Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, thank you for taking the time to post this Q&A, it has been extremely informative. I'm wondering what advice would you give to the parents of a kid who has extremely strong academic credentials, but does not show a demonstrated passion? My daughter is in 7th grade, and from how she is doing so far, I would expect she would be near valedictorian and have very high SAT scores. However, she is interested in everything. She is equally strong in STEM as she is in humanities/social sciences. When asked what she wants to do as a career, she'll say she doesn't know, so many things are interesting to her. Her activities are all over the place - soccer, theater, art, computers. I can easily see where she will be the dreaded "well-rounded" applicant who doesn't stand out to admission offers. And we can't be comforted by the notion that she will be accepted to a strong school somewhere as long as she casts her net wide enough. Our budget only allows for instate colleges. So basically if she doesn't get into the two top schools, she will have to settle for a school that is academically far beneath what she theoretically "should" be able to attend. From a purely strategic perspective, should we try to encourage her to "specialize" in a certain area, so she will stand a greater chance of standing out to the admission officers?

My honest advice for you is to to close the college and university forum and not open it again until your DD is midway through freshman year. Bye.

Says the person whose budget probably doesn't limit them to only in state publics.

Or says the person who knows many graduates of VA universities other than UVA and W&M who are thriving. The Harvard PhD economist in the office next to mine got his undergrad degree at JMU. My neighbor's kid who just graduated from UVA law got her undergrad degree from Mary Washington. Our successful business owner friend went to GMU. I don't think all will be lost if PP's DD doesn't get in to UVA and had to "squander" her talents at a lesser state school.

Of course it's possible to thrive if one does not attend a top college. But seriously, if college status didn't matter at all, why would anyone even care? Why do so many families strain their budgets to pay for elite colleges instead of choosing from the plethora of schools that are more affordable? Obviously, all else being equal most kids would prefer to attend the highest ranking school they are capable of getting in to. Is it really so unreasonable that the parents of a high achieving kid, are dismayed to know that there is a very good chance that their child might attend Average State U, because of finances that extremely limit their options?

Yes it is so unreasonable. Colleges are not chosen based on the " highest ranking school they are capable of getting in to". People who do that likely do the same with buying a car or house, without regard to their needs and requirements. A university rank is a composite, just like the DOW jones or the S&P500. You should not care about the rank/composite. What you should care about is the individual program or school that your child is interested in at the university. That is where education occurs. For example, if you are interested in nursing, it matters not to your kids future how the architecture school is doing. The thought that "average" colleges cannot educate or do not turn out mullionaires is ludicrous. When I went to law school, I saw no correlation between the elite prep school or the elite undergrad and the lawyers performance in school and their eventual performance in life. They all had a shot at being successful and it was more a personal trait than a cause of the high school or undergrad. Moreover, one must understand that if/when a high school or undergrad turns out a lot of winners, it is not just because of them--- they preselected for winners, people who already had the personal traits of being winners and who could self-educate and self-direct so that the institution's success with the student is closer to guaranteed. Lastly, any 7th grade mom who is already predicting valedictorian already has a self-directed child and shouldn't care about average university. PP, you have terribly faulty logic thinking that because most people do it, it must be right-- that thinking pattern will keep you 'average', not your university choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rollins College, in Orlando, is nice. It's one of the few, good private schools in Florida.

Well, good for partying for former private school kids. University if Florida is historically the only decent academic school.but University if Miami is on the rise.

University of Miami - I believe their newish President came from an Ivy and they've been slowly becoming more selective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, the Ivy applicant pools aren't that strong. I've heard average SAT of 2090, ACT of 31, and a UW GPA of a 3.8. Definitely nowhere near perfect. Just too many students applying who aren't qualified. Someone posted the link comparing how much stronger Amherst's applicant pool (which is self-selecting since it's an LAC) than Harvard or Stanford (which everyone applies to).

Had this very discussion last night with my wife. Compared the Naviance data, Duke vs. Amherst. Duke has 3-4x the number of applications from our HS, and at least 1/3 have SATs below 1400. Didn't see a single Amherst score below 1400. Plenty of kids applying to Ivies, Duke, etc, based on name recognition alone with no shot whatsoever of admission. Much less of that with the LACs.

Keep in mind that Duke gives athletic scholarships while Amherst does not. Kids can be misled by low-appearing SAT scores from colleges like these, and incorrectly think they have a shot. I suspect that in reality, most of those low SATs are from recruited athletes, not from the general applicant pool.

which is why time and time again i have said naviance is utter trash unless they start reporting hooks along with the data. it isn't like the data doesn't exist. it just doesn't want to be released.

Anonymous wrote:Rollins College, in Orlando, is nice. It's one of the few, good private schools in Florida.

Well, good for partying for former private school kids. University if Florida is historically the only decent academic school.but University if Miami is on the rise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But what a win if you win! Most people I know from HYP are complete morons and yet they are often held in high esteem for no reason other than HYP. Look at all the HYP idiots running the gov.

Right, it's better not to get educated at all! Who needs to read any books or study? I mean, I watched House, so why can't I be a doctor? Distinguished professors, great libraries, state-of-the-art labs, research opportunities, and smart classmates can't do anything but create morons.

oh please. 90% of that can be learned online + books. college degree is nothing but a certificate.

You wasted $150,000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library.

If DC is female, Scripps. Fabulous school!

Rollins College, in Orlando, is nice. It's one of the few, good private schools in Florida.

Any advice on which liberal arts schools are on the rise, but not yet fully "discovered". DC is starting the college search process, focused on liberal arts schools, but looking for the next hot school (i.e., where your average bright, accomplished, but unhooked kid might have a fighting chance of gaining admission).

Thank you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But what a win if you win! Most people I know from HYP are complete morons and yet they are often held in high esteem for no reason other than HYP. Look at all the HYP idiots running the gov.

Right, it's better not to get educated at all! Who needs to read any books or study? I mean, I watched House, so why can't I be a doctor? Distinguished professors, great libraries, state-of-the-art labs, research opportunities, and smart classmates can't do anything but create morons.

oh please. 90% of that can be learned online + books. college degree is nothing but a certificate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, the Ivy applicant pools aren't that strong. I've heard average SAT of 2090, ACT of 31, and a UW GPA of a 3.8. Definitely nowhere near perfect. Just too many students applying who aren't qualified. Someone posted the link comparing how much stronger Amherst's applicant pool (which is self-selecting since it's an LAC) than Harvard or Stanford (which everyone applies to).

Had this very discussion last night with my wife. Compared the Naviance data, Duke vs. Amherst. Duke has 3-4x the number of applications from our HS, and at least 1/3 have SATs below 1400. Didn't see a single Amherst score below 1400. Plenty of kids applying to Ivies, Duke, etc, based on name recognition alone with no shot whatsoever of admission. Much less of that with the LACs.

Keep in mind that Duke gives athletic scholarships while Amherst does not. Kids can be misled by low-appearing SAT scores from colleges like these, and incorrectly think they have a shot. I suspect that in reality, most of those low SATs are from recruited athletes, not from the general applicant pool.

These posters are talking about the applicant pool, not the accepted pool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, the Ivy applicant pools aren't that strong. I've heard average SAT of 2090, ACT of 31, and a UW GPA of a 3.8. Definitely nowhere near perfect. Just too many students applying who aren't qualified. Someone posted the link comparing how much stronger Amherst's applicant pool (which is self-selecting since it's an LAC) than Harvard or Stanford (which everyone applies to).

Had this very discussion last night with my wife. Compared the Naviance data, Duke vs. Amherst. Duke has 3-4x the number of applications from our HS, and at least 1/3 have SATs below 1400. Didn't see a single Amherst score below 1400. Plenty of kids applying to Ivies, Duke, etc, based on name recognition alone with no shot whatsoever of admission. Much less of that with the LACs.

Keep in mind that Duke gives athletic scholarships while Amherst does not. Kids can be misled by low-appearing SAT scores from colleges like these, and incorrectly think they have a shot. I suspect that in reality, most of those low SATs are from recruited athletes, not from the general applicant pool.

Anonymous wrote:What part of these is no quota are people not understanding?

There is a quota - do you think it is merely pure coincidence that % of Asians at ivies all hover around the same percentage? When CalTech became merit based, % Asians went up.