Ivies vs. Top 20 schools (after listening to many a podcast on the subject)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many cases, parents have bulldozed the "achievements" of the successful applicants to the Ivies. There are very few kids who actually start their own non-profits/businesses on their own, like that.

This is so true.

It sometimes makes me think of predestinationism and Calvinism. I feel like there is this belief that some people are born to be graced with an Ivy League education, and those children will, because of their blessed nature, do great works and follow the Will of the Admissions Officer. However, no one really knows who the blessed are, or what they actually do. So, everyone is looking at all the people around them, seeing who other people say is blessed, and attempting to mimic what they are doing. Thereby, no one is doing what comes naturally at all, and the entire thing becomes a farce.

Weird take. You might be overthinking this a tad.

Lol...."the blessed". These are just students going to college...some special and some jack*****. Nothing blessed about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many cases, parents have bulldozed the "achievements" of the successful applicants to the Ivies. There are very few kids who actually start their own non-profits/businesses on their own, like that.

This is so true.

It sometimes makes me think of predestinationism and Calvinism. I feel like there is this belief that some people are born to be graced with an Ivy League education, and those children will, because of their blessed nature, do great works and follow the Will of the Admissions Officer. However, no one really knows who the blessed are, or what they actually do. So, everyone is looking at all the people around them, seeing who other people say is blessed, and attempting to mimic what they are doing. Thereby, no one is doing what comes naturally at all, and the entire thing becomes a farce.

Weird take. You might be overthinking this a tad.

Lol...."the blessed". These are just students going to college...some special and some jack*****. Nothing blessed about it.

Ehh...I was drawing a corollary between current college admissions process and a medieval religious belief that some people are born to be saved and go to Heaven, while most people are not. You know who the saved are because they are born to be more obedient to God. Then people spend their entire lives trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were born one of the saved.
I am aware that gaining e trance to Harvard isn’t the same as gaining entrance to Heaven. But the idea that some people are born with innate qualities that will be proven through certain actions seems pretty similar.

[Anonymous]

The innate qualities that are useful in a challenging academic setting would be not be so useful in other settings. Some people are suited to nerdy colleges, some are suited to other environments. .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had no idea there were college admissions podcasts. I have a rising second year college student and a rising 12th grader. My kids don’t stand a chance with the level of parental involvement in the process that happens around here.

OP here - they absolutely will! There are so many colleges out there where kids can thrive And honestly, after listening to them, I wouldn't really recommend it. Inside the Admissions Office was interesting but some things they said really turned me off. For example, for one of the episodes they had a woman on who does interviews for Harvard. She was going on and on about how students interviewing should do their upmost to make the interviewer happy and comfortable because the point of the interviews is to keep alums involved at the school... okay. I get that interviewees should act appropriately but why is it my kid's job to make the interviewer feel good about the interview just so they keep giving money to a school that's probably going to reject my kid anyway? She also said how turned off she was by a kid who quoted his hockey coach a few times because "not everyone is into sports." Way to give a kid a chance.

I cringe whenever a poster writes "well, I interview for my Ivy and . . . "

They're doing it because they define themselves by the college they attended. It's the equivalent of peaking in high school and never getting over it. And even they understand completely that their interview will have little or no impact on the admissions decision. It's all about them and their egos, not the appliucant.

Pathetic.

Not an Ivy but I do interviews for my college and I do it because I love my school. I don’t have any illusions that I’m a meaningful part of the process, I just want to help kids learn about the place. Take a step back and try not to be so judgmental. Do you react to everything in your life so negatively? Yeesh.

This is just weird. When I was at a private law firm I interviewed for my Ivy because I loved the Ivy. I also interviewed for my masters program because I loved that. I also interviewed for the Peace Corps because I loved that. Does this mean I define myself by these three places and only these three places? Does that make me pathetic three times over? Stopped interviewing when I moved to DOJ because the applicants couldn’t get into the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many cases, parents have bulldozed the "achievements" of the successful applicants to the Ivies. There are very few kids who actually start their own non-profits/businesses on their own, like that.

This is so true.

It sometimes makes me think of predestinationism and Calvinism. I feel like there is this belief that some people are born to be graced with an Ivy League education, and those children will, because of their blessed nature, do great works and follow the Will of the Admissions Officer. However, no one really knows who the blessed are, or what they actually do. So, everyone is looking at all the people around them, seeing who other people say is blessed, and attempting to mimic what they are doing. Thereby, no one is doing what comes naturally at all, and the entire thing becomes a farce.

Weird take. You might be overthinking this a tad.

Lol...."the blessed". These are just students going to college...some special and some jack*****. Nothing blessed about it.

Ehh...I was drawing a corollary between current college admissions process and a medieval religious belief that some people are born to be saved and go to Heaven, while most people are not. You know who the saved are because they are born to be more obedient to God. Then people spend their entire lives trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were born one of the saved.
I am aware that gaining e trance to Harvard isn’t the same as gaining entrance to Heaven. But the idea that some people are born with innate qualities that will be proven through certain actions seems pretty similar.

DP: I think it's an interesting take, but I don't think it really explains it. I think it's about the group they think is right for the particular moment--rather than some sustaining innate quality/predestination for an individual. So basically all the exceptionally strong folks with requisite caliber are considered, but the sum of this group and the context of the moment in history is what matters--they are basically selecting out a group (comprised of individuals) that somehow matches or meets a particular moment well. If you're going to think through history, it might be that they are shooting for--what is the group of people that would create a "Golden Age" here and now at our school. (I don't think they actually do it, or can do it--but that's what I think they are going for).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had no idea there were college admissions podcasts. I have a rising second year college student and a rising 12th grader. My kids don’t stand a chance with the level of parental involvement in the process that happens around here.

OP here - they absolutely will! There are so many colleges out there where kids can thrive And honestly, after listening to them, I wouldn't really recommend it. Inside the Admissions Office was interesting but some things they said really turned me off. For example, for one of the episodes they had a woman on who does interviews for Harvard. She was going on and on about how students interviewing should do their upmost to make the interviewer happy and comfortable because the point of the interviews is to keep alums involved at the school... okay. I get that interviewees should act appropriately but why is it my kid's job to make the interviewer feel good about the interview just so they keep giving money to a school that's probably going to reject my kid anyway? She also said how turned off she was by a kid who quoted his hockey coach a few times because "not everyone is into sports." Way to give a kid a chance.

I cringe whenever a poster writes "well, I interview for my Ivy and . . . "

They're doing it because they define themselves by the college they attended. It's the equivalent of peaking in high school and never getting over it. And even they understand completely that their interview will have little or no impact on the admissions decision. It's all about them and their egos, not the appliucant.

Pathetic.

Not an Ivy but I do interviews for my college and I do it because I love my school. I don’t have any illusions that I’m a meaningful part of the process, I just want to help kids learn about the place. Take a step back and try not to be so judgmental. Do you react to everything in your life so negatively? Yeesh.

This is just weird. When I was at a private law firm I interviewed for my Ivy because I loved the Ivy. I also interviewed for my masters program because I loved that. I also interviewed for the Peace Corps because I loved that. Does this mean I define myself by these three places and only these three places? Does that make me pathetic three times over? Stopped interviewing when I moved to DOJ because the applicants couldn’t get into the building.

+1 When you appreciate your experiences with an organization, you might find ways to help that organization. That's just basically being an involved community member who cares about good institutions you have had connections to sustaining-- not trying to relive some personal glory. Same as you might recommend a charity you support to others. You want it to thrive because you think it's good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had no idea there were college admissions podcasts. I have a rising second year college student and a rising 12th grader. My kids don’t stand a chance with the level of parental involvement in the process that happens around here.

OP here - they absolutely will! There are so many colleges out there where kids can thrive And honestly, after listening to them, I wouldn't really recommend it. Inside the Admissions Office was interesting but some things they said really turned me off. For example, for one of the episodes they had a woman on who does interviews for Harvard. She was going on and on about how students interviewing should do their upmost to make the interviewer happy and comfortable because the point of the interviews is to keep alums involved at the school... okay. I get that interviewees should act appropriately but why is it my kid's job to make the interviewer feel good about the interview just so they keep giving money to a school that's probably going to reject my kid anyway? She also said how turned off she was by a kid who quoted his hockey coach a few times because "not everyone is into sports." Way to give a kid a chance.

I cringe whenever a poster writes "well, I interview for my Ivy and . . . "

They're doing it because they define themselves by the college they attended. It's the equivalent of peaking in high school and never getting over it. And even they understand completely that their interview will have little or no impact on the admissions decision. It's all about them and their egos, not the appliucant.

Pathetic.

Not an Ivy but I do interviews for my college and I do it because I love my school. I don’t have any illusions that I’m a meaningful part of the process, I just want to help kids learn about the place. Take a step back and try not to be so judgmental. Do you react to everything in your life so negatively? Yeesh.

This is just weird. When I was at a private law firm I interviewed for my Ivy because I loved the Ivy. I also interviewed for my masters program because I loved that. I also interviewed for the Peace Corps because I loved that. Does this mean I define myself by these three places and only these three places? Does that make me pathetic three times over? Stopped interviewing when I moved to DOJ because the applicants couldn’t get into the building.

In a word, yes. It does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many cases, parents have bulldozed the "achievements" of the successful applicants to the Ivies. There are very few kids who actually start their own non-profits/businesses on their own, like that.

This is so true.

It sometimes makes me think of predestinationism and Calvinism. I feel like there is this belief that some people are born to be graced with an Ivy League education, and those children will, because of their blessed nature, do great works and follow the Will of the Admissions Officer. However, no one really knows who the blessed are, or what they actually do. So, everyone is looking at all the people around them, seeing who other people say is blessed, and attempting to mimic what they are doing. Thereby, no one is doing what comes naturally at all, and the entire thing becomes a farce.

Weird take. You might be overthinking this a tad.

Lol...."the blessed". These are just students going to college...some special and some jack*****. Nothing blessed about it.

Ehh...I was drawing a corollary between current college admissions process and a medieval religious belief that some people are born to be saved and go to Heaven, while most people are not. You know who the saved are because they are born to be more obedient to God. Then people spend their entire lives trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were born one of the saved.
I am aware that gaining e trance to Harvard isn’t the same as gaining entrance to Heaven. But the idea that some people are born with innate qualities that will be proven through certain actions seems pretty similar.

DP: I think it's an interesting take, but I don't think it really explains it. I think it's about the group they think is right for the particular moment--rather than some sustaining innate quality/predestination for an individual. So basically all the exceptionally strong folks with requisite caliber are considered, but the sum of this group and the context of the moment in history is what matters--they are basically selecting out a group (comprised of individuals) that somehow matches or meets a particular moment well. If you're going to think through history, it might be that they are shooting for--what is the group of people that would create a "Golden Age" here and now at our school. (I don't think they actually do it, or can do it--but that's what I think they are going for).

I get what you are saying, and I am sure that is what the admissions committee is looking for. I was thinking about the perspective of the applicant. To the applicant, you are trying to prove that you are the "kind of person" that the admissions committee is looking for, and so, instead of being whatever kind of person you are, you engage in behavior that you believe "that kind of person," the kind of person the ivy league admissions office is looking for, would do.
This leads to a) it being difficult for the admissions committee to determine who really has the merits they are looking for. Although an argument could be made that anyone who is willing and able to do all of these behaviors DOES have a lot of what they are looking for, regardless of the motivation.
-and-
b) Probably more importantly, this kind of thinking leads to young adults who don't really know what "kind of person" they are at all. And that's how you create a narcissist, right? Narcissus could never "know himself," or else he would die. He falls in love with Echo, and then with a reflection of himself.

It just seems like we have this system where we create narcissists from childhood, then put them in charge of the world.

[Anonymous]

How is faking interest or talent, narcissistic? You are describing fakes and con artists more than narcissists. I am sure the second would argue that are experienced in weeding out the fakes.

[Anonymous]

The admissions* committee* can spot the fakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is faking interest or talent, narcissistic? You are describing fakes and con artists more than narcissists. I am sure the second would argue that are experienced in weeding out the fakes.

From a psychological perspective, narcissists are at their core "fakes." At an early age, they construct a false self that they believe will earn regard and spend a lifetime's energy (their own and everyone around them) needing to bolster it up. Or at least that's how the theory on it goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many cases, parents have bulldozed the "achievements" of the successful applicants to the Ivies. There are very few kids who actually start their own non-profits/businesses on their own, like that.

This is so true.

It sometimes makes me think of predestinationism and Calvinism. I feel like there is this belief that some people are born to be graced with an Ivy League education, and those children will, because of their blessed nature, do great works and follow the Will of the Admissions Officer. However, no one really knows who the blessed are, or what they actually do. So, everyone is looking at all the people around them, seeing who other people say is blessed, and attempting to mimic what they are doing. Thereby, no one is doing what comes naturally at all, and the entire thing becomes a farce.

Weird take. You might be overthinking this a tad.

Lol...."the blessed". These are just students going to college...some special and some jack*****. Nothing blessed about it.

Ehh...I was drawing a corollary between current college admissions process and a medieval religious belief that some people are born to be saved and go to Heaven, while most people are not. You know who the saved are because they are born to be more obedient to God. Then people spend their entire lives trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were born one of the saved.
I am aware that gaining e trance to Harvard isn’t the same as gaining entrance to Heaven. But the idea that some people are born with innate qualities that will be proven through certain actions seems pretty similar.

DP: I think it's an interesting take, but I don't think it really explains it. I think it's about the group they think is right for the particular moment--rather than some sustaining innate quality/predestination for an individual. So basically all the exceptionally strong folks with requisite caliber are considered, but the sum of this group and the context of the moment in history is what matters--they are basically selecting out a group (comprised of individuals) that somehow matches or meets a particular moment well. If you're going to think through history, it might be that they are shooting for--what is the group of people that would create a "Golden Age" here and now at our school. (I don't think they actually do it, or can do it--but that's what I think they are going for).

I get what you are saying, and I am sure that is what the admissions committee is looking for. I was thinking about the perspective of the applicant. To the applicant, you are trying to prove that you are the "kind of person" that the admissions committee is looking for, and so, instead of being whatever kind of person you are, you engage in behavior that you believe "that kind of person," the kind of person the ivy league admissions office is looking for, would do.
This leads to a) it being difficult for the admissions committee to determine who really has the merits they are looking for. Although an argument could be made that anyone who is willing and able to do all of these behaviors DOES have a lot of what they are looking for, regardless of the motivation.
-and-
b) Probably more importantly, this kind of thinking leads to young adults who don't really know what "kind of person" they are at all. And that's how you create a narcissist, right? Narcissus could never "know himself," or else he would die. He falls in love with Echo, and then with a reflection of himself.

It just seems like we have this system where we create narcissists from childhood, then put them in charge of the world.

Again, 99.5% of your posts seem to seek refuge in the notion that the pursuit of admission to an Ivy is ultimately self-defeating. It's just different, and still verbose, versions of "what will it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet lose his soul."

It's overwrought. If you don't want your kids doing what's required to be competitive for admission to some of the nation's most selective schools, there are plenty of other schools out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Ehh...I was drawing a corollary between current college admissions process and a medieval religious belief that some people are born to be saved and go to Heaven, while most people are not. You know who the saved are because they are born to be more obedient to God. Then people spend their entire lives trying to prove to themselves and everyone else that they were born one of the saved.
I am aware that gaining e trance to Harvard isn’t the same as gaining entrance to Heaven. But the idea that some people are born with innate qualities that will be proven through certain actions seems pretty similar.

I don't understand what you don't understand. For example, have you seen Katie Ledecky? Many more are working as hard as she is, some even harder, true some things may be different, like support from family, nutrition, and so on, and all these factors add something to the equation, but in the end that level of performance has to do with some innate ability or convergence of aptitudes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our private complied a booklet about various popular colleges. One Dean wrote that in the past Ivy students were upper crust but different in personality. Now he says the personality of the average Ivy student is “driven”.

You can be driven, but still have a different personality if different things motivate you.

You can also send your kids to a school where administrators try to affect an all-knowing tone. It's not a big revelation to learn the Ivies aren't letting in as many pedigreed slackers as they did 50 years ago.

I think the real message is that HYPSM have completely ruined a fair number of our brightest kids. Any bright kids who are taking that BS seriously and trying to twist themselves into pretzels to please those schools probably have ended up with serious problems that’ll take generations to analyze. Our nation may perish because our brightest kids are more into checking boxes than actually doing anything of value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the real message is that HYPSM have completely ruined a fair number of our brightest kids. Any bright kids who are taking that BS seriously and trying to twist themselves into pretzels to please those schools probably have ended up with serious problems that’ll take generations to analyze. Our nation may perish because our brightest kids are more into checking boxes than actually doing anything of value.

And the evidence you base this opinion on comes from where, exactly?

My guess is you made it up to suit your narrative.