Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?

VERY well stated. +1000

+1

I have 2 who went for prestige and one who went to a CTCL. The latter had an overwhelmingly better academic experience, much closer relationships with professors, much better research opportunities, and much better guidance for grad schools and careers. The 2 who went for prestige have some pretty big regrets with their choice.

You people are so dense. For the umpteenth time, no one is saying that the prestige schools are invariably better. Again, the point is that the CTCL schools don’t own the market on good non-prestige schools. There are 100 others that are just as good. A marketing ploy!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?

VERY well stated. +1000

+1

I have 2 who went for prestige and one who went to a CTCL. The latter had an overwhelmingly better academic experience, much closer relationships with professors, much better research opportunities, and much better guidance for grad schools and careers. The 2 who went for prestige have some pretty big regrets with their choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.

Sure. Right. Ok. You're missing the point anyway. There are many, many other non "higher ranked" schools that offer ALL of the benefits that you've just outlined for your kid's CTCL school that are NOT on the CTCL list. That's why it's a marketing ploy for those schools.

Not really.

Yes, really. I went to one.

You can't have it both ways. Some CTCL schools are probably pretty great and offer many of the benefits listed above (and so do MANY other non-CTCL schools). But you can't lump them all together and claim that they are all wonderful. So please, do yourself a favor and promote the actual school that you think is so great and STOP promoting the whole CTCL BS!

FWIW, my DC considered several CTCL schools when looking at schools a couple of years ago. I found the marketing by the CTCL group very over the top.

Anonymous wrote:If she likes Amherst, she should look at Smith & Mt Holyoke. She could still take Amherst classes. Not sure why one wouldn’t look at a number of theses colleges if they are in the area. You can visit 3 in a day and even squeeze a drive by or drop in at the other 2.

Those schools are easier to tour than o get into. Perhaps you haven’t been following the discussion.

Anonymous wrote:With those grades she has no chance at the Midds and Amhersts of the world. Look at second tier schools like Skidmore or Gettysburg or Dickinson.

Those aren’t easy to get into, either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.

Oh your one NESCAC school didn’t have those resources (many years ago)? Well that’s it folks. Argument is over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve also been LAC hunting with a 33 ACT and a 3.6uw/4.1w

Our list includes:

Reaches:
Colgate
Vassar

Matches:
Franklin and Marshall
Bucknell
Lafayette
Skidmore

Safeties:
Marist
Union
CNU
Wooster

From what kind of high school?

Top MD public with full IB diploma

Anonymous wrote:We’ve also been LAC hunting with a 33 ACT and a 3.6uw/4.1w

Our list includes:

Reaches:
Colgate
Vassar

Matches:
Franklin and Marshall
Bucknell
Lafayette
Skidmore

Safeties:
Marist
Union
CNU
Wooster

From what kind of high school?

Have you asked her WHY these schools?

We’ve also been LAC hunting with a 33 ACT and a 3.6uw/4.1w

Our list includes:

Reaches:
Colgate
Vassar

Matches:
Franklin and Marshall
Bucknell
Lafayette
Skidmore

Safeties:
Marist
Union
CNU
Wooster

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.

Sure. Right. Ok. You're missing the point anyway. There are many, many other non "higher ranked" schools that offer ALL of the benefits that you've just outlined for your kid's CTCL school that are NOT on the CTCL list. That's why it's a marketing ploy for those schools.

Not really.

Yes, really. I went to one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.

Sure. Right. Ok. You're missing the point anyway. There are many, many other non "higher ranked" schools that offer ALL of the benefits that you've just outlined for your kid's CTCL school that are NOT on the CTCL list. That's why it's a marketing ploy for those schools.

Not really.

Don't get overanxious, its early. Wait for this year's grades and SATs next June. Junior year is tough and grades this year matter more than grades in 9th and 10th. You'll get the best advice from the school's college counselor. If by "top private" you mean one of the schools most talked about on this board - NCS, SFS, GDS, Maret, WIS, Potomac, etc. - a mix of As and Bs are solid grades. Very few students have straight As at these schools. Typical college destinations include all the SLACs but it depends on the classes taken and a lot on the teacher and counselor recommendations. But a good list would include reaches (all the top SLACS), matches (> than 50/50 odds), and foundations (pretty assured admission). The college counselor will have very specific and clear guidance but they probably don't want to talk to you until after this year's seniors are done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.

Sure. Right. Ok. You're missing the point anyway. There are many, many other non "higher ranked" schools that offer ALL of the benefits that you've just outlined for your kid's CTCL school that are NOT on the CTCL list. That's why it's a marketing ploy for those schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the Colleges that Change Lives schools!

(chuckle chuckle)

Okay, I'm newer to this forum. I'm only a little bit familiar with Colleges that Change Lives schools. So, for the novice, let me in on the joke!

There's a running argument about Colleges that Change Lives. One side (which apparently includes PP) thinks that CTCL is a marketing ploy by third tier schools to get noticed, and that no one seriously would attend one of these schools if they had any other choices. The other side thinks that CTCL has great advice and that students who attend those colleges (or other schools like them) are happier and have better outcomes than PP would anticipate.

It breaks down to a prestige, competitive admissions strategy vs. a holistic admissions strategy. Do you want your kid to win the college admissions game? Or do you want your kid to find a school that is a good match and will further their development as a person, in addition to furthering their career goals?[/

Excuse me while I vomit. The point of the CTCL skeptics isn't that the listed schools aren't good, it's that [b]there's nothing so special about them that distinguishes them in any meaningful way from hundreds of other schools with similar admissions standards other than their being in the book -- hence, the view that it's nothing but a marketing tool for the listed schools.

For my DC who is at a CTCL school, there are a lot of special things about it that distinguish it from higher-ranked SLACs.

First, DC got a big merit aid package, which enabled us to send him to the exact right-fit school.

Second, the academic supports are tremendous, and have helped DC to succeed in ways that were not possible in high school. This in turn has built his confidence such that every success begets another.

Third, his mentors at school have been amazing.

Fourth, paid internships and research.

Fifth, the loyal alumni network.

I went to a NESCAC and the resources there pale compared to the ones at DC's school.