Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with your general point that different people mean different things in discussion forums.

Rigor, grades, and accordingly rank, are not standardized. Trying to standardize that which cannot be standardized is... not a good idea.

On safety, too many schools with acceptance rates in the 30-50+ range also heavily consider demonstrated interest, yield protect, or otherwise are careful about admitting students with stats on the higher end for the school, if they think the student is unlikely to attend. They are not true safeties.

just my two cents...

+1

These are terms that can't be defined in a way that applies across the board for all applicants.

I generally agree with you (though i would like to think certain things are somewhat universal -- test scores for example), And it is underscores OPs point that when posters make claims about these things as determinative, it is not super helpful. But also, colleges have to standardize these considerations when determining admittance, so there must be some sort of standard?

I'm guessing Princeton has a different standard than Podunk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with your general point that different people mean different things in discussion forums.

Rigor, grades, and accordingly rank, are not standardized. Trying to standardize that which cannot be standardized is... not a good idea.

On safety, too many schools with acceptance rates in the 30-50+ range also heavily consider demonstrated interest, yield protect, or otherwise are careful about admitting students with stats on the higher end for the school, if they think the student is unlikely to attend. They are not true safeties.

just my two cents...

+1

These are terms that can't be defined in a way that applies across the board for all applicants.

I generally agree with you (though i would like to think certain things are somewhat universal -- test scores for example), And it is underscores OPs point that when posters make claims about these things as determinative, it is not super helpful. But also, colleges have to standardize these considerations when determining admittance, so there must be some sort of standard?

Anonymous wrote:I agree with your general point that different people mean different things in discussion forums.

Rigor, grades, and accordingly rank, are not standardized. Trying to standardize that which cannot be standardized is... not a good idea.

On safety, too many schools with acceptance rates in the 30-50+ range also heavily consider demonstrated interest, yield protect, or otherwise are careful about admitting students with stats on the higher end for the school, if they think the student is unlikely to attend. They are not true safeties.

just my two cents...

+1

These are terms that can't be defined in a way that applies across the board for all applicants.

I agree with your general point that different people mean different things in discussion forums.

Rigor, grades, and accordingly rank, are not standardized. Trying to standardize that which cannot be standardized is... not a good idea.

On safety, too many schools with acceptance rates in the 30-50+ range also heavily consider demonstrated interest, yield protect, or otherwise are careful about admitting students with stats on the higher end for the school, if they think the student is unlikely to attend. They are not true safeties.

just my two cents...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t count rigor by the number of APs and Honors. One person’s AP bio curriculum could be similar to someone else’s honors or regular biology class.

So how would you determine it then?

relative to the classes that other students at the same school are taking with allowance being made that certain schools as a whole may be more rigorous.

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t count rigor by the number of APs and Honors. One person’s AP bio curriculum could be similar to someone else’s honors or regular biology class.

So how would you determine it then?

I wouldn’t count rigor by the number of APs and Honors. One person’s AP bio curriculum could be similar to someone else’s honors or regular biology class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:high GPA as: top 10 in class (not percent, top 10 kids)

The reason people use percent is that class sizes vary so dramatically. My kid has a graduating class of 600. Yours?

I think that is a great point. and, probably hard to hash out. My kids' class is 200.

Anonymous wrote:high GPA as: top 10 in class (not percent, top 10 kids)

The reason people use percent is that class sizes vary so dramatically. My kid has a graduating class of 600. Yours?

Reading through these boards, it feels like folks are talking past each other. People mention High stats, reach, safety, but it feels like we are all talking about different ideas.

I would define

high GPA as: top 10 in class (not percent, top 10 kids)
high test scores: 1500/34 or above
high stats: both of the above
rigor: IB or 5+ honors or AP
reach: school where kid meets the median scores and/or has less than 20% selectivity no matter the kid's profile
hook: not even sure because there is so much disagreement
safety: depends on stats. should never be below a 30% admit rate but I think the scale slides. A team captain valedictorian who has a1500 SAT might use a more selective school as a safety than even a kid who has participant ECs, 1500 SAT and only top 10 of class as an example.

And obviously factors specific to your kid skew all of this (ECs, gender, race, full pay, public/private, legacy etc).

I bring this up because it feels like the information isn't as helpful if we all mean different things.