What colleges are the rest of TJ students (not in the top 20%) going?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

What? That's so racist. Asian students are not the one dimensional prep robots that you seem to think. If you look at any elite musical ensembles, they're dominated by Asian students. Certain sports have a decent number of Asian participants. If Asian students had applications otherwise lacking in heft, elite colleges wouldn't need to create a 'personality' score and ding them on that to deny admissions.

PP. My statement did not come from any sort of racial animus, but from experience in application evaluation.

Your point about "any elite musical ensembles" is false. It is true only with respect to orchestras. Bands and choirs do not generally have high representation of Asian students. Furthermore, those orchestras overwhelmingly are dominated by East and Southeast Asian students, rather than South Asian. It is a matter of some note in college admissions circles that participation in orchestra is typical of East Asian applicants and is not generally a separator except in cases of national-level participation.

Certain sports do indeed have a decent number of Asian participants. For the most part, those are sports which are individual in nature - tennis, table tennis, and badminton are those most frequently observed. With the exception of recruitable athletes, participation in individual sports is not looked on as kindly in the admissions process as participation in team sports, for reasons that should be fairly obvious. If they're not, I'm happy to explain.

The students who are admitted to elite schools receive that honor because it is in the best interest of the school that they receive it. It's not the job of the admissions team to find "the best students" and admit them to the school - it's to admit the group of students as a collective who are most likely to raise the profile of the school - to inspire greater application numbers and greater levels of private investment.

Parents who wish to augment their child's chances at admission to elite colleges and universities would do well to understand that and significantly adjust their approaches to their children's education.

Tough pill to swallow but pp is absolutely spot on.

And none of it will likely be legally defensible when the Supreme Court rulings on Harvard and UNC are issued.

No ruling by the Supreme Court will effect what was stated above.

That is exactly what they are ruling on.

Regardless of what TJ parents hope for, Harvard is not taking the middle of the class from TJ. Nothing that PP listed will change. The only change will be URMs will no longer receive preference. That doesn't change admissions for school bands or for the football team. Even after the change, schools will just switch to SES, and being URM is not a protected class

Why aren't they taking the middle of the class? They are doing a holistic admissions, so perhaps they will take someone from the middle over someone from the top.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

What? That's so racist. Asian students are not the one dimensional prep robots that you seem to think. If you look at any elite musical ensembles, they're dominated by Asian students. Certain sports have a decent number of Asian participants. If Asian students had applications otherwise lacking in heft, elite colleges wouldn't need to create a 'personality' score and ding them on that to deny admissions.

PP. My statement did not come from any sort of racial animus, but from experience in application evaluation.

Your point about "any elite musical ensembles" is false. It is true only with respect to orchestras. Bands and choirs do not generally have high representation of Asian students. Furthermore, those orchestras overwhelmingly are dominated by East and Southeast Asian students, rather than South Asian. It is a matter of some note in college admissions circles that participation in orchestra is typical of East Asian applicants and is not generally a separator except in cases of national-level participation.

Certain sports do indeed have a decent number of Asian participants. For the most part, those are sports which are individual in nature - tennis, table tennis, and badminton are those most frequently observed. With the exception of recruitable athletes, participation in individual sports is not looked on as kindly in the admissions process as participation in team sports, for reasons that should be fairly obvious. If they're not, I'm happy to explain.

The students who are admitted to elite schools receive that honor because it is in the best interest of the school that they receive it. It's not the job of the admissions team to find "the best students" and admit them to the school - it's to admit the group of students as a collective who are most likely to raise the profile of the school - to inspire greater application numbers and greater levels of private investment.

Parents who wish to augment their child's chances at admission to elite colleges and universities would do well to understand that and significantly adjust their approaches to their children's education.

Tough pill to swallow but pp is absolutely spot on.

And none of it will likely be legally defensible when the Supreme Court rulings on Harvard and UNC are issued.

No ruling by the Supreme Court will effect what was stated above.

That is exactly what they are ruling on.

Regardless of what TJ parents hope for, Harvard is not taking the middle of the class from TJ. Nothing that PP listed will change. The only change will be URMs will no longer receive preference. That doesn't change admissions for school bands or for the football team. Even after the change, schools will just switch to SES, and being URM is not a protected class

Why aren't they taking the middle of the class? They are doing a holistic admissions, so perhaps they will take someone from the middle over someone from the top.

The cardinal rule of selective college admissions is this: No one knows shit.

Everyone is guessing. An admissions officer is not even reading the entire essay in the application. They are skimming first couple of sentences and last sentence most of the time. A misplaced word in the recommendation letter might make the admissions officer view it in an entirely different way. So much randomness.

[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:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Actually, Asian applicants' application packages present the strongest test scores/GPA as well as the strongest leadership quality, EC activities, volunteering and service, strongest recommendations from teachers, very strong/strongest essays, strongest national/international awards etc. compared to other groups. Stop spreading disinformation.

PP. You are correct with respect to test scores, GPA, and national/international awards, and that's all. In all of the other areas, you are incorrect.

Leadership quality: Asian students are well-noted for inventing leadership opportunities for themselves through the creation of new clubs and, in many cases, non-profit organizations that have no apparent plan beyond a student's high school years. Major red flag.

EC Activities: You're going to see a ton of Model UN, Debate, Orchestra, individual sports, and competitions, along with the aforementioned invented clubs. And an awful lot of breadth without depth, that comes through in the essays.

Volunteering and Service: This is straight-up false. To the extent that Asian students do volunteer, they tend to do so within their own communities and are frequently noted for helping those who don't need help - a great example is in tutoring for other high-income students. They don't tend to write well about these experiences because they're not actually passionate about anything other than using the volunteering opportunity as a springboard to college.

Recommendations from Teachers: By and large, recommendations from teachers about Asian students are broadly positive, but rarely enthusiastic.

Essays: They tend to lack authenticity and overwhelmingly sound designed to relitigate their resumes rather than shed light on the human being behind the achievements. They're dry and pre-packaged, and extremely difficult to distinguish from one another.

Are there exceptions? Certainly! Are there a lot of white kids who also fall into the above categories? Absolutely! But when you follow the above path, you'd better be the best of the best on that path, and more often than not you end up finding a lot of kids who are trying to be a cardboard cutout of someone else who was successful in the application process.

Best summary I've seen so far. The conversations in my community seem to center around what the magic formula is, rather than acknowledging that they're actively seeking a balanced class with kids from various backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

Yes, VT for some reason doesn't take a lot of TJ kids.

They feel kids consider it as a safety school

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

What? That's so racist. Asian students are not the one dimensional prep robots that you seem to think. If you look at any elite musical ensembles, they're dominated by Asian students. Certain sports have a decent number of Asian participants. If Asian students had applications otherwise lacking in heft, elite colleges wouldn't need to create a 'personality' score and ding them on that to deny admissions.

PP. My statement did not come from any sort of racial animus, but from experience in application evaluation.

Your point about "any elite musical ensembles" is false. It is true only with respect to orchestras. Bands and choirs do not generally have high representation of Asian students. Furthermore, those orchestras overwhelmingly are dominated by East and Southeast Asian students, rather than South Asian. It is a matter of some note in college admissions circles that participation in orchestra is typical of East Asian applicants and is not generally a separator except in cases of national-level participation.

Certain sports do indeed have a decent number of Asian participants. For the most part, those are sports which are individual in nature - tennis, table tennis, and badminton are those most frequently observed. With the exception of recruitable athletes, participation in individual sports is not looked on as kindly in the admissions process as participation in team sports, for reasons that should be fairly obvious. If they're not, I'm happy to explain.

The students who are admitted to elite schools receive that honor because it is in the best interest of the school that they receive it. It's not the job of the admissions team to find "the best students" and admit them to the school - it's to admit the group of students as a collective who are most likely to raise the profile of the school - to inspire greater application numbers and greater levels of private investment.

Parents who wish to augment their child's chances at admission to elite colleges and universities would do well to understand that and significantly adjust their approaches to their children's education.

Tough pill to swallow but pp is absolutely spot on.

And none of it will likely be legally defensible when the Supreme Court rulings on Harvard and UNC are issued.

No ruling by the Supreme Court will effect what was stated above.

That is exactly what they are ruling on.

Regardless of what TJ parents hope for, Harvard is not taking the middle of the class from TJ. Nothing that PP listed will change. The only change will be URMs will no longer receive preference. That doesn't change admissions for school bands or for the football team. Even after the change, schools will just switch to SES, and being URM is not a protected class

Why aren't they taking the middle of the class? They are doing a holistic admissions, so perhaps they will take someone from the middle over someone from the top.

The cardinal rule of selective college admissions is this: No one knows shit.

Everyone is guessing. An admissions officer is not even reading the entire essay in the application. They are skimming first couple of sentences and last sentence most of the time. A misplaced word in the recommendation letter might make the admissions officer view it in an entirely different way. So much randomness.

Sour grapes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

Yes, VT for some reason doesn't take a lot of TJ kids.

They feel kids consider it as a safety school

So yield protection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The usual UVA, JMU, GMU, VT

Quite a high percentage go OOS. The in state numbers are limited below UVA, W&M, VT. From 2015-2022, the top in-state for those reporting destinations were:

459 UVA
241 W&M
212 VT
62 VCU
55 GMU
8 JMU

If there are only 550 kids at TJ seems like they all went in state based on those stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The usual UVA, JMU, GMU, VT

Quite a high percentage go OOS. The in state numbers are limited below UVA, W&M, VT. From 2015-2022, the top in-state for those reporting destinations were:

459 UVA
241 W&M
212 VT
62 VCU
55 GMU
8 JMU

If there are only 550 kids at TJ seems like they all went in state based on those stats.

That is 8 years of students, about 3500.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

Yes, VT for some reason doesn't take a lot of TJ kids.

They feel kids consider it as a safety school

So yield protection?

Kind of, yeah. My DS applied a couple years ago and got WLed, then rejected outright. A bunch of his friends ended up the same way. Their loss.

[Anonymous]

A lot more kids are going to VT this year, about mid twenties.

[Anonymous]

With the hugely inflated private and OOS tuition, many more TJ families are choosing in-state schools and any colleges giving out scholarships.

[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:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Actually, Asian applicants' application packages present the strongest test scores/GPA as well as the strongest leadership quality, EC activities, volunteering and service, strongest recommendations from teachers, very strong/strongest essays, strongest national/international awards etc. compared to other groups. Stop spreading disinformation.

PP. You are correct with respect to test scores, GPA, and national/international awards, and that's all. In all of the other areas, you are incorrect.

Leadership quality: Asian students are well-noted for inventing leadership opportunities for themselves through the creation of new clubs and, in many cases, non-profit organizations that have no apparent plan beyond a student's high school years. Major red flag.

EC Activities: You're going to see a ton of Model UN, Debate, Orchestra, individual sports, and competitions, along with the aforementioned invented clubs. And an awful lot of breadth without depth, that comes through in the essays.

Volunteering and Service: This is straight-up false. To the extent that Asian students do volunteer, they tend to do so within their own communities and are frequently noted for helping those who don't need help - a great example is in tutoring for other high-income students. They don't tend to write well about these experiences because they're not actually passionate about anything other than using the volunteering opportunity as a springboard to college.

Recommendations from Teachers: By and large, recommendations from teachers about Asian students are broadly positive, but rarely enthusiastic.

Essays: They tend to lack authenticity and overwhelmingly sound designed to relitigate their resumes rather than shed light on the human being behind the achievements. They're dry and pre-packaged, and extremely difficult to distinguish from one another.

Are there exceptions? Certainly! Are there a lot of white kids who also fall into the above categories? Absolutely! But when you follow the above path, you'd better be the best of the best on that path, and more often than not you end up finding a lot of kids who are trying to be a cardboard cutout of someone else who was successful in the application process.

Best summary I've seen so far. The conversations in my community seem to center around what the magic formula is, rather than acknowledging that they're actively seeking a balanced class with kids from various backgrounds.

Agreed. I know a family who bemoaned the fact that they had a formula for getting their kids into ivys, but schools changed what they were looking for (pointy instead of well rounded), ruining their chances. And after my niece got into med school after taking an unconventional route, everyone and their mother wanted to know what exactly she did, so their kids can do it too.

[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:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Actually, Asian applicants' application packages present the strongest test scores/GPA as well as the strongest leadership quality, EC activities, volunteering and service, strongest recommendations from teachers, very strong/strongest essays, strongest national/international awards etc. compared to other groups. Stop spreading disinformation.

PP. You are correct with respect to test scores, GPA, and national/international awards, and that's all. In all of the other areas, you are incorrect.

Leadership quality: Asian students are well-noted for inventing leadership opportunities for themselves through the creation of new clubs and, in many cases, non-profit organizations that have no apparent plan beyond a student's high school years. Major red flag.

EC Activities: You're going to see a ton of Model UN, Debate, Orchestra, individual sports, and competitions, along with the aforementioned invented clubs. And an awful lot of breadth without depth, that comes through in the essays.

Volunteering and Service: This is straight-up false. To the extent that Asian students do volunteer, they tend to do so within their own communities and are frequently noted for helping those who don't need help - a great example is in tutoring for other high-income students. They don't tend to write well about these experiences because they're not actually passionate about anything other than using the volunteering opportunity as a springboard to college.

Recommendations from Teachers: By and large, recommendations from teachers about Asian students are broadly positive, but rarely enthusiastic.

Essays: They tend to lack authenticity and overwhelmingly sound designed to relitigate their resumes rather than shed light on the human being behind the achievements. They're dry and pre-packaged, and extremely difficult to distinguish from one another.

Are there exceptions? Certainly! Are there a lot of white kids who also fall into the above categories? Absolutely! But when you follow the above path, you'd better be the best of the best on that path, and more often than not you end up finding a lot of kids who are trying to be a cardboard cutout of someone else who was successful in the application process.

What a racist commentary. I hope you'll eat your words in a week once SCOTUS decides.

[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:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Actually, Asian applicants' application packages present the strongest test scores/GPA as well as the strongest leadership quality, EC activities, volunteering and service, strongest recommendations from teachers, very strong/strongest essays, strongest national/international awards etc. compared to other groups. Stop spreading disinformation.

PP. You are correct with respect to test scores, GPA, and national/international awards, and that's all. In all of the other areas, you are incorrect.

Leadership quality: Asian students are well-noted for inventing leadership opportunities for themselves through the creation of new clubs and, in many cases, non-profit organizations that have no apparent plan beyond a student's high school years. Major red flag.

EC Activities: You're going to see a ton of Model UN, Debate, Orchestra, individual sports, and competitions, along with the aforementioned invented clubs. And an awful lot of breadth without depth, that comes through in the essays.

Volunteering and Service: This is straight-up false. To the extent that Asian students do volunteer, they tend to do so within their own communities and are frequently noted for helping those who don't need help - a great example is in tutoring for other high-income students. They don't tend to write well about these experiences because they're not actually passionate about anything other than using the volunteering opportunity as a springboard to college.

Recommendations from Teachers: By and large, recommendations from teachers about Asian students are broadly positive, but rarely enthusiastic.

Essays: They tend to lack authenticity and overwhelmingly sound designed to relitigate their resumes rather than shed light on the human being behind the achievements. They're dry and pre-packaged, and extremely difficult to distinguish from one another.

Are there exceptions? Certainly! Are there a lot of white kids who also fall into the above categories? Absolutely! But when you follow the above path, you'd better be the best of the best on that path, and more often than not you end up finding a lot of kids who are trying to be a cardboard cutout of someone else who was successful in the application process.

What a racist commentary. I hope you'll eat your words in a week once SCOTUS decides.

DP. This is not racist at all; it is statistically spot on since the school is Asian majority. As much as I love TJ and the rigorous education it provides, it has become an unfortunate pressure cooker environment for most kids. When learning for the love of learning takes a back seat to playing the college game for four years, kids tend to lose their authentic interest and end up mechanically optimizing every choice toward improving their image for college. It is a sad thing to witness; especially when they overschedule themselves to such a degree that they do not even have time to sit back and ponder or ever have a chance to become bored enough to wonder about the world. As usual, the root cause isn't the kids, but mostly their parents who taught them to obsess over status and placement from a young age, slowly draining their curiosity and genuine interest in learning and playing. Not true for all, but true for an alarmingly significant portion of TJ students, whose main passion is sculpting their image and rank for colleges.

[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:Last year had UVA (49), W&M (26), VA Tech (7), VCU (10), GMU (10).
I think the middle of the road kids get shut out at UVA and VA Tech and go to OOS schools - Purdue, UIUC, Michigan etc

So you are saying VT only had 7 because they largely didn't admit TJ students?

This is a big change from a generation ago. I'm a late-90s TJ grad and my memory is that about 100 people went to UVA, a quarter of the class. Another huge chunk went to VT too. I wonder when the UVa numbers dropped?

Probably when the rest of VA started complaining!

A much higher percentage of TJ students now go OOS.

Are they going OOS by choice?

In 2011, 193 reported they are attending UVA, W&M, and VT. In 2022, that number had declined to 82, a decline of 58%, with each school down by more than 50%. You can say it is because they are more selective, but I suspect some other dynamic is in play. I don't think the same decline is happening at other NoVa schools.

It's because the caliber of TJ students wasn't the same by 2022. The student body was more homogenous and with all the entrance exams favoring prep over ability there were fewer gifted students.

I think it's less that the caliber of TJ students had declined so much as it is that they were too similar, to your second point. It doesn't do UVA or any other elite school any favors to admit a bunch of kids who all look the same on paper and who are trying to accomplish the same goals through the same means. That's bad for business.

There have always been students at TJ who follow the relatively rigid model of (maximize math advancement) + (maximize AP classes) + (focus exclusively on STEM ECs) + (layer in something like Model UN or Debate) + (compete in national level STEM events) in order to optimize their college application. Those students did a lot better in the admissions game when there were 50 in every class instead of 250.

An amusing phenomenon at TJ is whenever a kid announces that they've been accepted to an Ivy or a Duke or a Stanford or an MIT, immediately they get hundreds of friend requests and follows with DMs asking them how they did it. You then have hundreds of TJ kids who are trying to follow the same path, only to be disappointed when they learn that there's no value for the college in admitting 100 carbon copies of the same kid with the same resume as the one they already took.

For years kids were convinced that Crew was the magic secret to getting into an Ivy because a couple of kids a dozen years ago got in as recruited athletes when they had (for TJ) relatively weak scores and GPAs. But those kids were 6'7 and could pull an erg faster than anyone in the area. That same logic doesn't help a 5'6 kid with no muscle tone get to Princeton.

That sounds like the sorry defense of making Asians have much higher stats, etc. than other groups to be admitted.

The defense of making Asians have much higher stats than other groups to be admitted is that frequently, their stats are the strongest part of an application otherwise lacking in heft. Put differently, when the only reason you're getting in is because of your test scores, your test scores on average are going to be significantly higher than other admitted students who got in for other reasons.

This is to be expected when your community goes on message boards like this one and crows about sending their kids to extra enrichment sessions while poo-pooing other valuable uses of kids' time.

Actually, Asian applicants' application packages present the strongest test scores/GPA as well as the strongest leadership quality, EC activities, volunteering and service, strongest recommendations from teachers, very strong/strongest essays, strongest national/international awards etc. compared to other groups. Stop spreading disinformation.

PP. You are correct with respect to test scores, GPA, and national/international awards, and that's all. In all of the other areas, you are incorrect.

Leadership quality: Asian students are well-noted for inventing leadership opportunities for themselves through the creation of new clubs and, in many cases, non-profit organizations that have no apparent plan beyond a student's high school years. Major red flag.

EC Activities: You're going to see a ton of Model UN, Debate, Orchestra, individual sports, and competitions, along with the aforementioned invented clubs. And an awful lot of breadth without depth, that comes through in the essays.

Volunteering and Service: This is straight-up false. To the extent that Asian students do volunteer, they tend to do so within their own communities and are frequently noted for helping those who don't need help - a great example is in tutoring for other high-income students. They don't tend to write well about these experiences because they're not actually passionate about anything other than using the volunteering opportunity as a springboard to college.

Recommendations from Teachers: By and large, recommendations from teachers about Asian students are broadly positive, but rarely enthusiastic.

Essays: They tend to lack authenticity and overwhelmingly sound designed to relitigate their resumes rather than shed light on the human being behind the achievements. They're dry and pre-packaged, and extremely difficult to distinguish from one another.

Are there exceptions? Certainly! Are there a lot of white kids who also fall into the above categories? Absolutely! But when you follow the above path, you'd better be the best of the best on that path, and more often than not you end up finding a lot of kids who are trying to be a cardboard cutout of someone else who was successful in the application process.

What a racist commentary. I hope you'll eat your words in a week once SCOTUS decides.

Yeah, no. These are observations, not opinions.

And the Supreme Court can say whatever it wants about admissions processes, but they can't dictate a school who they select or how they go about selecting. They can only rule that a school CAN'T do X. I promise you all of these schools have backup plans for how to achieve the same goals through different means that will take another 5-10 years to litigate.