Stories from even 4 years ago are irrelevant with the way things are changing now and you're trotting out something from when YOU were in college? Come on. That just doesn't make sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

Sounds like your DC2 is smarter than you are! I went to VT and in my eng class a professor asked, "How many of you got into MIT?" No kidding, at least a third of the class raised their hand. I had a buddy on a full ride to VT after turning down a partial from MIT (this was in the 90s). You can think what you want; VT Eng is legit. It's a great education and their students do well. The students at VT are genuinely happy and most look back with a great fondness of their college experience after graduation.

My friends from other schools visited frequently. The ones I remember were my UVA friends who couldn't believe how happy and down to earth everyone was. They would comment on how it was SO different than the vibe at UVA and would go on and on about how we were so lucky to not have to worry about how were perceived when going to class. At the time, I didn't know what they meant.

And then the professor asked, "How many can produce an MIT acceptance letter to prove it?" And all the hands went down.

Believe what you want. It's a true story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

Sounds like your DC2 is smarter than you are! I went to VT and in my eng class a professor asked, "How many of you got into MIT?" No kidding, at least a third of the class raised their hand. I had a buddy on a full ride to VT after turning down a partial from MIT (this was in the 90s). You can think what you want; VT Eng is legit. It's a great education and their students do well. The students at VT are genuinely happy and most look back with a great fondness of their college experience after graduation.

My friends from other schools visited frequently. The ones I remember were my UVA friends who couldn't believe how happy and down to earth everyone was. They would comment on how it was SO different than the vibe at UVA and would go on and on about how we were so lucky to not have to worry about how were perceived when going to class. At the time, I didn't know what they meant.

And then the professor asked, "How many can produce an MIT acceptance letter to prove it?" And all the hands went down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

For some students ALL VA public school are safety schools. Nice "humble" brag there. Get over yourself!

+1 To a certain extent, public schools are stats-driven, you know going in what it will cost, and they don't yield-protect. So, for a high-stats student like the PP's who is in the range for super selective schools, these schools are "safeties" because no school that might be a 'match" for their stats can be counted on. At that level it's all a crapshoot. The highest tier are a lottery basically and the next tier down will yield-protect as they are trying to move up the ranks.

My DS has a very high SAT although after a weak freshman year, GPA isn't as high. Our school Naviance reports Ivies as "safeties" for him purely because of his SAT. I feel badly for uninformed students who look at that and only apply to that type of school. In reality, in-state UVA is a big reach for him and VT is a solid match (not applying to engineering) and he's not applying to Ivy-level schools because I know it is in no way affordable and he won't get aid there. From what I've seen a lot of those high-stats kids do apply to VT and UVAs as safeties but when the merit aid doesn't come through they end up happy at VT (in STEM) or UVA (Humanities).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

For some students ALL VA public school are safety schools. Nice "humble" brag there. Get over yourself!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

Sounds like your DC2 is smarter than you are! I went to VT and in my eng class a professor asked, "How many of you got into MIT?" No kidding, at least a third of the class raised their hand. I had a buddy on a full ride to VT after turning down a partial from MIT (this was in the 90s). You can think what you want; VT Eng is legit. It's a great education and their students do well. The students at VT are genuinely happy and most look back with a great fondness of their college experience after graduation.

My friends from other schools visited frequently. The ones I remember were my UVA friends who couldn't believe how happy and down to earth everyone was. They would comment on how it was SO different than the vibe at UVA and would go on and on about how we were so lucky to not have to worry about how were perceived when going to class. At the time, I didn't know what they meant.

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

Oh, grow up. Tech doesn't need your opinion to validate that it's a great school that produces quality graduates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

So it was a safety school for my DC1 who had a 4.6 and 1580. And her friends who had similar stats.

The fact that people are continuing to argue that it's not a safety school is silly, and it's making VT look like they didn't teach you all a thing. My DC2 wants to go there and I am against it for this reason. I don't see a lot of high-level, critical thinking coming out of there, be it from the alumni, admin, or profs.

Could someone from VT please say something smart so we can feel better about our decision? A math proof maybe?

When my DS interviewed for Engineering, VT made it clear that Engineering, Architecture and Vet undergrad would need a 4.0 weighted at a minimum and that Engineering would most likely not admit until Calculus B/C was done so don't apply ED (it was ED then) if you haven't finished that yet. Look at the SCHEV stats.

There is no "Vet undergrad". The Virginia–Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine is the vet school at Virginia Tech and is not an undergraduate college. The Animal Science majors, many of whom are pre-Vet, have similar grades/test scores as the rest of the university and are not as high as the engineering students. My DD is a potential Animal Science major, so we've looked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

The College admissions game is changing every single year. Nothing is like what it was in the 80s and 90s. Here are the entering stats for the class last september at VT: (and remember these are the ENTERING students, not those of the entire accepted class, which is higher because some students go elsewhere): The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My ds graduated last year from one of the M named FCPS high schools. Her friends that went to VT were the kids who took regular level classes and had GPAs between 3.5 and 3.8

His best friend is there now. Know for a fact he had a 27 ACT score and never took the SAT. His GPA was a weighted 3.6 and the highest math class he took was precalc. He’s in the business school and was admitted EA. No hooks. Regular white suburban kid.

It’s hard to get into engineering there, but it’s easy for every other decent student in the state.

Not sure what a "regular white suburban kid" means, but I call BS on these stats for acceptance into Tech's Business school. As for the other kids you claim were accepted between 3.5-3.8 w/regular level classes, I doubt you have access to all their applications to know all their stats.

I’m reporting what I know from my kid. Friends talk. And every kid with a weighted GPA above 4.0 is noted with an asterisk in the graduation program. The kids at Vt are not the kids with a 4.0

And there you are just wrong. The high school GPAs for the entering class at VT last fall was a 4.22 for 75th percentile, a 4.02 for Median and 3.81 for bottom 25th of the class. SATs scores were 1270/1290/1200 similarly and ACTs were 31/28/25. And those are the scores for ALL of the students. When my DS interviewed for Engineering, VT made it clear that Engineering, Architecture and Vet undergrad would need a 4.0 weighted at a minimum and that Engineering would most likely not admit until Calculus B/C was done so don't apply ED (it was ED then) if you haven't finished that yet. Look at the SCHEV stats. https://research.schev.edu/enrollment/B10_FreshmenProfile.asp

unlikely to have gotten in for science with above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My ds graduated last year from one of the M named FCPS high schools. Her friends that went to VT were the kids who took regular level classes and had GPAs between 3.5 and 3.8

His best friend is there now. Know for a fact he had a 27 ACT score and never took the SAT. His GPA was a weighted 3.6 and the highest math class he took was precalc. He’s in the business school and was admitted EA. No hooks. Regular white suburban kid.

It’s hard to get into engineering there, but it’s easy for every other decent student in the state.

Not sure what a "regular white suburban kid" means, but I call BS on these stats for acceptance into Tech's Business school. As for the other kids you claim were accepted between 3.5-3.8 w/regular level classes, I doubt you have access to all their applications to know all their stats.

I’m reporting what I know from my kid. Friends talk. And every kid with a weighted GPA above 4.0 is noted with an asterisk in the graduation program. The kids at Vt are not the kids with a 4.0

Disagree with VT doesn’t let in kids with lower stats. I think they are intentionally opening the doors to kids from diverse backgrounds ( and I mean diverse, that’s not a code for any one group, including rural and first gen kids) who have good grades but maybe not as high test scores. They are offering the opportunity and there is a place for most hard working kids. If they are not coming well-prepared from HS or highly able and persistent, they will be bumped into less demanding majors. It spreads out the opportunités, opens new paths, etc. for some, and still has a high caliber student in a number of tough majors. Not trying to say it’s MIT, and who cares? They have lots going on there and plenty of success stories. Continually comparing it with UVA and JMU are immaterial unless you look at specific programs at each school and what your student wants/needs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems in general that they are trying to get out of being a safety school. Some high stat kids have been turned down the last couple of years while lower stat kids admitted. They probably don’t care much about early action. It’s just more kids applying to a long list of schools and it doesn’t help them predict their enrollment. They might get a handful of yeses to EA offers. How would it help them better manage their enrollment?

VT is not and has never been a "safety school"

And has not let in kids with lower stats than others for a majority.

Oh, please. You didn’t grow up here, did you? Tech was very much a safety in the 80s and 90s. I was a very average student and didn’t get into UVA or JMU - but I did get into VT. As did all of my average friends. Things have definitely changed since then, but it was absolutely a safety school at one time.

Every school that has a higher than 50% admission rate is a safety school for kids with a certain set of stats. It's part of the definition used to define how you should choose a "safety." Doesn't mean it's an easy or bad school--just a relatively assured admission if you fall above the 50% percentile of GPA/SAT.