significant number taken up by athletes...LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was linked to this profile by Amherst College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a 14% admit rate: https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/669797

According to this,

75% of applicants with SAT critical reading scores of 750-800 were turned down.
78% of those with SAT math scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with SAT writing scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with ACT scores of 34-36 were ultimately turned down.

It becomes worse on the lower end (85% of 700-740s or 30-33s ultimately turned down).

What's the point in wasting $60-$80 in applying to colleges like Stanford, Ivies, U'Chicago, Amherst, Pomona, etc. when doing the absolute best you can isn't enough to get in? When so many of the slots are taken by athletes, legacies, students of color, or low-income students? I just find this appalling, honestly. I know test scores aren't the best predictors, but most of these kids rank in the top of their class and have great extracurricular involvements to boot. Is the average valedictorian just not good enough for the top schools at this day and time?

Well you have the SAT scores of those who were rejected but no other information about them whatsoever and applications are not just judged on SAT scores alone. You know that right??. Its hardly enough to throw yourself in front of a train. Cheer up OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

No, but it definitely helps. A lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

No, but it definitely helps. A lot.

Actually, for undergrad it had minimal advantage, and outside of a few grad programs (e.g., Law), there is not a real advantage

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
75% of applicants with SAT critical reading scores of 750-800 were turned down.
78% of those with SAT math scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with SAT writing scores of 750-800 were ultimately turned down.
77% of those with ACT scores of 34-36 were ultimately turned down.

It becomes worse on the lower end (85% of 700-740s or 30-33s ultimately turned down).

Worse-case gunners with those stats will still get into a top 25 university or a top 10 selective LAS. And they'll be drowning in 100% full ride scholarship offers from solid colleges around the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

Yeah, but what about those of us who can only afford in-state colleges? If my high achieving DD fails to get in UVA or W&M, her only other choices are much lower ranked than what she could attend if we had the means for out of state/private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

Yeah, but what about those of us who can only afford in-state colleges? If my high achieving DD fails to get in UVA or W&M, her only other choices are much lower ranked than what she could attend if we had the means for out of state/private.

There are a lot of us in that position. My DC has perfect PSAT scores and straight As in a math magnet, but will not be applying to Amherst, Harvard, etc. because we neither qualify for need-based aid, nor can pay $65K+/year for elite schools.

There are a lot of us in this position, especially in places like metro DC. This is why state flagships are becoming more competitive every year to get into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This focus on elite colleges is so out of control. There a thousands of universities where your kid can get a terrific education -- find one that fits.

You don't have to go to Harvard to excel in this life.

Yeah, but what about those of us who can only afford in-state colleges? If my high achieving DD fails to get in UVA or W&M, her only other choices are much lower ranked than what she could attend if we had the means for out of state/private.

This is why it was a mistake to buy in a super competitive area (NoVa).