Your DS seems smart, social and fun. Have him apply to VT, JMU, UGA, Penn State, Tennessee, Auburn, and Indiana. He will get into many of these and be really happy. He can apply as a history major or something and change later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are his grades like? Unweighted GPA?
No EC leadership?
Favorite subjects?
Public or private HS?

UW 3.8, 8 IB classes
High level participation in sports with leadership experience
Doesn’t seem to have a favorite subject, how he feels about a class seems to depend more on how well he connects to teacher and other students in the class.
Public school

Agree with others. If you can afford full pay, pick a full pay choice. Very important.
Look at these schools and narrow down major choice.

Wake:
Major: https://sociology.wfu.edu/ (Courses: Sociology of Sports; Society, Culture & Sport; Sport, Media & Communication (COMM);
Minor: Communication or Entrepreneurship https://admissions.wfu.edu/academics/majors-minors/communication/ https://entrepreneurship.wfu.edu/minor-in-entrepreneurship/

You can do the same as the above for any other school - does he want big, small? Greek life? Urban, suburban, rural?
What is your in-state option?
Look at WashU, Lehigh, BU, W&M, Villanova, GW.

Saw this on Reddit and thought of this thread it was on r/wfu re choice btw UNC and WF



They’re both great schools with totally different vibes, and WFU was the perfect vibe for me so I would absolutely pick it over UNC time and again.

Here’s my why reasons in no particular order: I’m from NC, about 25 people from my graduating class went to UNC, I was the only person I knew going to wake. I loved getting to branch out and meet new people. I loved the smaller campus atmosphere. I did not have a single class taught by a TA, and only 1 or 2 classes that had enrollment higher than 25 my entire 4 years at wake. Depending on your major, that will almost certainly not be true at Carolina. I liked the small town feel of W-S better than all the traffic of the triangle area. Because wake is such a small school, the alumni experience is also unique and very tight knit, and I’m not sure I would’ve gotten that experience at UNC.

I now work/teach at a large r1 state university similar to UNC, and while I recognize the students here mostly love it and are successful, I have also noticed that a handful slip through the cracks due to the large campus and class sizes. I worry that would’ve happened to me had I attended UNC, but I also have friends from high school who absolutely loved their time there and were very successful. The choice really comes down to what learning environment works best for you and what you want out of your college experience. Think also about what you want to do after college: law school, business school, straight to industry, etc and let the reputation of each university in those fields/rate of student placement impact your choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a little crazy, but both of my boys go to college and neither cracked 700 on math.

One has a niche humanities interest and is pursuing that, the other was undecided when he first arrived at college, a small LAC, and now is pursing a business major. Both love college and are doing well.

This is generally my view as well. The smaller the better for kids (male and female) who seem a bit lost. Larger schools are perfect for kids who know precisely where they're going and can get themselves there with little to no hand-holding.
Now, if finances are an issue, well, just go to the cheapest option. No loans ever.

I've been a professor for 20 years now at large research universities, and this perception is not really helpful. While it is true that go-getters can thrive at a large state university with little hand-holding, the majority of kids enrolled at large universities are not going to be this way. Most of them are happy to be anonymous and part of a larger crowd where they won't be accountable if they skip class. Also, so much depends on your major. Smaller majors, especially those with few graduate students, even at large universities typically mean a lot more attention paid to undergraduate students. Larger majors, typically bio, econ, poli sci, mean a lot of anonymity and, sometimes, falling through the cracks and/or needing an extra semester or year to graduate so that major/graduation requirements can be fulfilled.
There is a lot to be said for kids who know what they want with little hand-holding who attend selective LACs. They are going to be pushed by the professors (in a good way), and they will be held accountable. At a larger university, these kids would likely be ignored by professors (as most undergrads at large research universities are, until maybe junior or senior year), and left alone by TAs because they don't need the help. Remember large research universities prioritize research, not teaching. Your kid may end up with great teachers, but that is by chance not by design. At the tippy top LACs, you get both research and teaching. At most LACs, you get excellent teaching with less emphasis on research.

These are excellent points. In particular the emphasis on teaching was my own experience at a very strong but not tippy top LAC. It’s an expensive thing to buy. However, for a kid who has the potential to be intellectually curious but who might not know what he/she wants to be doing, can be worth it.

Anonymous wrote:OP is on the wrong forum. The rule here is Ivy League or no-name private liberal arts college. There's no in between.

Very close, however, no-name LAC is meant to be viewed as "exclusive".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes I want to (metaphorically speaking, of course) strangle DCUM posters on the college board. This thread is an excellent example.

OP's kid has a 1380 on the SAT, meaning he's obviously very bright. But isn't that strong at upper level math and based on his interests he's not all that academic.

In other words, he's a lot like the overwhelming majority of boys his age, just brighter than most. Of course he should be going to college.

But he shouldn't be going to a LAC, that's clearly not his thing (far too academic), and he shouldn't be going to or even applying to the striver and high pressure schools like Vandy, Emory, WashU or the other ridiculous ideas that posters are coming up with. He should be going to a large or mid-sized state university or chasing merit aid at a solid mid sized private that offers a variety of preprofessional programs and taking introductory classes and figuring it all out. I'd suggest looking hard at Jesuit universities. They are tailored made for a kid like him.

See, I think you are REALLY REALLY WRONG HERE.
A giant state flagship is the worst option for a kid like this. Undecided, perhaps a bit lost. This kid needs guidance. Great advisors. High-touch professors. Easy opportunities to try lots of different things. A SLAC might be just the thing. Or a small private school like a Wake Forest.

Its posts like yours that make me want to strangle DCUM users who think they know everything but really know very little.

Way to cherry pick what I said.

I said large or mid sized state school or chase merit at a mid sized private. I never said "giant state flagship." It's only on DCUM where every high school senior knows exactly what they want to study in college or what they want to do afterwards, and that's only because mommy and daddy have already decided for them. The idea that if you don't have your career carefully plotted out by senior year means you're doomed to failure and dropping out unless you go to a private liberal arts college with a bunch of pampered kids with helicopter parents is just so ridiculous.

This is a public high school kid who has done well. He's grounded and rounded. He's achieving. He's testing well. He's FINE. He doesn't need and wouldn't even benefit from a liberal arts college. He's better off at a school with a wider variety of practical and professional offerings.

ITA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this a joke? Go into business, finance, accounting. You don't need high level math for that stuff.

Agree that you don't need calculus but you need a very strong number sense and in general to be "good with numbers." Someone who struggles to do quick math and estimating in their head would not be a good fit.

Hahahaha. Hahaha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My ds who couldn't crack 700 on math is an Econ Major at a T30.

TO?

Nope.

But not from DMV. I really think reality is warped.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here suggesting he should do sports management because he likes sports. No.

What he needs to do is go to an affordable school and take different classes until he finds something he feels passionate about.

+1000

Very few "good" sports management jobs. Most start in sales for a sports team (often not even the majors/NFL/top level) and have to work their way up. The glamorous job they want is not easy to obtain.

Anonymous wrote:Sports management is a hard major to get into. Same with business. Both are very competitive with more male applicants than they can handle.

The sociology poster is on the right track, with the sports leadership minor.

Kids can slightly pivot to the right major when they get to college, unless it's a direct admission program.

It's also a difficult major to actually use in sports management. Difficult career path to forge. I'd focus on business major with focus on sports management, so you can pivot into other areas if needed

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a little crazy, but both of my boys go to college and neither cracked 700 on math.

One has a niche humanities interest and is pursuing that, the other was undecided when he first arrived at college, a small LAC, and now is pursing a business major. Both love college and are doing well.

This is generally my view as well. The smaller the better for kids (male and female) who seem a bit lost. Larger schools are perfect for kids who know precisely where they're going and can get themselves there with little to no hand-holding.
Now, if finances are an issue, well, just go to the cheapest option. No loans ever.

I've been a professor for 20 years now at large research universities, and this perception is not really helpful. While it is true that go-getters can thrive at a large state university with little hand-holding, the majority of kids enrolled at large universities are not going to be this way. Most of them are happy to be anonymous and part of a larger crowd where they won't be accountable if they skip class. Also, so much depends on your major. Smaller majors, especially those with few graduate students, even at large universities typically mean a lot more attention paid to undergraduate students. Larger majors, typically bio, econ, poli sci, mean a lot of anonymity and, sometimes, falling through the cracks and/or needing an extra semester or year to graduate so that major/graduation requirements can be fulfilled.
There is a lot to be said for kids who know what they want with little hand-holding who attend selective LACs. They are going to be pushed by the professors (in a good way), and they will be held accountable. At a larger university, these kids would likely be ignored by professors (as most undergrads at large research universities are, until maybe junior or senior year), and left alone by TAs because they don't need the help. Remember large research universities prioritize research, not teaching. Your kid may end up with great teachers, but that is by chance not by design. At the tippy top LACs, you get both research and teaching. At most LACs, you get excellent teaching with less emphasis on research.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a little crazy, but both of my boys go to college and neither cracked 700 on math.

One has a niche humanities interest and is pursuing that, the other was undecided when he first arrived at college, a small LAC, and now is pursing a business major. Both love college and are doing well.

This is generally my view as well. The smaller the better for kids (male and female) who seem a bit lost. Larger schools are perfect for kids who know precisely where they're going and can get themselves there with little to no hand-holding.
Now, if finances are an issue, well, just go to the cheapest option. No loans ever.

"Lost" and "hand-holding" are derogatory and really not the right choice of words anyway. No one needs to know what they want to do as a career before they've had an opportunity to explore what they don't yet now. What a strong LAC does is ensure that students study a broad range of areas, learn cross curricular connections, strong research, writing and critical thinking, and they typically have a strong advisor program to guide the students in finding their passions and strengths. And even if they don't find one passion, and are curious life-long learners with many areas of interest, they are well educated and able to move into pretty much any role outside of super specialized programs or trades. These people are not "lost" nor do they need "hand holding."

OP is on the wrong forum. The rule here is Ivy League or no-name private liberal arts college. There's no in between.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this a joke? Go into business, finance, accounting. You don't need high level math for that stuff.

Agree that you don't need calculus but you need a very strong number sense and in general to be "good with numbers." Someone who struggles to do quick math and estimating in their head would not be a good fit.

No. seriously, you might think that, and certainly someone in the building needs to be good at math, but actually, you just need charisma.

Anonymous wrote:Is this a joke? Go into business, finance, accounting. You don't need high level math for that stuff.

Agree that you don't need calculus but you need a very strong number sense and in general to be "good with numbers." Someone who struggles to do quick math and estimating in their head would not be a good fit.

Anonymous wrote:There are plenty of math related jobs where such a score would be perfectly fine. For example if he likes business or health care he will be perfectly fine.

+1 People on here are so out of touch with reality.