Kiss and Cry (college disappointments)

[*LC]

There are something like 26,000 public high schools in this country. No idea how many private high schools there are. Each produces a Valedictorian. That alone does not warrant admission into a top school. High test scores alone don't warrant admission into a top school. Great extracurriculuars alone do not warrant admission into a top school. Any of those or a combination of those *may* get you in the read pile, but that's it. Top schools often say that they could fill their entering classes three or four times over and not be able to tell any difference between the first batch that was admitted and the last batch that was admitted. The common data set stats, while helpful, can NOT be relied upon for top schools. They can probably indicate whether or not one's application will get read. There are MANY qualified applicants.

 

 

Athletics are usually seen as economically beneficial to a school, even if they aren't money-makers at the school. Some people like athletics and athletic events. However, I think it's a false assumption that being a desired athlete was the *sole* reason for a student's admission. Being an athlete can be a hook, just as being a legacy, a URM, or a first-generation student can be a hook. All of those categories of people bring diversity to campuses.

 

 

I disagree with your statement "but if you can pay full tuition, those doors do open regardless of academic standing." If I am being honest, I find this a bit insulting as someone who is paying full-freight. Do you really believe that the ability to pay full tuition is the litmus test for admission to the most selective universities in the country?

 

I don't think it's right or wrong to apply to only one school or to apply to 100 schools. It's none of my beeswax what others choose to do. Each family has to decide what is best for them based on MANY factors. Yes, finances are definitely one of those factors. I think (but this is only my opinion) finances should be the starting point.

 

People often refer to top schools as "lottery schools." The odds are extremely high that one will NOT get in. Many consider the whole admissions process to be a game. Perhaps it is. Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, "You can't win if you don't play."

 

I know not all the top students from all the schools in the country are applying for the lottery schools. If that ever becomes the case, the acceptance rate at the lottery schools would drop into the decimals points. 

 

I agree it is insulting to assume that athletics (or any other hook) is the reason a student got in, but when the numbers are off, I can see why people wonder. Did you know that according to the common data set 7 freshman at Stanford this year have an ACT between 18-23? I have a kid in junior high with higher ACT score.  Another 50-something have an SAT CR in the 500s? Of course, there is no way of knowing who these students are. They may easily be brilliant students in their chosen fields with a disability that makes standardized testing scores out-of-line with their intellectual abilities. Unfortunately I don't think that is where people's minds first jump. I know a student/athlete at Stanford.  I feel bad that people may make these assumptions about him, as I know he has high test scores and grades coming out of a highly ranked public school. He ended up finishing number 2 in the class when the person ranked number 2 fall semester made a B in an AP class spring semester. To have beat out number 1 in this class you would have needed 15 AP classes as well as all As. Number one and number three both went to their first choice schools, in-state (different) public universities ranked in the top 100. One in the class went to an Ivy, but he wasn't in the top 5 students. 

 

Again, according to the Stanford's data set a couple students more than exactly half of 2014 freshmen are full pay students. So, I can see why people think having the money helps since it is a pricey school. However, there is no way to know if the rejected students profile was split 50/50 also. So people can make wrong assumptions.

 

(I'm stuck in a hotel with a sick kid, who is thankfully sleeping. So, this common data set thing is fun for me to look at right now when I am surrounded by 4-walls.)

 

I totally agree that it is totally up to the families and students to make the right decisions for them. Just because my mind wanders, I wonder how many accepted students would have to turn down a lottery school for one student to move off the waitlist. The Common data set shows Stanford waitlisted 576 students and accepted none. 

 

My agreeing with you stops at Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, "You can't win if you don't play."

 

If I was a person to get insulted, I could get insulted since this seems to indicate that if you don't apply to lottery schools you can't win. I have a college kid that had great test scores and grades. She had other things going for her also, however, she found her perfect school in an OOS top 100 school. In her first two years of college, she finished in the top 5 in a regional competition in her area of interest, was selected for the only research experience for undergraduates that she applied for as freshman, was hired for an on-campus research job that may include international travel, and was hired as a sophomore for a highly-sought after summer internship. When she was applying for summer internships, she interviewed with or was contacted to schedule an internship with 5 of the top 10 companies in her area of interest. (I can't remember if the criteria for top company was by intern pay or something else as she shared with me a couple of different lists.) She never played the lottery game,but I fail to see what more she could have won by playing except for debt. We have strange financials, so I don't know how those schools without merit aid would have treated her. 

 

When you son was deciding between Stanford and his other acceptances last year, I seemed to insult you by asking something about his safeties. If I remember correctly, your response was along the lines of  why would he consider those anymore now that he was accepted to these other schools. I never answered, but my answer would have been, because he decided he liked it better, he wants to stay closer to home, one has some special program that he was accepted into that seems the perfect fit for him, it is cheaper, wants  to go to school with friends/girl friend/boy friend... all the same reasons that most top students do not apply to the lottery schools. I completely understand it would be harder to make this choice after your student "won the lottery" than before buying the lottery tickets. 

 

Even though the vast majority of my kid's classmates went to in-state public universities, some of them gave her a hard time for her choice. (All schools involved are ranked in the top 100, however theirs were more selective than hers.) So, she decided to apply to Columbia to show she could be accepted at a truly elective school. She actually had no interest in attending Columbia if accepted, so I would not pay the $90 application fee as I have much better uses for that money than her being bothered by teen telk. She didn't feel bothered enough to spend her own money to apply.

 

Once I overheard in a group thing someone say the kids that go out-of-state to my daughter's school are those who were rejected from our top in-state schools. Instead of being insulted, I laughed and thought of an old quote. "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." Since these in-state schools are not lottery schools, there is no doubt my daughter would have been accepted if she had applied, but we did not see a reason to spend that money eiher. 

 

(I am not saying you are a fool. I just think you have a different perspective than I do. This lady was making a broad assumption/generalization, which is almost always the wrong way to go.) I know many of successful, wealthy people and they all got there by hard work, luck, and smart financial choices. None of them got there by playing the lottery. 

 

 

 The only good news is that dd did not plan to stay there all 4 years - the best schools for what she wants to study are schools that had extra requirements for hsers that she did not want to meet (SAT 2;s etc, also would have had to retake ACT to include writing)

 

Her first choice is a really good school to study science @ (she wants to major in bio), but it is more focused on human bio than animal, and she is animal/wildlife focused and specifically wants to go to a college that has lots of opportunities for ocean-related courses or research/volunteer opportunities... So because of that, starting out at this school was a great choice and then transferring to one that better fit long term goals (while avoiding extra homeschooling requirements) was the best option...

 

 

 

So very disappointed, but thankfully she isn't losing a 4-year dream, just a one year one..... :/

 

The only worry now is that the less selective school that gave her a full ride (seriously, how cruel is the world? full ride at safety, horrible aid at first choice!) will lower her chances of transferring as a sophomore to a more selective college... because it is much more lower ranked than her first choice. 

I would not necessarily assume this will lower her chances of transferring. I don't know how much transferring has anything to do the school students are coming from as opposed to the transfer student himself/herself. Tell your student to keep up the great work and talk to those schools she truly wants to attend about what they want to see in a transfer student. Good luck to her. 

For me, the worst part is knowing that I told my son that the grades, the test scores, the ECs, and being the first generation male (on both sides) to attend college would matter and that the merit aid, scholarships, and financial aid would be there.

 

To the best of our knowledge about hooks, ECs, and whatnot - DS held up his end.  I feel like I let him down.

I'm sorry that things are not going to way the way everything says it will. I'm still hoping that something will work out. Please know deep down you did not let your son down. Just from reading here, it looks like the system did, but I don't know enough to know that. 

What I was trying to say is, "working hard" is necessary, but not sufficient, to get merit aid. If you work hard, but the schools you apply to don't give merit aid (or don't need to give merit aid to attract students with your particular profile), you won't get a scholarship.

 

Working hard is important, but being strategic about applying is at least as important.

 

Yes, this is tue. However, it is hard to know exactly where is right since it differs per student. I have read numerous times on here that private schools give better scholarships than public. My kid got much better offers from her OOS public school than the private schools she applied to. It was higher ranked than any of the others, which she only applied to, because they were free. I wanted her to have a choice in case she changed her mind. She was above all of their top 25 percent scores, she gave geographical diversity for a couple, she may have doubled the female students at another (just kidding, but it was 75-90 percent male.) They all gave her $20 to $30 thousand in merit aid. She received some need based, but it was mainly loans. She would have ended up paying 2 to 3 times out EFC at all of them. She pays way less than at her OOS school. Another OOS was even cheaper, but some of those scholarships would have gone away after the first year. 

Just to agree with this, I know from my own experience that from the schools' perspective, they are using merit aid to attract some kinds of kids that they think they otherwise wouldn't get. Back in the dark ages, I got a lot of merit aid to go to a certain law school that was on its way up in the rankings. As it turned out, the woman I ended up rooming with did too. As best we could figure out, they were trying to improve their rankings by attracting students who might not otherwise come there (and it was a good school, but I think they had amibitions to move from say #14 or 12 to being top 10). Even more so, we were both applying to a newish joint degree program and I think they really wanted to attract students to it (my part of it was the very first year). People who were very/just as qualified but hadn't applied to this program didn't get the money.

 

So yes, we'd both worked hard in college and done well, but sort of lucked on some serious money that we got because of the school's objectives. If you knew which schools had objectives that match what your student has to offer, that would be very helpful. 

I think this is a generalization. Yes, merit aid brings in students who may not have otherwise gone there. But, I know that isn't the only reason top students attend schools that give merit aid. I know my kid knew she was going to her school even before she knew the final scholarship offer. On paper, the higher-ranked in-state schools looked cheaper. It turns out they weren't, but we didn't know that until after she decided not to apply to any in-state schools. Since I went there also, I know a bunch of people I went to school with whose kids are going their now. Many of these kids have the scores/grades to have had their applications read anywhere, but they wanted this school. Why wouldn't they? Their parents are all successful and they went there. 

 

Oops sickie is up, so I won't be able to respond to the other things I had multi-quoted. I had too much fun with those common data sets. 

 

Hugs to all of you still figuring out where your senior will be next year and how to pay for it. My advice is don't listen to all the chatter that you hear around you, but focus on what is right for your student and your finances. 

[Teachin'Mine]

I know not all the top students from all the schools in the country are applying for the lottery schools. If that ever becomes the case, the acceptance rate at the lottery schools would drop into the decimals points. 

 

I agree it is insulting to assume that athletics (or any other hook) is the reason a student got in, but when the numbers are off, I can see why people wonder. Did you know that according to the common data set 7 freshman at Stanford this year have an ACT between 18-23? I have a kid in junior high with higher ACT score.  Another 50-something have an SAT CR in the 500s? Of course, there is no way of knowing who these students are. They may easily be brilliant students in their chosen fields with a disability that makes standardized testing scores out-of-line with their intellectual abilities. Unfortunately I don't think that is where people's minds first jump. I know a student/athlete at Stanford.  I feel bad that people may make these assumptions about him, as I know he has high test scores and grades coming out of a highly ranked public school. He ended up finishing number 2 in the class when the person ranked number 2 fall semester made a B in an AP class spring semester. To have beat out number 1 in this class you would have needed 15 AP classes as well as all As. Number one and number three both went to their first choice schools, in-state (different) public universities ranked in the top 100. One in the class went to an Ivy, but he wasn't in the top 5 students. 

 

Again, according to the Stanford's data set a couple students more than exactly half of 2014 freshmen are full pay students. So, I can see why people think having the money helps since it is a pricey school. However, there is no way to know if the rejected students profile was split 50/50 also. So people can make wrong assumptions.

 

(I'm stuck in a hotel with a sick kid, who is thankfully sleeping. So, this common data set thing is fun for me to look at right now when I am surrounded by 4-walls.)

 

I totally agree that it is totally up to the families and students to make the right decisions for them. Just because my mind wanders, I wonder how many accepted students would have to turn down a lottery school for one student to move off the waitlist. The Common data set shows Stanford waitlisted 576 students and accepted none. 

 

My agreeing with you stops at Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, "You can't win if you don't play."

 

If I was a person to get insulted, I could get insulted since this seems to indicate that if you don't apply to lottery schools you can't win. I have a college kid that had great test scores and grades. She had other things going for her also, however, she found her perfect school in an OOS top 100 school. In her first two years of college, she finished in the top 5 in a regional competition in her area of interest, was selected for the only research experience for undergraduates that she applied for as freshman, was hired for an on-campus research job that may include international travel, and was hired as a sophomore for a highly-sought after summer internship. When she was applying for summer internships, she interviewed with or was contacted to schedule an internship with 5 of the top 10 companies in her area of interest. (I can't remember if the criteria for top company was by intern pay or something else as she shared with me a couple of different lists.) She never played the lottery game,but I fail to see what more she could have won by playing except for debt. We have strange financials, so I don't know how those schools without merit aid would have treated her. 

 

When you son was deciding between Stanford and his other acceptances last year, I seemed to insult you by asking something about his safeties. If I remember correctly, your response was along the lines of  why would he consider those anymore now that he was accepted to these other schools. I never answered, but my answer would have been, because he decided he liked it better, he wants to stay closer to home, one has some special program that he was accepted into that seems the perfect fit for him, it is cheaper, wants  to go to school with friends/girl friend/boy friend... all the same reasons that most top students do not apply to the lottery schools. I completely understand it would be harder to make this choice after your student "won the lottery" than before buying the lottery tickets. 

 

Even though the vast majority of my kid's classmates went to in-state public universities, some of them gave her a hard time for her choice. (All schools involved are ranked in the top 100, however theirs were more selective than hers.) So, she decided to apply to Columbia to show she could be accepted at a truly elective school. She actually had no interest in attending Columbia if accepted, so I would not pay the $90 application fee as I have much better uses for that money than her being bothered by teen telk. She didn't feel bothered enough to spend her own money to apply.

 

Once I overheard in a group thing someone say the kids that go out-of-state to my daughter's school are those who were rejected from our top in-state schools. Instead of being insulted, I laughed and thought of an old quote. "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." Since these in-state schools are not lottery schools, there is no doubt my daughter would have been accepted if she had applied, but we did not see a reason to spend that money eiher. 

 

(I am not saying you are a fool. I just think you have a different perspective than I do. This lady was making a broad assumption/generalization, which is almost always the wrong way to go.) I know many of successful, wealthy people and they all got there by hard work, luck, and smart financial choices. None of them got there by playing the lottery. 

 

I would not necessarily assume this will lower her chances of transferring. I don't know how much transferring has anything to do the school students are coming from as opposed to the transfer student himself/herself. Tell your student to keep up the great work and talk to those schools she truly wants to attend about what they want to see in a transfer student. Good luck to her. 

I'm sorry that things are not going to way the way everything says it will. I'm still hoping that something will work out. Please know deep down you did not let your son down. Just from reading here, it looks like the system did, but I don't know enough to know that. 

 

Yes, this is tue. However, it is hard to know exactly where is right since it differs per student. I have read numerous times on here that private schools give better scholarships than public. My kid got much better offers from her OOS public school than the private schools she applied to. It was higher ranked than any of the others, which she only applied to, because they were free. I wanted her to have a choice in case she changed her mind. She was above all of their top 25 percent scores, she gave geographical diversity for a couple, she may have doubled the female students at another (just kidding, but it was 75-90 percent male.) They all gave her $20 to $30 thousand in merit aid. She received some need based, but it was mainly loans. She would have ended up paying 2 to 3 times out EFC at all of them. She pays way less than at her OOS school. Another OOS was even cheaper, but some of those scholarships would have gone away after the first year. 

I think this is a generalization. Yes, merit aid brings in students who may not have otherwise gone there. But, I know that isn't the only reason top students attend schools that give merit aid. I know my kid knew she was going to her school even before she knew the final scholarship offer. On paper, the higher-ranked in-state schools looked cheaper. It turns out they weren't, but we didn't know that until after she decided not to apply to any in-state schools. Since I went there also, I know a bunch of people I went to school with whose kids are going their now. Many of these kids have the scores/grades to have had their applications read anywhere, but they wanted this school. Why wouldn't they? Their parents are all successful and they went there. 

 

Oops sickie is up, so I won't be able to respond to the other things I had multi-quoted. I had too much fun with those common data sets. 

 

Hugs to all of you still figuring out where your senior will be next year and how to pay for it. My advice is don't listen to all the chatter that you hear around you, but focus on what is right for your student and your finances. 

 

If you don't apply to "lottery school" you can't "win" admission to the lottery schools.  It's simply a fact and not something to be insulted by.  If you remember accurately, HG acknowledged that her son had some great options.  I was the one who assumed he would choose Stanford.  Many parents would be thrilled to have a student at Stanford, and HG expressed that last year.  It sounds like your daughter made a great choice for herself.

 

Glad you had fun with the common data sets, and hope your sick one is feeling better.

 

[Hoggirl]

If you don't apply to "lottery school" you can't "win" admission to the lottery schools. It's simply a fact and not something to be insulted by. If you remember accurately, HG acknowledged that her son had some great options. I was the one who assumed he would choose Stanford. Many parents would be thrilled to have a student at Stanford, and HG expressed that last year. It sounds like your daughter made a great choice for herself.

 

Glad you had fun with the common data sets, and hope your sick one is feeling better.

 

Thank you, Teachin' You expressed exactly what I meant by "playing/winning," the lottery. Thank you for clarifying this. I absolutely did not mean that the only way to "win" was to matriculate to a lottery school. As we often discuss here, there are MANY paths our children can take and ALL of them can be "winning" ways whether they involve attending college or not.

 

Please don't make me define "winning." I am a grown woman, and I am still not sure I know!!

[MysteryJen]

I have been mulling over this topic in the last few days. I have one kid who had pretty good stats (not high enough, not enough rigor on transcripts, or good ECs, or desire to apply to Ivies or Stanford) and the next one coming up who is an athlete. I will tell you right now that the high-ish stats kid had many more options both with number of schools to go to and merit aid than the athlete will.  But in a lot of ways, the athlete is easier. We know how fast she is and what tier recruit she is and what schools are out of reach and what schools are not going to be good enough. She is in an equivalency sport, so her scholarship will be a fraction, instead of a full-ride. Stackable merit aid is available at most schools, based solely on test scores and GPA.

 

What I have learned (painful lesson and continue to learn it) is to check my ego at the door. Know your kid (Stats and desires) and know your finances. Both are limits. But limits can free you to look at schools that might be wonderful. 

 

So, yes, the acceptance rate at Stanford and Ivies is very low. But realistically, most of those applications were weeded out quickly on test scores. The rest are scrutinized and weighed according to the needs of the institution and student body. It is like a swimmer calling the Cal coach. You can call, you can fill out the questionnaire, but unless you are an Olympian or podium at nationals, you are not going to get a serious look. The advice given over and over on this board to look at schools where you are in the top 25% of stats is solid. For some, that means Ivies. That's great. For others, it is other schools. That's great, too. 

 

"Winning" at the college search is finding a school that wants you and you want it and you can afford to attend. 

[*LC]

 

People often refer to top schools as "lottery schools." The odds are extremely high that one will NOT get in. Many consider the whole admissions process to be a game. Perhaps it is. Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, "You can't win if you don't play."

 

 

If you don't apply to "lottery school" you can't "win" admission to the lottery schools.  It's simply a fact and not something to be insulted by.  If you remember accurately, HG acknowledged that her son had some great options.  I was the one who assumed he would choose Stanford.  Many parents would be thrilled to have a student at Stanford, and HG expressed that last year.  It sounds like your daughter made a great choice for herself.

 

Glad you had fun with the common data sets, and hope your sick one is feeling better.

 

 

We can't kick this bug that seems to keep going back and forth between a couple of kids. However, no one is sick tonight and there was nothing on the calendar. I have been trying to work my way back to this thread and it took me forever as I always start with the newest posts. One day I'll learn.

 

Of course you can't get into a school if you do not apply to the school. I can't imagine anyone would think you could/would or should. My comment was about "Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, 'You can't win if you don't play.'" Whenever I have heard expression "I'm going to take my toys and go home," it was in a negative context. The person saying it is always unhappy with a situation and is attempting to change it to his/her liking/advantage by threatening to go home if they don't get his/her way. Usually there is usually a game involved that will stop if the unhappy person leaves with his/her toys. In addition, I normally hear "you can't win if you don't play"  given as a warning on missing out on something necessary/important.  So, to me " "Folks can take their toys and go home and choose not to play. But just as the saying goes with regard to the lottery, "You can't win if you don't play." reads like a warning that people that don't like the college application game and choose not to play the game can't win the game because they aren't playing the game. I'm simply saying there lots of games/colleges out there and one doesn't need to attend (or even apply) a lottery school to win. 

 

I went back to see if I was remembering HG's reaction accurately, because I had been "worried" all year that I bothered her with my post about being prepared for a student choosing a safety. I never want to offend someone, so that is why I remembered. In looking back, she said she would be disappointed if her son chose one of his safety schools. "Ds absolutely knows that this is 100% his choice. Dh and I will support whatever decision he makes, but I would be a liar if I said I wouldn't be disappointed if he were to choose some of the schools on his list *given the choices that he has now.* Maybe that's wrong of me. I will do my best to mask my disappointment if he picks one of those. It IS his choice. I am all about "love thy safety," but, to ME, those schools have now served their useful purpose. However, if he chooses one, I will buy gear and smile and be happy for him. I am not the one who will be spending the next four years somewhere." I have a different opinion, and I still say a safety can always be picked at any point in the process for a lot of valid reasons. I know a current senior with perfect scores, NMF, varsity athlete, ranked in top 10 percent, 10+ AP classes, 2 math classes after AP, works 2 jobs, who is deciding between an OOS pvt school that is ranked in the top 20 and an OOS public school ranked in the top 100. The pvt school meets need; the public school does not, however, both will cost her almost the same, less than $10,000 total a year, due to merit scholarships at the public. She has turned down an OOS public ivy that meets need, because it was going to cost more than the other two. She thinks she will have better opportunities for mentoring and smaller classes with the special program the public-school scholarship gives her; it also pays for a study abroad experience. She is pre-med, and the doctors she has asked say "go where you want; it doesn't matter for med school." Others, are telling her she needs to go to the higher ranked school, because it is super selective, and she got in. Her mom thinks she is leaning toward the public school since her boyfriend goes there. 

 

I never got the chance to finish my earlier post. I want to say that my kids will be allowed to apply wherever they want; it just happened that the oldest picked the school that her parents, grandparents, a couple great-grandparents attended. I picked it for a visit, because it was near where some of my youngest kids were staying during our college-visit road trip after her sophomore year, and she never wanted to visit anywhere else. I made visit an in-state school for a special program I thought she would like (I was wrong), and I made her apply to some other schools in case she changed her mind since she had made her decision so early in high school. Her grandparents would have been disappointed if she had attended Stanford or any Ivy League school.

 

My next kid was looking at competitive programs within a few OOS public schools, and his grandparents understood why. However, he changed his mind about what he wants to do and no longer needs those programs/schools. He attends a regional 4-year school for DE, and after changing his mind about the selective programs, he said why don't I just stay here for college. I decided he needed to see what else was out there, and I set up college visits to a couple top 40 schools. one local and one near where we were vacationing soon. He loved them both. His scores are in the middle 50 for both, and I have been encouraging his interest even though I'm not sure we can afford the pvt OOS school. (We have a low EFC, but I don't know what our CSS amount would be as we are not a typical family.) In addition, the in-state public will require us to jump through some hoops as homeschoolers, but I didn't say anything. His grandparents are telling his older sister, younger siblings, and my siblings, that I can't let him go to the in-state school. They hadn't told me since they knew I would say, "It is his life; it is his decision, just like I did when they said the same thing when I took the oldest to visit the same school." Then, out of nowhere, he announces he wants to go to the same OOS public school his sister attends. I suggest we visit it before he decides to attend. He says, "I've already been there doesn't that count." Now he has had an official visit and he still says it is his first choice. Based on my oldest's experience, I know it likely will be cheaper for him to attend than the in-state  school he likes. However, I am still planning to take him back to the in-state school again. I also have another in-state school that I want him to visit. I want him to attend the school that is right for him. 

 

Thank you, Teachin' You expressed exactly what I meant by "playing/winning," the lottery. Thank you for clarifying this. I absolutely did not mean that the only way to "win" was to matriculate to a lottery school. As we often discuss here, there are MANY paths our children can take and ALL of them can be "winning" ways whether they involve attending college or not.

 

Please don't make me define "winning." I am a grown woman, and I am still not sure I know!!

I'm glad to hear this. I have read on this board more than once -- not posted by you that I remember -- that students should attend the highest rated school they can. Obviously, I disagree with this.

 

 

 

"Winning" at the college search is finding a school that wants you and you want it and you can afford to attend. 

I find this a pretty good definition of "winning" the college search. I would further say that sometimes you don't realize you have won until after you have attended the school for a bit. 

[elegantlion]

 

I find this a pretty good definition of "winning" the college search. I would further say that sometimes you don't realize you have won until after you have attended the school for a bit. 

 

:iagree:  I doubted I would find my groove at my school, but I've been pleasantly surprised. Looking at the school they appear to be a regional state school known for their nursing, education, and police academy. There's also the new shiny science and math building, not to mention one of the lowest university tuitions in the state. 

 

I'm a history major and found a gem of a department - not really evident by reading their website or reading any type of reviews. It's not because of my age, but because I'm a good student, I have been finding opportunities I probably wouldn't at a bigger school, that includes renewable scholarships and mentorship way beyond regular advising. 

 

If I had been 18 and had options of school, this one probably wouldn't have hit the radar as a history major. I doubt at 18 I would have recognized the potential had I attended a class or two. Beyond word of mouth referrals, I'm not sure how one unfamiliar with a specific department would know that potential either. Grad school admissions for graduates, maybe? 

[8filltheheart]

Winning to me is finding the tribe and the appropriate level of challenge plus being a financial fit.

 

My son was waitlisted by the school where he was in the top 25% of stats. He was accepted where he was top 1%. So, I would say, the times, they are a'changin'. If i had another child, I would be looking at more schools where he was in top 5% and consider the stats in top 25% schools to be reaches.

I don't really know where ds falls stats wise. I do know he takes classes mostly with jrs and srs and is still making very high As in all of his classes. But you know what? He loves it and has a great group of friends. He also says those grades are not easy and that he is working extremely hard to earn them. His professors know him. He had more than one offer for paid summer research. Following the merit trail has not been a negative at all from his perspective.