2024 Washington DC area College commits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is our experience with student groups at a big3 and where they fall and their admits:
I think it sums it up pretty darn well.

-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits regardless of hooks
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --no top 30 college admits regardless of hooks
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 college admits if hooked

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students -no top 20 college admits without hooks
-9th grade admits who are the very top students in the class --some top 20 college admits without hooks and some are shut out of top 20 schools if no hooks.

This seems directionally reasonable, though how do you define "hook" exactly?

Hook at the Big schools are athletic recruits, legacy (at Big3 this often requires both parents or several generations or parent who is legacy and still has active, current day connection to the university), VIP (nationally known figure OR someone who called in a favor of their friend/contact who is a VIP)

Is full pay a hook? What kind of connection/donation level is necessary for legacy status to matter? Which hooks are stronger than others?

what about unique and remarkable ECs?

That is not a hook. Anyone can be that if they select and choose the right ones. That just means a strong application but no not a hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College admissions probably is the number one consideration of families sending a kid to a big 3 school whether they admit it or not.

The stark reality of admissions is your kid basically needs to be hooked or in the top 10-15% of their class to get in a T25 college.

Hooks defined as URM, 1st gen, legacy, recruited athlete, coming from a geographically underserved area, VIP parent.

In Sidwell's 2023 graduating class, Hooks also included parents with beaucoup bucks whose surnames appear on buildings and "centers" at assorted Ivies. Maybe this is a subset of "VIP Parent" but it was disheartening for this naive writer. Kid was on academic life support and now...

What does this mean?

It means that the child (parent happens to be on the Board) was barely getting by academically. And now they are at a Top 5 college.

Board of Trustees kids often go to Ivies or their first choice top 25. The two boards I am familiar with - at one in the past 5 years - families who were on the board at the time of applying to college: 5 sent to Princeton over the course of 5 years, two to Dartmouth and a few to UVA. The other Board this year sending at least 2 to Ivies. All strong students - not saying they should not be but I am saying this is not a new phenomenon.

Clarification - one was a previous board member but still involved in the community different role.

Sorry - Do you mean parents are on the high school board of trustees? Or on the board at Princeton etc?

Private school board not college board but they may be on of their boards as well for the college? Do not know? Never looked. They are also legacies.

Legacies just for the one school. Not the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College admissions probably is the number one consideration of families sending a kid to a big 3 school whether they admit it or not.

The stark reality of admissions is your kid basically needs to be hooked or in the top 10-15% of their class to get in a T25 college.

Hooks defined as URM, 1st gen, legacy, recruited athlete, coming from a geographically underserved area, VIP parent.

In Sidwell's 2023 graduating class, Hooks also included parents with beaucoup bucks whose surnames appear on buildings and "centers" at assorted Ivies. Maybe this is a subset of "VIP Parent" but it was disheartening for this naive writer. Kid was on academic life support and now...

What does this mean?

It means that the child (parent happens to be on the Board) was barely getting by academically. And now they are at a Top 5 college.

Board of Trustees kids often go to Ivies or their first choice top 25. The two boards I am familiar with - at one in the past 5 years - families who were on the board at the time of applying to college: 5 sent to Princeton over the course of 5 years, two to Dartmouth and a few to UVA. The other Board this year sending at least 2 to Ivies. All strong students - not saying they should not be but I am saying this is not a new phenomenon.

Clarification - one was a previous board member but still involved in the community different role.

Sorry - Do you mean parents are on the high school board of trustees? Or on the board at Princeton etc?

Private school board not college board but they may be on of their boards as well for the college? Do not know? Never looked. They are also legacies.

Legacies just for the one school. Not the other.

More about the parents than the students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually this is more clear:



-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits--too far out of the running for hooks to even help
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --some top 30 admits if heavily hooked
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky kid unhooked kid gets in top 20

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky unhooked kid gets in top 20
-9th grade admits who are the very top students --the strongest academic cohort in the grade. The hooked kids get in to top 20 schools. The unhooked kids are split about 50/50, some get into top20, some do not. It's all luck.

I'm a little curious about how you are defining "very top students." Some things are known or hinted at numbers wise but for schools that don't rank and people who don't disclose or aren't fully truthful about scores, the top kids are not as easy to ID, are they?

Also, when you say top 20 schools, do you include places like Chicago or Georgetown that might be top 20 in one publication but not another? Especially with Chicago, it seemed like a lot of unhooked kids were getting in and parents were labeling it top 10 a few years ago.

[Anonymous]

Do the schools look at potential hooks when admitting? If two parents were athletes at a top 5 school, does that help their elementary-aged child as the private school thinks about things longer-term?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually this is more clear:



-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits--too far out of the running for hooks to even help
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --some top 30 admits if heavily hooked
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky kid unhooked kid gets in top 20

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky unhooked kid gets in top 20
-9th grade admits who are the very top students --the strongest academic cohort in the grade. The hooked kids get in to top 20 schools. The unhooked kids are split about 50/50, some get into top20, some do not. It's all luck.

I'm a little curious about how you are defining "very top students." Some things are known or hinted at numbers wise but for schools that don't rank and people who don't disclose or aren't fully truthful about scores, the top kids are not as easy to ID, are they?

Also, when you say top 20 schools, do you include places like Chicago or Georgetown that might be top 20 in one publication but not another? Especially with Chicago, it seemed like a lot of unhooked kids were getting in and parents were labeling it top 10 a few years ago.

I would say that very top are kids at 3.9 or above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:full pay hook - Not for T20
donation levels - named buildings, funded scholarships *
legacy for very strong student will help without donation
legacy parent + VIP parent *
stronger - who knows - my guess is if you don't already know what to do to game the system, you're not in the category of someone who has this option (and this in not meant in a snarky way.... I also am not in this category.)

* these two can even lift a very average student

These types of nuances are important because you often see posters jump to the conclusion that someone admitted to a T20 school was hooked simply because they're a legacy, but you have no idea if their family has been donors or if they would've been admitted regardless of the purported hook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:full pay hook - Not for T20
donation levels - named buildings, funded scholarships *
legacy for very strong student will help without donation
legacy parent + VIP parent *
stronger - who knows - my guess is if you don't already know what to do to game the system, you're not in the category of someone who has this option (and this in not meant in a snarky way.... I also am not in this category.)

* these two can even lift a very average student

These types of nuances are important because you often see posters jump to the conclusion that someone admitted to a T20 school was hooked simply because they're a legacy, but you have no idea if their family has been donors or if they would've been admitted regardless of the purported hook.

They do not have to be mutually exclusive. Sorry if your kid is a legacy and gets accepted everyone will assume that is part of the equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:full pay hook - Not for T20
donation levels - named buildings, funded scholarships *
legacy for very strong student will help without donation
legacy parent + VIP parent *
stronger - who knows - my guess is if you don't already know what to do to game the system, you're not in the category of someone who has this option (and this in not meant in a snarky way.... I also am not in this category.)

* these two can even lift a very average student

These types of nuances are important because you often see posters jump to the conclusion that someone admitted to a T20 school was hooked simply because they're a legacy, but you have no idea if their family has been donors or if they would've been admitted regardless of the purported hook.

They do not have to be mutually exclusive. Sorry if your kid is a legacy and gets accepted everyone will assume that is part of the equation.

True, some parents will mistakenly think it is part of the equation even if the kid is admitted to a top school like MIT, Amherst, Caltech, or Hopkins that doesn't even consider legacy status
Will it really matter though? Ultimately, an acceptance is an acceptance is an acceptance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually this is more clear:



-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits--too far out of the running for hooks to even help
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --some top 30 admits if heavily hooked
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky kid unhooked kid gets in top 20

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky unhooked kid gets in top 20
-9th grade admits who are the very top students --the strongest academic cohort in the grade. The hooked kids get in to top 20 schools. The unhooked kids are split about 50/50, some get into top20, some do not. It's all luck.

I'm a little curious about how you are defining "very top students." Some things are known or hinted at numbers wise but for schools that don't rank and people who don't disclose or aren't fully truthful about scores, the top kids are not as easy to ID, are they?

Also, when you say top 20 schools, do you include places like Chicago or Georgetown that might be top 20 in one publication but not another? Especially with Chicago, it seemed like a lot of unhooked kids were getting in and parents were labeling it top 10 a few years ago.

I would say that very top are kids at 3.9 or above.

You don't know who really has a 3.9 at the time of applying though, do you? I think that is PP's point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually this is more clear:



-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits--too far out of the running for hooks to even help
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --some top 30 admits if heavily hooked
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky kid unhooked kid gets in top 20

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky unhooked kid gets in top 20
-9th grade admits who are the very top students --the strongest academic cohort in the grade. The hooked kids get in to top 20 schools. The unhooked kids are split about 50/50, some get into top20, some do not. It's all luck.

I'm a little curious about how you are defining "very top students." Some things are known or hinted at numbers wise but for schools that don't rank and people who don't disclose or aren't fully truthful about scores, the top kids are not as easy to ID, are they?

Also, when you say top 20 schools, do you include places like Chicago or Georgetown that might be top 20 in one publication but not another? Especially with Chicago, it seemed like a lot of unhooked kids were getting in and parents were labeling it top 10 a few years ago.

I would say that very top are kids at 3.9 or above.

You don't know who really has a 3.9 at the time of applying though, do you? I think that is PP's point.

I think this really varies by Big3. My kids are (or were) at STA and NCS and both schools give pretty free access to SCOIR/Naviance and also Cum laude societes which honor the top members of the class. So between all of this it becomes pretty apparent who the kids are with a 3.9+.

Also, in my experience (multiple kids) its really hard to move a GPA after junior year. Both mathematically speaking and because kids tend to work around the same level each year. For example, my kid has expended maximum academic effort throughout high school (done ever assignment on time, gone to office hours daily, studied at home 3 hours a night, etc) and has received about a 3.8 each year. It's unlikely she/he will suddenly turn in a senior fall of a 4.0---if it was that easy he/she would have done it junior year. A 3.8 is literally about the best she/he can do.

[Anonymous]

A 3.9 with all advanced is rare. A 3.9 with little rigor is fairly normal. The issue is whether your school helps those with the rigor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A 3.9 with all advanced is rare. A 3.9 with little rigor is fairly normal. The issue is whether your school helps those with the rigor.

no. average GPA is about a 3.5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do the schools look at potential hooks when admitting? If two parents were athletes at a top 5 school, does that help their elementary-aged child as the private school thinks about things longer-term?

If two parents went to top 5 schools, then the kid is legacy. Of course the privates look at that. They will Google you or just flat out ask on the application.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually this is more clear:



-lifers who are weak students -- no top 50 college admits--too far out of the running for hooks to even help
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are average students --some top 30 admits if heavily hooked
-lifers or middle school acceptances who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky kid unhooked kid gets in top 20

-9th grade athletic recruits --college admits are mostly independent of grades and these students are all over the map academically
-9th grade admits who are strong students --some top 20 admits if hooked, very occasional lucky unhooked kid gets in top 20
-9th grade admits who are the very top students --the strongest academic cohort in the grade. The hooked kids get in to top 20 schools. The unhooked kids are split about 50/50, some get into top20, some do not. It's all luck.

I'm a little curious about how you are defining "very top students." Some things are known or hinted at numbers wise but for schools that don't rank and people who don't disclose or aren't fully truthful about scores, the top kids are not as easy to ID, are they?

Also, when you say top 20 schools, do you include places like Chicago or Georgetown that might be top 20 in one publication but not another? Especially with Chicago, it seemed like a lot of unhooked kids were getting in and parents were labeling it top 10 a few years ago.

I would say that very top are kids at 3.9 or above.

You don't know who really has a 3.9 at the time of applying though, do you? I think that is PP's point.

I think this really varies by Big3. My kids are (or were) at STA and NCS and both schools give pretty free access to SCOIR/Naviance and also Cum laude societes which honor the top members of the class. So between all of this it becomes pretty apparent who the kids are with a 3.9+.

Also, in my experience (multiple kids) its really hard to move a GPA after junior year. Both mathematically speaking and because kids tend to work around the same level each year. For example, my kid has expended maximum academic effort throughout high school (done ever assignment on time, gone to office hours daily, studied at home 3 hours a night, etc) and has received about a 3.8 each year. It's unlikely she/he will suddenly turn in a senior fall of a 4.0---if it was that easy he/she would have done it junior year. A 3.8 is literally about the best she/he can do.

Score and naviance do not show the gpa when they actually applied just fyi. My child graduated from a Big 3 and it shows their average at the end of senior year which slightly lower than when they applied in the fall. After kids get in they loosen up a bit.