Did any high stats kids get rejected from all top 20s?

[Anonymous]

If you are wondering if this can happen to your kid the answer is absolutely yes. It happens to many kids.

Are they ok? Also yes.

You know who is not making it ok? People who think kids success and future prospects are fully defined by the ranking of the school they attend. Asking this question makes you one of these people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

What happened is just bc you have the stats, you will not be accepted into “reaches for all”. Congrats honestly on the wonderful acceptances - these are all great schools!

[Anonymous]

The year before the Supreme Court ruling, I heard of many high stat Asian and white kids getting shut out. I heard of many kids who got shut out while less qualified URMs getting all the top school spots. This was upsetting for many. Have not heard of any high stat kids getting shut out this year. In fact, this year kids who I would not even consider high stats are getting into the better colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

It's your job to convince a "safety school" that you actually want to attend. Just like it's the school's job to manage yield and keep it high.
If you do your job, you will most likely get accepted at your safety, same for targets

This is true but just ridiculous. Imagine employers not trying to hire the best candidate because they don’t think the person will accept. The high stats kids applied so obviously they are interested. Assuming they are not and making them do extra work is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

The only explanation is yield protection with the exception of Barnard and Wellesley. Did your DC apply ED to Wellesley? That would have made a big difference in the outcome.

No, she didn't apply ED to Wellesley.

few more details, no great ECs.. just published a few articles, tutoring at schoolhouse.world etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

The only explanation is yield protection with the exception of Barnard and Wellesley. Did your DC apply ED to Wellesley? That would have made a big difference in the outcome.

No, she didn't apply ED to Wellesley.

few more details, no great ECs.. just published a few articles, tutoring at schoolhouse.world etc

Great outcomes - congrats.

To the OP, seriously T20? This happens all the time

[Anonymous]

Many seem to land at UMD and Pitt. Good for them! Those schools are on the rise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many seem to land at UMD and Pitt. Good for them! Those schools are on the rise.

Also Wisconsin and UIUC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

It's your job to convince a "safety school" that you actually want to attend. Just like it's the school's job to manage yield and keep it high.
If you do your job, you will most likely get accepted at your safety, same for targets

This is true but just ridiculous. Imagine employers not trying to hire the best candidate because they don’t think the person will accept. The high stats kids applied so obviously they are interested. Assuming they are not and making them do extra work is just wrong.

Bad comparison. The employer only needs to find one qualified person to hire and accepts. Schools have to balance multiple variables for multiple spaces. Employers don’t need to consider if too many people accept the offer and there isn’t enough desks/ offices, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The year before the Supreme Court ruling, I heard of many high stat Asian and white kids getting shut out. I heard of many kids who got shut out while less qualified URMs getting all the top school spots. This was upsetting for many. Have not heard of any high stat kids getting shut out this year. In fact, this year kids who I would not even consider high stats are getting into the better colleges.

But, this was manufactured and untrue. In the year before SC ruling, the large majority of T20 admits were white and Asian. Not many URMs. Students for Fair Admissions and similar lobby groups promoted this false narrative to advance an anti AA agenda. Yes, many kids got rejected. They still do. Many rejected kids were white and Asian. They still are. But, they are and were bith over-represented in T20 student bodies.
Look at the graduating classes for these schools. Go to their campuses. See for yourself. The students there are all pre SC ruling. They are largely Asian and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

It's your job to convince a "safety school" that you actually want to attend. Just like it's the school's job to manage yield and keep it high.
If you do your job, you will most likely get accepted at your safety, same for targets

This is true but just ridiculous. Imagine employers not trying to hire the best candidate because they don’t think the person will accept. The high stats kids applied so obviously they are interested. Assuming they are not and making them do extra work is just wrong.

Well, there are many employers that only recruit at certain colleges because kids at say Stanford don’t want to join the Coca Cola management trainee program.

So, they spend their time trying to hire the best kids they know that are interested and will accept the job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious if your child with high stats got rejected from all selective schools and what are they going to do next year? Are they okay going to a safety?

Not this year but applied to 10 T20 schools and got into. Were offered a full merit ride at their state school but instead of going for free, went to T20 with half tuition merit scholarship, other T20 was too expensive with full pay so not a good value.

[Anonymous]

*got into 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The year before the Supreme Court ruling, I heard of many high stat Asian and white kids getting shut out. I heard of many kids who got shut out while less qualified URMs getting all the top school spots. This was upsetting for many. Have not heard of any high stat kids getting shut out this year. In fact, this year kids who I would not even consider high stats are getting into the better colleges.

But, this was manufactured and untrue. In the year before SC ruling, the large majority of T20 admits were white and Asian. Not many URMs. Students for Fair Admissions and similar lobby groups promoted this false narrative to advance an anti AA agenda. Yes, many kids got rejected. They still do. Many rejected kids were white and Asian. They still are. But, they are and were bith over-represented in T20 student bodies.
Look at the graduating classes for these schools. Go to their campuses. See for yourself. The students there are all pre SC ruling. They are largely Asian and white.

My anecdotal tidbit - by looking at previous years Instagram pages, it seemed like the only kids from my kids school who got into Ivies+ were Asians. Maybe 1 or 2 whites/blacks.

This year - there seem to be a lot more white kids posting their Ivy+ acceptances. I’ve only seen 1 Hispanic so far post. No black kids yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious if your child with high stats got rejected from all selective schools and what are they going to do next year? Are they okay going to a safety?

You are asking a couple different things here...
"Rejected from all top 20": DS didn't apply to all top 20 however the 2 he did apply, were rejections.

"Rejected from all selective schools": do you mean admission rate? He was accepted to 3 w/sub 30% acceptance rates and WL at 2 others. These school were all outside the top 20.

Attending UMD CS. The school has an acceptance rate of 44% The major has a lower acceptance rate and he is very happy.