It has been thoroughly discussed in other threads that many thousands of deserving applicants are annually passed over by Ivy+ colleges. What I haven't heard discussed much is where those kids wind up.

Lets say you have a white male who lettered in a varsity sport, has an SAT score in the mid 1500s as well as other honors and extracurriculars, but he can't demonstrate some all-consuming passion and predetermined life path (because he's 17) and doesn't fill a specialized niche. In other words, he is every bit as academically qualified as the kids who do get admitted to top colleges, but is without a life story that sparks the interest of a leftist admissions officer. We know the most selective schools will gleefully reject that kid without a second thought. Most highly selective colleges seem to be looking for (mostly nonwhite) kids who are already almost finished products and then just issue them a stamp of approval. Where do those rejected applicants go in 2024? What highly regarded colleges are looking to take bright, talented kids and actually help develop them and help them figure out what they want to be when they grow up?

State schools like tu, Texas A&M, etc.

My kid didn't apply to an Ivy, but applied to Vanderbilt and Notre Dame. Did not get into Vanderbilt and ended up at ND, which was first choice, even if accepted to Vanderbilt. If they did not make it into ND, probably would have been Alabama due to National Merit Scholarship. And without National Merit scholarship, likely would have been A&M.

Even though a kid may be disappointed if they are not accepted to their top choice, having A&M and/or tu (if you are in Texas) as a "safety" school is still a great situation to be in.

If a kid applies to enough of the Top 25 they have a decent shot at getting in one unless they don't strategize well at all. Applying ED helps a LOT at the ones outside the Top 10. Most who can't do ED go to Flagship publics but some will go to the next tier private schools in the 25-50 range. Really a lot depends as well on how much money matters.

Keep in mind that a lot of the flagship public schools have several programs to compete with the T20 schools and they successfully attract talented students from them every year. Each of these programs provide their own academic opportunities and most come with additional merit dollars. Within the last three years, I have successfully placed students into each one of these selective programs.

Texas A&M:

• E2EnMed Early Assurance Program (8 students/year)
• Brown Scholars (~50 students/year)
• Mays Business and Engineering Honors (~90 students/year)

University of Texas

• 40 Acres Scholars (15-20 students/year)
• Plan II (~200 students/year)
• Engineering Honors (~50 students/year)
• Canfield Business Honors (100 students/year)
• College of Science: Dean's Scholars, Health Science Scholars, and Polymathic Scholars (~50 students/year for each program)
• Liberal Arts Honors (~200 students/year)

When you submit scores to schools, can you submit only your best score, or does it automatically send all scores if you took the SAT/ACT more than once?

khkman22 said:

---

When you submit scores to schools, can you submit only your best score, or does it automatically send all scores if you took the SAT/ACT more than once?

---

you can select which scores to send

That's what I thought, but I was not involved when they were sent. I'm thinking the first score may have hurt the chances for Vanderbilt.

Rice. Don't forget Rice

BlueSmoke said:

---

Rice. Don't forget Rice

---

Rice is another one of those schools that predominantly admits students through Early Decision, and I expect that to only increase with their addition of ED II this year.

Rice is included in the Ivy+ group, along with schools like Vandy, Tulane, Duke, Northwestern, MIT, Caltech, U Chicago etc. They all accept less than 10% of their applicants.

My daughter applied to William & Mary. Was number one in her high school class, clubs and all that, don't remember test scores, but was rejected.
Went to A&M, made one B in 4 years and that was a 89, earned two majors. Received full ride for her masters and PhD program at UT Dallas. Now a tenured college professor at UNT.

Buck Turgidson said:

---

Rice is included in the Ivy+ group, along with schools like Vandy, Tulane, Duke, Northwestern, MIT, Caltech, U Chicago etc. They all accept less than 10% of their applicants.

---

Those schools are not created equal and ED impacts them at very different levels. Tulane is probably the most extreme, if you apply ED the acceptance is 40% or so, Regular and it's definitely below 10%. At MIT though applying Early Action really doesn't give you much of a boost at all, same with Caltech. It really varies a lot depending on the school. Rice is another one that you drastically improve your chances ED and if you are RD you are probably under 5%.

my kid is not quite Ivy 'qualified' (has the test scores and extra curriculars but not the gpa). i echo much of the sentiment here. i think the vast majority of ivy/ivy+ are overrated. though i wish my kid could get a crack at MIT....

i think he'll end of choosing Bama (nms) or A&M with an outside shot of Carnegie Mellon.

Buck Turgidson said:

---

Where do those rejected applicants go in 2024?

---

Top state universities. Then get a second shot at IVY for Grad/Professional school.

Daughter UC Davis to Cornell Law.
Son, UCLA freshman.

With zero need based financial aid, I'm glad the kids ended up at state school.

do state schools in this area/more regional type private schools(SMU etc) give decent merit scholarships for this caliber of student without NMS?

phorizt said:

---

do state schools in this area/more regional type private schools(SMU etc) give decent merit scholarships for this caliber of student without NMS?

---

There are actually only a few schools that care about NMS, they just get a lot of pub over it. Among the Top 50 Schools fewer than 5 have scholarships for it and most are pretty small. A&M is really the only major school in Texas that cares about it. For elite schools it is only considered a modest level award on an application and certainly won't get you in to a Top 20 school without a strong resume and grades to go with it. Probably the best school that rewards NM is Vanderbilt that gives a modest scholarship for it but it's like having a small coupon code at Vandy which has become one of the most expensive schools in the country.

Tons of scholarship money at most schools without it, A&M is the only school I know of that makes it a prequalifier for significant awards except Tulsa.

It depends on what your child wants to do. For example, if your child is smart and wants to go to med school, A&M and tu are perfect. They can more consistently make A's in big classes, tons of opportunities for volunteering, many research opportunities, many med schools in TX, etc. My son went this route. The cost difference is a real factor that should be considered.

I actually think schools should care more about NMFs. In TX, you are 99+% percentile across the country based on how the state requirements work. These kids usually do well on the SAT and ACT. If a NMF kid shows a strong work ethic, they are going to do well for the most part.

I understand it is not a guarantee and doesn't mean other kids can't be great.

Ag9701 said:

---

It depends on what your child wants to do. For example, if your child is smart and wants to go to med school, A&M and tu are perfect. They can more consistently make A's in big classes, tons of opportunities for volunteering, many research opportunities, many med schools in TX, etc. My son went this route. The cost difference is a real factor that should be considered.

I actually think schools should care more about NMFs. In TX, you are 99+% percentile across the country based on how the state requirements work. These kids usually do well on the SAT and ACT. If a NMF kid shows a strong work ethic, they are going to do well for the most part.

I understand it is not a guarantee and doesn't mean other kids can't be great.

---

So you think the most important thing about whether a kid will succeed in Med School is how they did on a test their Junior year in HS? Plenty of NM kids that are mediocre college students or are one dimensional and with tutoring it can be gamed. At best it is one metric.

I specifically stated if they have a good work ethic. Maybe you didn't see that. I know many kids who were NMFs. The ones with a good work ethic are killing it in college and grad schools. Again, I don't think it is a guarantee, and I don't think it means other kids can't be great. There is a lot that goes into being a successful adult.

There are some people who are smart but don't work as hard. They seem to do ok but don't reach their potential. There are some people who work hard to make up for some of their deficiencies. They seem to do well for the most part. Really intelligent people who work hard is a combination hard to beat. I fit in with the 2nd group. The people in my med school class in the 3rd group….they were just above the rest. Truly talented people who had the work ethic to be top notch.

You can study for the PSAT but to score in the top 1% (in TX it is actually higher than that) is a big accomplishment. I wasn't a NMF btw. Most of these kids didn't just do well on one test in their junior year. Most I know make great grades, do equally as well on the SAT/ACT, etc.

I am also curious what number "plenty" is.

Also, my experience is based on kids in TX where the qualifying score is one of the highest in the nation. Other states have lower criteria for NMF.

Ag9701 said:

---

I specifically stated if they have a good work ethic. Maybe you didn't see that. I know many kids who were NMFs. The ones with a good work ethic are killing it in college and grad schools. Again, I don't think it is a guarantee, and I don't think it means other kids can't be great. There is a lot that goes into being a successful adult.

There are some people who are smart but don't work as hard. They seem to do ok but don't reach their potential. There are some people who work hard to make up for some of their deficiencies. They seem to do well for the most part. Really intelligent people who work hard is a combination hard to beat. I fit in with the 2nd group. The people in my med school class in the 3rd group….they were just above the rest. Truly talented people who had the work ethic to be top notch.

You can study for the PSAT but to score in the top 1% (in TX it is actually higher than that) is a big accomplishment. I wasn't a NMF btw. Most of these kids didn't just do well on one test in their junior year. Most I know make great grades, do equally as well on the SAT/ACT, etc.

I am also curious what number "plenty" is.

Also, my experience is based on kids in TX where the qualifying score is one of the highest in the nation. Other states have lower criteria for NMF.

---

I agree with what you are saying. Large schools are playing a numbers game. They are trying to maximize the number of students they are bringing in who will do well in school, possibly go on to successful graduate school careers, be successful in business or whatever they endeavor, and (hopefully) donate back to the university.
National Merit seems like a really good (albeit blunt) tool for figuring out who these kids might be and bringing them onto campus. After that, it's up to the kid. Additionally, I doubt many kids "prepare for" the PSAT. The SAT or ACT - definitely. It would be foolish not to, especially with as many free or low-cost options as there are out there for these.

Of course, a really bright kid can slack off, get into trouble, and just not perform. But there isn't a metric you could use out there (including grades) which wouldn't be prone to the same issue.

I will also add you can game the system just as much or more with ECs and to some extent with grades.

It was one of my biggest issues with my kids when they were in HS. The amount of gaming going on for college apps was tiring and non-stop among their peers.

Ag9701 said:

---

I will also add you can game the system just as much or more with ECs and to some extent with grades.

It was one of my biggest issues with my kids when they were in HS. The amount of gaming going on for college apps was tiring and non-stop among their peers.

---

Nothing wrong with NM and it is an accomplishment. It generally measures IQ and ability to apply logic quickly. I know you mention with a work ethic but that's incredibly vague and more importantly it puts far too much value on NM. It's a good test but it's not THAT good of a test. It's not even as good as the SAT or ACT itself. It's a measure of potential but like any standardized test it can absolutely be gamed. If you make it as important as you imply kids would put huge emphasis on it. Soon you would have kids prepping for the PSAT years and years before and if you didn't then your odds of making NM would be very small. On the flip side you could literally have a kid's future greatly dependent on guessing right or wrong on a few questions on a test 2 years before they step foot on a college campus. That time could be spent on so many other things and it also devalues other academics, activities, and accomplishments.

There is a reason why elite schools for the most part don't give a damn about NM. Some applicants for elite schools don't even have it on their Top 5 Awards. Only a few schools in the Top 50 give any scholarship money associated with NM with the highest rated being Vanderbilt but they don't make it a prerequisite for significant scholarships or admission. Texas doesn't care about NM at all. A&M has gone to the extreme on it, really Tulsa is one of the few schools that are so all in with it and I certainly hope we aren't trying to emulate Tulsa. We even have now set it up that the only kids who can avoid ETAM were NM regardless of any other quals, something no other school does. It really makes no sense because the PSAT weights Verbal more than Math. You could literally have a 1600 SAT with 18 APs and all 5's including every STEM and not get out of ETAM. How does that make any sense?

Your emphasis on Texas is also misguided. You are literally talking about a question or two difference in most cases. So you think somehow a kid getting a 215 vs a 220 is drastically different? No, obviously not. Of course as a general rule a kid who is NM is likely to be successful but that's because they often have lots of other things to go with it. It's simply one measure is the point. I know a kid who missed NM by a couple questions and got a 1590 SAT. I know 2 kids from my son's high school from last year who were NM and weren't even Top 25% and certainly fit the lazy profile you mentioned (good kids but mainly just smart and test well). I also know kids who are NM and are absolutely incredible but NM is basically a footnote on their resume. They do everything well and rocking the PSAT is just one thing.

My argument is to look at the whole picture. Standardized tests are part of that but I wouldn't say they are more important than someone with heavy rigor in STEM classes with high grades and high AP scores. Or someone who is at the top of their class. Or someone who has done significant research or has exceptional ECs. The elite schools want kids that have all of the above but they don't necessarily weight any one factor above all. If you want to give a scholarship to a kid for being NM that's fine, NM is great. It's just one factor though and I don't know how it could be seen as the most important.