Safety school your child ended up loving…?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scripps turned out to be fantastic.

Not a safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Umdcp is not a safety for anyone. Acceptance rate has to be higher than 50-60% to be a safety.

Get over yourself. It is a safety for many kids. You don’t get to decide what other people define as a safety for them.

It's only a safety for kids aiming for Ivies, or equivalent. For kids a tier below Ivies, it's not a safety. DS didn't get in, and he went to Haverford.

True, but there are many people on this site whose kids are aiming for Ivies, so it seems fine to include it in a list of safeties.

I really liked Haverford and wished my kid would have ended up there. He got into an Ivy equivalent but still think he would have been happier at Haverford....

You wish your kid *had ended up* there.

What is an "Ivy equivalent"?

Ivy equivalents are schools like UC Berkeley/Cal, UCLA, Stanford, MIT, Duke, Vanderbilt, etc. Tippy top schools that are not Ivys.

At this point, maybe they should just have named the school. It is an anonymous forum after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal.

I know will say that’s not a safety, but it was for this kid. And they absolutely loved it.

What is "Cal"? ?

Some people on DCUM are so provincial. How can you not know Cal? Have you ever watched college football? Good grief.

Still not the type of school whose name you expect to be thrown around on a safety schools thread. I was thinking of California University of PA. I don't think "Cal" is a safety for any kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal.

I know will say that’s not a safety, but it was for this kid. And they absolutely loved it.

What is "Cal"? ?

Some people on DCUM are so provincial. How can you not know Cal? Have you ever watched college football? Good grief.

Still not the type of school whose name you expect to be thrown around on a safety schools thread. I was thinking of California University of PA. I don't think "Cal" is a safety for any kid.

It's not. It had a 11% freshman acceptance rate last year. Even for the most stellar, above all others candidate, it is at best a "target", never a safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Umdcp is not a safety for anyone. Acceptance rate has to be higher than 50-60% to be a safety.

Get over yourself. It is a safety for many kids. You don’t get to decide what other people define as a safety for them.

It's only a safety for kids aiming for Ivies, or equivalent. For kids a tier below Ivies, it's not a safety. DS didn't get in, and he went to Haverford.

True, but there are many people on this site whose kids are aiming for Ivies, so it seems fine to include it in a list of safeties.

I really liked Haverford and wished my kid would have ended up there. He got into an Ivy equivalent but still think he would have been happier at Haverford....

Yeah, still not sure Haverford's a safety, saying this as a parent who kid applied to Pitt as a safety (I'm fine labeling some schools at safeties for certain kids). DD's best friend applied to Wooster as a safety and ED'd at Haverford. Why didn't your kid go to Haverford?

Haverford is in no way a safety. See the other recent thread about selectivity of SLACs. If I’m reading that right Haverford is actually more selective than even some other higher ranked schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVM

Kid at the admitted student event said it was his safety. He loves it.

UVM received 28,000 applications this year, 33,000 last year, for freshman classes of less than 3,000. "Safety" is a relative.

[Anonymous]

In these types of threads, it would be useful to set the scene in terms of stats and what schools the child is aiming for before stating the safety. Safeties are relative, as are other factors, including whether the student is applying to a public school in-state or out-of-state. I've seen VA parents post about deferrals or rejections from VT for kids with stats higher than my kids' classmates in Maryland who got in (and the opposite for UMCP).

Among my own kids, safeties varied. One is very high achieving and was aiming for Ivies and MIT. He didn't get into any of those. His safety, which is not a safety for most students, was Georgia Tech, where he wound up having an amazing experience that he wouldn't trade for anything.

My other kids have more conventional in-state safeties, like Towson, UMBC, and Salisbury. But believe it or not, my kids also know kids who were rejected from Towson and UMBC too, so they aren't safeties for everyone either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Umdcp is not a safety for anyone. Acceptance rate has to be higher than 50-60% to be a safety.

Get over yourself. It is a safety for many kids. You don’t get to decide what other people define as a safety for them.

It's only a safety for kids aiming for Ivies, or equivalent. For kids a tier below Ivies, it's not a safety. DS didn't get in, and he went to Haverford.

True, but there are many people on this site whose kids are aiming for Ivies, so it seems fine to include it in a list of safeties.

I really liked Haverford and wished my kid would have ended up there. He got into an Ivy equivalent but still think he would have been happier at Haverford....

Yeah, still not sure Haverford's a safety, saying this as a parent who kid applied to Pitt as a safety (I'm fine labeling some schools at safeties for certain kids). DD's best friend applied to Wooster as a safety and ED'd at Haverford. Why didn't your kid go to Haverford?

Haverford is in no way a safety. See the other recent thread about selectivity of SLACs. If I’m reading that right Haverford is actually more selective than even some other higher ranked schools.

Haverford was not brought up as a safety. I believe a pp said their kid got into Haverford but not UMD, implying that UMD was not a safety.

[Anonymous]

Wisco! Although maybe not so much a safety anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In these types of threads, it would be useful to set the scene in terms of stats and what schools the child is aiming for before stating the safety. Safeties are relative, as are other factors, including whether the student is applying to a public school in-state or out-of-state. I've seen VA parents post about deferrals or rejections from VT for kids with stats higher than my kids' classmates in Maryland who got in (and the opposite for UMCP).

Among my own kids, safeties varied. One is very high achieving and was aiming for Ivies and MIT. He didn't get into any of those. His safety, which is not a safety for most students, was Georgia Tech, where he wound up having an amazing experience that he wouldn't trade for anything.

My other kids have more conventional in-state safeties, like Towson, UMBC, and Salisbury. But believe it or not, my kids also know kids who were rejected from Towson and UMBC too, so they aren't safeties for everyone either.

Of course there is a lot of variation in what is a safety for different types of students. I think mostly what people are noting when saying a school is "not a safety" is the schools with very low acceptance rates. No matter how awesome your student is, a school with a sub 20% acceptance rate is not a safety, no matter what (well, unless your dad is the president or you gave the school $1M+)

Georgia Tech's OOS admissions rate was 13%. It's great that your son got in but it was a target, not a "safety" and could easily have gone the other way. You think it's a safety now because it worked out. Same with anyone whose kid won the lottery-odds and now thinks that school is a safety. It's not. You got lucky.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In these types of threads, it would be useful to set the scene in terms of stats and what schools the child is aiming for before stating the safety. Safeties are relative, as are other factors, including whether the student is applying to a public school in-state or out-of-state. I've seen VA parents post about deferrals or rejections from VT for kids with stats higher than my kids' classmates in Maryland who got in (and the opposite for UMCP).

Among my own kids, safeties varied. One is very high achieving and was aiming for Ivies and MIT. He didn't get into any of those. His safety, which is not a safety for most students, was Georgia Tech, where he wound up having an amazing experience that he wouldn't trade for anything.

My other kids have more conventional in-state safeties, like Towson, UMBC, and Salisbury. But believe it or not, my kids also know kids who were rejected from Towson and UMBC too, so they aren't safeties for everyone either.

Of course there is a lot of variation in what is a safety for different types of students. I think mostly what people are noting when saying a school is "not a safety" is the schools with very low acceptance rates. No matter how awesome your student is, a school with a sub 20% acceptance rate is not a safety, no matter what (well, unless your dad is the president or you gave the school $1M+)

Georgia Tech's OOS admissions rate was 13%. It's great that your son got in but it was a target, not a "safety" and could easily have gone the other way. You think it's a safety now because it worked out. Same with anyone whose kid won the lottery-odds and now thinks that school is a safety. It's not. You got lucky.

Actually, I didn't realize how low the acceptance rate for GT has gotten. My son graduated in the 2010s, and the admit rate has totally dropped off since then. On the other hand, I'm not sure that even now, admission would "be getting lucky" for a student with the same level of achievement in math during high school.

[Anonymous]

UVa

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wisco! Although maybe not so much a safety anymore.

OOS acceptance is about mid 30s now, I think that kills its safety status.

[Anonymous]

Our daughter is a first year at UVM. She was waitlisted at Kenyon and Fordham but UVM was not what I'd call her "safety" (that was Stone HIll). She's LOVING the school and Burlington.

[Anonymous]

Cal grad here. I can only wish our football team was good enough to be known…