Class of 22 admissions report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

My kid had high grades (4.53 wGPA) and test scores (ACT 35), but didn't do him much good with T20 school admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

My kid had high grades (4.53 wGPA) and test scores (ACT 35), but didn't do him much good with T20 school admissions.

That test score matches that GPA so nobody has an issue with that. It's when kids are getting nearly all As in their classes but getting a 1020 on their SATs that something doesn't add up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

My kid had high grades (4.53 wGPA) and test scores (ACT 35), but didn't do him much good with T20 school admissions.

That test score matches that GPA so nobody has an issue with that. It's when kids are getting nearly all As in their classes but getting a 1020 on their SATs that something doesn't add up.

I don't know. There's plenty of evidence that SAT/ACT scores have a lot to do with a student's socio-economic status/background, rather than just intellectual ability and knowledge. Why do you think colleges have gone test optional? What would be more enlightening would be the correlation between an AP class grade and the AP test result, since that test is designed to measure what the student learned/mastered in that specific class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

The test scores on this chart are practically useless bc they only reflect the practice test taken at the school unless a student self- reported additional test scores. My daughter whose college admissions are reflected on this chart (UVA ‘26) never reported her ACT score (34) on Naviance or to her counselor so the only test score on this chart for her are the practice SAT (1250 approximately) she took at school.

And believe it or not, not all smart kids do well on standardized tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot of inflated grades going on there.

What on earth? There may be, but you couldn’t tell from that data. These are not unique data points— it’s the same 20-30 kids with those high grades. The concept of inflated grades is also irrelevant. It’s the top 10% of the class that gets most of the good admissions, regardless of GPA.

I think the point PP is trying to make is that a high GPA paired with a low test score means the grade is inflated.

My kid had high grades (4.53 wGPA) and test scores (ACT 35), but didn't do him much good with T20 school admissions.

That test score matches that GPA so nobody has an issue with that. It's when kids are getting nearly all As in their classes but getting a 1020 on their SATs that something doesn't add up.

I don't know. There's plenty of evidence that SAT/ACT scores have a lot to do with a student's socio-economic status/background, rather than just intellectual ability and knowledge. Why do you think colleges have gone test optional? What would be more enlightening would be the correlation between an AP class grade and the AP test result, since that test is designed to measure what the student learned/mastered in that specific class.

The SATs test what is taught. If a kid gets all As in school but is scoring in the 50th percentile on the SATs, something is off there. Schools aren't doing students any favors by inflating their grades. These kids go off to college and have to take remedial courses and many drop out and own big bucks in student loans. If students earn As in classes which shows mastery of subject material and then get an SAT score in the 50th percentile, there is something very off there no matter what the SES background of the student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seeing some of those low scores (that were surely not submitted) made me feel better in some ways (but worse in others). But at least proof that not every kid has a 1450+ like is seemingly claimed on here.

It also depends on the high school in question. Some high schools have much higher stats.

It pisses me off scores aren’t required. So many kids with every advantage in the world (not the students that taking away scores was supposed to help) are now clogging admissions and applying places they never would have ever considered if they had to submit that low score.

Yah. Bummer your kid blew all of that time and money prepping and studying while others did something more fun/valuable. Tests are done. No one cares anymore. Your little Prep machine will need to find some other formula.

Smart people don’t need prep. His first mock ACT was a 35.

The SAT and ACT are NOT intelligences tests. Your kid is obviously very smart, but I bet you're UMC and that has a big impact on scores. Kids who are just as naturally smart as your kid but raised in a moderate or lower middle class home, attend a non-rigorous school, have non-English speaking parents, etc. will score lower.

What I've seen is in schools in wealthy areas the URMs come from an identical background, some even wealthier than many of the non-represented families. Their kids greatly benefit from this and will gain admission with lower scores/gpa. It is really frustrating for kids that worked right alongside these peers their entire childhood to see kids with at times a full point lower GPA and lower scores gain admission.

It's just the way it is. It would be admirable if the system worked and benefited those that really were at risk and disadvantaged, but it doesn't. Those kids are in areas where people aren't even applying to college, much less top colleges. Then, you have the issue if these kids get in they are not prepared at all for the rigors of the university because of their dismal public schools.

Well, I don't know where you've "seen" but by and large what you've described isn't the case. Certainly not at this high school, where it is definitely not the case that the URMs here come from "identical" backgrounds as the white kids. The white kids here are definitely wealthier on average.

Two of the wealthiest families in our hood are 'URM'. I'm talking $$$$$$$$$. Many multi-cultural families choosing the side that is not white on the application. But, I'm sure when you look at the kid you are basing it on their 'appearance'.

Don't hate on them. They are just answering the question truthfully. Are you black or Hispanic? My kid is half Hispanic so he checked the Hispanic box. It is what he is. If colleges want to view him differently, fine, but don't blame him for giving them truthful information. Colleges are dumb. They can easily look up a kid's address and their school and their financial info to see if they are poor and black/Hispanic, etc. All it takes it a quick Google search if they really want to know.

I think you mean 'colleges aren't dumb'. If they can get more to fill their quota and make them look ultra diverse as they are all racing to prove they can have the least legacy and most URM and first gen students these past few years---why would they do the work to look it up? Princeton is at 68% URM.

No, it’s not.

+1 Someone keeps posting the 68% figure on the board. That number is for ACCEPTED students. If you go to Princeton's enrolled student demographic page the URM number is 22% (https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics).

Yes. Accepted--[/b]almost 70%[b]. They decided not to attend/enroll. What is your point? The whole story about the 68% was the advantage given to URMs in admissions.

My point is that you are not posting facts and trying to get people on this board to believe that the URM population is 68% at Princeton. There are not enough URMs that are within these schools' acceptable stats range applying to college to achieve those numbers at ANY top 20 schools. I know that URMs have an advantage in admissions but if we are having an honest conversation about this post facts instead of misleading people.

From the Daily Mail over a year ago. 68% accepted in 2021. 49 percent URM showed up. Google it. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9451013/Princeton-selecting-fewer-white-students-year.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting that WL got kids into Harvard, Yale, Stanford and MIT. But they were shut out of lesser Ivies like Cornell, Brown and totally shut out of Williams, Amherst, Wellesley, Northwestern, and nearly shut out of the Claremont colleges. That might be different applicants applying to those schools , but it might also be legacy preference and different schools valuing different hooks.

Actually, I think it may be more about driving up the yield percentage for reporting to USNWR purposes. The smaller slacs have this on their mind all the time. Hence more use of ED1, ED2, EA, etc. etc. They want to lock in those kids early so they have a high yield. The top ivies know the kids are coming anyhow so care less. Their yield is going to be high so they focus on other matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seeing some of those low scores (that were surely not submitted) made me feel better in some ways (but worse in others). But at least proof that not every kid has a 1450+ like is seemingly claimed on here.

It also depends on the high school in question. Some high schools have much higher stats.

It pisses me off scores aren’t required. So many kids with every advantage in the world (not the students that taking away scores was supposed to help) are now clogging admissions and applying places they never would have ever considered if they had to submit that low score.

Yah. Bummer your kid blew all of that time and money prepping and studying while others did something more fun/valuable. Tests are done. No one cares anymore. Your little Prep machine will need to find some other formula.

Smart people don’t need prep. His first mock ACT was a 35.

The SAT and ACT are NOT intelligences tests. Your kid is obviously very smart, but I bet you're UMC and that has a big impact on scores. Kids who are just as naturally smart as your kid but raised in a moderate or lower middle class home, attend a non-rigorous school, have non-English speaking parents, etc. will score lower.

What I've seen is in schools in wealthy areas the URMs come from an identical background, some even wealthier than many of the non-represented families. Their kids greatly benefit from this and will gain admission with lower scores/gpa. It is really frustrating for kids that worked right alongside these peers their entire childhood to see kids with at times a full point lower GPA and lower scores gain admission.

It's just the way it is. It would be admirable if the system worked and benefited those that really were at risk and disadvantaged, but it doesn't. Those kids are in areas where people aren't even applying to college, much less top colleges. Then, you have the issue if these kids get in they are not prepared at all for the rigors of the university because of their dismal public schools.

Well, I don't know where you've "seen" but by and large what you've described isn't the case. Certainly not at this high school, where it is definitely not the case that the URMs here come from "identical" backgrounds as the white kids. The white kids here are definitely wealthier on average.

Two of the wealthiest families in our hood are 'URM'. I'm talking $$$$$$$$$. Many multi-cultural families choosing the side that is not white on the application. But, I'm sure when you look at the kid you are basing it on their 'appearance'.

Don't hate on them. They are just answering the question truthfully. Are you black or Hispanic? My kid is half Hispanic so he checked the Hispanic box. It is what he is. If colleges want to view him differently, fine, but don't blame him for giving them truthful information. Colleges are dumb. They can easily look up a kid's address and their school and their financial info to see if they are poor and black/Hispanic, etc. All it takes it a quick Google search if they really want to know.

I think you mean 'colleges aren't dumb'. If they can get more to fill their quota and make them look ultra diverse as they are all racing to prove they can have the least legacy and most URM and first gen students these past few years---why would they do the work to look it up? Princeton is at 68% URM.

No, it’s not.

+1 Someone keeps posting the 68% figure on the board. That number is for ACCEPTED students. If you go to Princeton's enrolled student demographic page the URM number is 22% (https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics).

Yes. Accepted--[/b]almost 70%. They decided not to attend/enroll. What is your point? The whole story about the 68% was the advantage given to URMs in admissions.

My point is that you are not posting facts and trying to get people on this board to believe that the URM population is 68% at Princeton. There are not enough URMs that are within these schools' acceptable stats range applying to college to achieve those numbers at ANY top 20 schools. I know that URMs have an advantage in admissions but if we are having an honest conversation about this post facts instead of misleading people.

From the Daily Mail over a year ago. 68% accepted in 2021. 49 percent URM showed up. Google it. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9451013/Princeton-selecting-fewer-white-students-year.html

The article doesn't say that 49 percent showed up. It can't because it was published in April--before students made a decision to attend Princeton. The article is about acceptable not enrolled students. I posted earlier the class of 2025 enrolled student demographics from Princeton's website: https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

22% of the class of 2025 is [b]URM. 27% is Asian. FACTS. You can also find this info on the CDS.

Anyone else reading this look for yourself. The person posting can't read or is deliberately trying to mislead people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seeing some of those low scores (that were surely not submitted) made me feel better in some ways (but worse in others). But at least proof that not every kid has a 1450+ like is seemingly claimed on here.

It also depends on the high school in question. Some high schools have much higher stats.

It pisses me off scores aren’t required. So many kids with every advantage in the world (not the students that taking away scores was supposed to help) are now clogging admissions and applying places they never would have ever considered if they had to submit that low score.

Yah. Bummer your kid blew all of that time and money prepping and studying while others did something more fun/valuable. Tests are done. No one cares anymore. Your little Prep machine will need to find some other formula.

Smart people don’t need prep. His first mock ACT was a 35.

The SAT and ACT are NOT intelligences tests. Your kid is obviously very smart, but I bet you're UMC and that has a big impact on scores. Kids who are just as naturally smart as your kid but raised in a moderate or lower middle class home, attend a non-rigorous school, have non-English speaking parents, etc. will score lower.

What I've seen is in schools in wealthy areas the URMs come from an identical background, some even wealthier than many of the non-represented families. Their kids greatly benefit from this and will gain admission with lower scores/gpa. It is really frustrating for kids that worked right alongside these peers their entire childhood to see kids with at times a full point lower GPA and lower scores gain admission.

It's just the way it is. It would be admirable if the system worked and benefited those that really were at risk and disadvantaged, but it doesn't. Those kids are in areas where people aren't even applying to college, much less top colleges. Then, you have the issue if these kids get in they are not prepared at all for the rigors of the university because of their dismal public schools.

Well, I don't know where you've "seen" but by and large what you've described isn't the case. Certainly not at this high school, where it is definitely not the case that the URMs here come from "identical" backgrounds as the white kids. The white kids here are definitely wealthier on average.

Two of the wealthiest families in our hood are 'URM'. I'm talking $$$$$$$$$. Many multi-cultural families choosing the side that is not white on the application. But, I'm sure when you look at the kid you are basing it on their 'appearance'.

Don't hate on them. They are just answering the question truthfully. Are you black or Hispanic? My kid is half Hispanic so he checked the Hispanic box. It is what he is. If colleges want to view him differently, fine, but don't blame him for giving them truthful information. Colleges are dumb. They can easily look up a kid's address and their school and their financial info to see if they are poor and black/Hispanic, etc. All it takes it a quick Google search if they really want to know.

I think you mean 'colleges aren't dumb'. If they can get more to fill their quota and make them look ultra diverse as they are all racing to prove they can have the least legacy and most URM and first gen students these past few years---why would they do the work to look it up? Princeton is at 68% URM.

No, it’s not.

+1 Someone keeps posting the 68% figure on the board. That number is for ACCEPTED students. If you go to Princeton's enrolled student demographic page the URM number is 22% (https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics).

Yes. Accepted--[/b]almost 70%. They decided not to attend/enroll. What is your point? The whole story about the 68% was the advantage given to URMs in admissions.

My point is that you are not posting facts and trying to get people on this board to believe that the URM population is 68% at Princeton. There are not enough URMs that are within these schools' acceptable stats range applying to college to achieve those numbers at ANY top 20 schools. I know that URMs have an advantage in admissions but if we are having an honest conversation about this post facts instead of misleading people.

From the Daily Mail over a year ago. 68% accepted in 2021. 49 percent URM showed up. Google it. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9451013/Princeton-selecting-fewer-white-students-year.html

T[b]he article doesn't say that 49 percent showed up. It can't because it was published in April--before students made a decision to attend Princeton. The article is about acceptable not enrolled students. I posted earlier the class of 2025 enrolled student demographics from Princeton's website: https://inclusive.princeton.edu/about/demographics

22% of the class of 2025 is URM. 27% is Asian. FACTS. You can also find this info on the CDS.

Anyone else reading this look for yourself. The person posting can't read or is deliberately trying to mislead people.

but that article/post from princeton does exist. for the ADMITTED (as in showed up class). I read it. I was there. But I'm not going to hand feed it to you because you have a nasty agenda and won't listen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting that WL got kids into Harvard, Yale, Stanford and MIT. But they were shut out of lesser Ivies like Cornell, Brown and totally shut out of Williams, Amherst, Wellesley, Northwestern, and nearly shut out of the Claremont colleges. That might be different applicants applying to those schools , but it might also be legacy preference and different schools valuing different hooks.

Actually, I think it may be more about driving up the yield percentage for reporting to USNWR purposes. The smaller slacs have this on their mind all the time. Hence more use of ED1, ED2, EA, etc. etc. They want to lock in those kids early so they have a high yield. The top ivies know the kids are coming anyhow so care less. Their yield is going to be high so they focus on other matters.

Yes I see. Thank you. This chart doesn’t break it down by ED or not, which would be really helpful info to have. In hindsight, I wish my DC who just graduated from WL had done ED. Her stats were higher than the admitted stats for some Top 20 schools. We are full pay, so we could have done ED but she didn’t want to. I regret not working harder in the summer and fall to zero in on a top choice to ED to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting that WL got kids into Harvard, Yale, Stanford and MIT. But they were shut out of lesser Ivies like Cornell, Brown and totally shut out of Williams, Amherst, Wellesley, Northwestern, and nearly shut out of the Claremont colleges. That might be different applicants applying to those schools , but it might also be legacy preference and different schools valuing different hooks.

Actually, I think it may be more about driving up the yield percentage for reporting to USNWR purposes. The smaller slacs have this on their mind all the time. Hence more use of ED1, ED2, EA, etc. etc. They want to lock in those kids early so they have a high yield. The top ivies know the kids are coming anyhow so care less. Their yield is going to be high so they focus on other matters.

Yes I see. Thank you. This chart doesn’t break it down by ED or not, which would be really helpful info to have. In hindsight, I wish my DC who just graduated from WL had done ED. Her stats were higher than the admitted stats for some Top 20 schools. We are full pay, so we could have done ED but she didn’t want to. I regret not working harder in the summer and fall to zero in on a top choice to ED to.

LOL it isn't you going to college. I applaud your kid for resisting your pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Georgetown has a 200% admit rate, think I'll have my kid apply next year.

And according to this - they would get in twice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting that WL got kids into Harvard, Yale, Stanford and MIT. But they were shut out of lesser Ivies like Cornell, Brown and totally shut out of Williams, Amherst, Wellesley, Northwestern, and nearly shut out of the Claremont colleges. That might be different applicants applying to those schools , but it might also be legacy preference and different schools valuing different hooks.

Actually, I think it may be more about driving up the yield percentage for reporting to USNWR purposes. The smaller slacs have this on their mind all the time. Hence more use of ED1, ED2, EA, etc. etc. They want to lock in those kids early so they have a high yield. The top ivies know the kids are coming anyhow so care less. Their yield is going to be high so they focus on other matters.

Yes I see. Thank you. This chart doesn’t break it down by ED or not, which would be really helpful info to have. In hindsight, I wish my DC who just graduated from WL had done ED. Her stats were higher than the admitted stats for some Top 20 schools. We are full pay, so we could have done ED but she didn’t want to. I regret not working harder in the summer and fall to zero in on a top choice to ED to.

LOL it isn't you going to college. I applaud your kid for resisting your pressure.

Yeah the kids who EDd into a Top 10 school applaud her too.