Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Ivy League Admissions.

I think that the problem that I have is that I think that giftedness ought to be the norm at a university or at least a top tier/state flagship one. So I would be more comfortable if the inverse of what you wrote applied I suppose.

I guess that I am too idealistic.

The problem isn't idealism. It's math.

There aren't enough gifted people who want to actually attend state flagship universities to do that.

The gifted people tend to be in the Honors program or whatever it is called at the state flagship university.

This is true, especially at flagship state schools, but here are the 25-75 SAT percentiles for U Mass Amherst, the Massachusetts flagship, and Harvard:

http://collegeapps.about.com/od/collegeprofiles/p/umass-amherst.htm
U Mass Amherst
SAT Critical Reading: 530 / 630
SAT Math: 560 / 660

http://collegeapps.about.com/od/collegeprofiles/p/harvard_profile.htm
Harvard
SAT Critical Reading: 700 / 800
SAT Math: 710 / 790

The 25th percentile at Harvard well exceeds the 75th percentile at U Mass Amherst. In our affluent Boston suburb, the average SAT scores at the high school are about the same as the mid-range for U Mass Amherst. We'd like our children to have smarter peer groups in college. There are of course schools intermediate in selectivity between Harvard and U Mass Amherst, but many of them cost almost as much as Harvard.

Then the way ahead is clear:-

Oxford is now reintroducing entrance exams.

Details...
Austria and Finland (at least) have national exams where the top x get to study at university.

Thanks - you just saved me a ton of money - German lessons will be way cheaper

This link was recently making the Facebook rounds in my circle of friends (particularly since my alma mater, and those of other friends were on the list-- at number 8, HK, and I really think your daughter should consider Wellesley).

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesma...-25-colleges-with-the-smartest-students/

Of course, it's based on performance at Luminosity, so take it for what it's worth.

MoN you bring up great points but I cannot help thinking that my DD will have to put up with being an outlier throughout elementary, middle and high school in addition throughout adulthood. Perhaps, I am being unrealistic, but I would like her to at least find college a place where she can swim with other swans before life catches up and forces her back into ugly ducklinghood.

Good points, Bostonian and madeinUK. That is exactly how my DD felt when reading down that list from MIT. She started to kind of glow.

As if she were thinking-- Wow-- I'm--I'm a SWAN!!

The problem we've had in looking at elite schools is that we kind of HAVE to do our level best to avoid TigerKids, because she's like MoN's DD in terms of her prosocial leanings, and she is viscerally intolerant of pretentious, elitist snobbery. Ergo, many of the places which would otherwise be suitable in terms of test scores and GPA aren't because of the elitist factors. Besides, nothing draws TigerKids like snobbery and a brand name.... :sigh:

I know that I recommended this early on in this thread, but-- truly-- check out the "how do I stack up" tab at College Board's college search engine for those stats, because they are REALLY eye-opening. I truly had no idea just HOW low they were for our state flagship... and for those of neighboring states, for that matter. Literally the SOLE institution within 500 miles of us where my DD looks "only slightly above average" is Reed, which isn't suitable for her in particular for a variety of reasons.

When you get into that tier of institutions (those that draw higher in terms of performance of matriculants) you have to tease apart what role hyper-prepping plays in that average. This is particularly important in the schools that have universal "Ooooooooo" Name Recognition.

Finding safety schools is NO problem for HG+ kids who perform at high levels. Finding "matches" academically isn't hard either-- it's just hard making them stand OUT enough from the horde who justify almost any means... and understanding that unlike most kids, there are no "match" schools where admission is a slam dunk-- because of the nature of those schools.

Where we've had some trouble is identifying "reach" schools-- for an academic rock star, what does that even mean? Is it Oxford? DD asked me, and I seriously didn't know how to answer her. Because in pragmatic terms, she's theoretically the kind of student places like U-Chi, Oxford, King's-London, Harvard, Princeton, Cornell, MIT, Claremont(s), etc. are seeking... but because of the Tiger component to admissions at any and all of those institutions... in a pragmatic sense, all of them are "reach" schools, so don't fall in love because any one of them could (and probably will) turn you down, even if you're Stephen Hawking or a future Nobel winner.

On the other hand, my DD is willing to WORK to make her odds better for a place like MIT. Which is a first-- SHE wants it. She wants to do what it takes to let them see who and what she is.

I just hope that she has enough time.

Giftedness is so rare that there is no one institution for us and your children who will be attending college in the future. As a PG 23 year old, I am used to being and outlier and not quite fitting in except amidst my small group of friends and some professors who supported me. I'm sorry to be pessimistic but gifted ness will never be the norm at any school. To think otherwise may be an idealistic expectation.

I am very sorry about all the typos. I am on a kindle and am not used to typing on it.

Right-- the point of seeking out an elite college is that the only way-- other than sheer random luck-- to find other HG+ individuals (who are, for PG people, at least close enough in ability to have shared perspective) is to look for places that are "enriched" in those individuals to begin with.

The odds of finding a fellow HG+ student at a school with an average SAT score of 500/500/500 is lower than it is at an institution of the same size and focus whose SAT average is 750/750/750, basically. The students at the former school are going to be mostly average to MG, and the students at the latter are going to be mostly bright-to-MG+. It's a statistics game.

The other thing that an elite institution does for PG people is provide lifelong opportunity. Choices, in other words. The ability to WALK AWAY from toxic situations by virtue of seldom having just the one choice.

I'm well aware that HG+ kids can and do wind up at public universities whose stats would not suggest that they are there... and that one can find 'pockets' of those students, often in math and physics, at any post-secondary institution. But finding ENOUGH of them can be a problem, particularly for a polymath.

Why is state college a more viable option if you intend to major in math or a physical science?

The Audacious Epigone: IQ estimates by college major

And if one looks further to GRE scores as a proxy of IQ (which, okay, has some sampling methodology problems, but hey-- the TRENDS are probably true, in any case):

Steve Sailer's estimate of IQ by actual (not just intended) college major

One important reason for the latter's estimates being different from the former, clearly, is students who change majors or do not complete a degree. Presumably those who are taking GRE's are successful, and they are, by definition, seeking to attend graduate school.

What is interesting is that about half of those students in many disciplines are gifted people. Most are in MG territory, given where the mean is at, but there ARE large concentrations of gifted people in some disciplines.

It is deeply unfortunate that the analytical section of the GRE has ceased to exist. That was probably the single best proxy of IQ in all of standardized achievement/aptitude testing. Totally unscientific, but it's my opinion that there is a 1:1 correlation there among people I've known who took it, and the LSAT still correlates VERY well with IQ. Not coincidence that the analytical questions are similar to some IQ measurement tools.

More on this subject from a College Confidential thread:

Average Harvard IQ?


Even if one were to assume that this is somewhat inflated, HALF of the students at Harvard (and presumably similar institutions) are MG, which means that one might reasonably quadruple the incidence of HG+ students in that population relative to the general population, as well. So at Generic State, the rarity of PG students might be little higher than in the regular population-- about 0.02-0.05%, say. If the rate at a place like Harvard is more like 0.2%, that seems to me to be a significant increase which improves a student's odds of finding true peers... who can become a lifelong support network.

Assuming, of course, that the other elements of the environment support that kind of thing. If it's too cut-throat, then it doesn't matter because those people are merely competitors and not colleagues.


ETA: yes, Sailer. Ironic coming from me, I know. Disclaimer: I'm not saying that I agree with his CONCLUSION, just citing him here because it's one of the few sources of actual data on the subject of IQ and institution/majors, and it seems pertinent to the current trend in the thread. I disagree vehemently with him re: race, SES, and the Bell Curve. That has not changed, but I see no reason to doubt the conclusions to be drawn with this particular data, which says nothing spurious that I can see. Particularly in the GRE-associated data.