Success with Ivy-level admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they go the extra mile? Do they love to learn? Are they scholarly with a natural gift for academic pursuits? Are they engaged deeply and for a sustained period ( years) with ECs of interest? Are they distinguished participants in those ECs? Are they a real standout in a particular discipline?

Unless they have some hook, that is the type of candidate they are up against to gain admittance at top universities. Top grades and scores are not enough....all the applicants admitted have that.

+1

I have said in this board before that there is a difference between a high academically performing kid and a truly gifted child. Intellectual curiosity, unique interests, superior performance in a specific area need to be demonstrated.

" Intellectual curiosity, unique interests, superior performance in a specific area need to be demonstrated." - Not ALL accepted HYPSM kids truly have these traits. Many extrapolate what they do. There is NO validation/verification done by the schools. I understand it's hard to do that for every applicant. But once they have shortlisted, they can atleast spot check one per every 100 application or something like that. Atleast the schools can verify the few things in the application that they considered for admission. This "holistic" approach truly benefits only a small percentage. There are a lot that just game the system.

Not really. Why would a system gamer want to go those schools anyway?

one example of gaming the system - starting a charity organization or a tutoring agency. the website will talk have pics, info, etc projecting as if the org is doing amazing things but in reality it's not. And their essays will talk a lot about these amazing things which wouldn't have happened in that magnitude in reality. I personally know 3 such kids. 2 got into Princeton and 1 to Harvard. They are academically high achieving kids for sure but not as heavily involved in community service / leadership which they claim to be in their LinkedIn profile and their charity/tutoring websites.

I resent these kids, too, but how would they check? They do some Google searching and look for inconsistencies with letters, etc. what else would you have them do? There is a counselor in Nothern California where I live , not sure if he’s still in Business, who basically sets all of this up for your child. There are professors you can pay for your child to “help” them with research and get the kid on the article as an author. These things are fraud, pure and simple. I guess the best schools can do is dig deeper when things seem too amazing. They could also reach out to the counselors (who likely know the kids fairly well). This is all fed by parents, by the way. No kid is scrounging up the cash for this. It’s parents who are insane and will do anything for their kid to get into certain schools. I’m not even certain that the kids care all that much if they get into the schools (other than that they get in trouble if they don’t).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The very top kids at my child's high school (valedictorian, salutatorian and a couple others) got into Ivy-level colleges. The kids (like my DD), who would have had a good shot at some of these schools even 5 years ago, didn't have a chance, and every one is going to a second-tier college or in-state school because of cost.

The top-ranked schools attract a lot of hyper-qualified applicants, so they can pick whomever they want from their applicant pool. These days you need a hook, a 4.0 and at least 1550 on your SAT to even be considered at the top schools.

Kids who aren't interested in working that hard in high school should be realistic about college admissions, even if they are extremely bright. Sure, they'd do fine at Harvard and Yale, but without stats, they don't have the admissions ticket, unless they are a top athlete or have some other unique skill or talent.

I know two superb athletes who went to Princeton and Harvard who are not at the top of their classes academically. But their athletic skill got them admitted.

My kid is not even a top athlete, but is a decent athlete. He’s a 4.0 and a wicked math student. I was almost blown the F away when a choach reached out to him from Harvard. Bring a decent athlete and a great student goes a looooong way. And yes my child is a public school kid. He’s done some showcase tournaments this summer and did one in particular for high achieving student athletes. Most of these showcases and full of prep school kids, so I feel like maybe the public school kids don’t even try.

I strongly suggest if someone had a decent student athlete who is an excellent student to do the showcase circuit and target the showcases that have a minimum GPA requirement.

How does one even find these? I just googled and found a couple things but it was a bit confusing and only one seemed to have a minimum GPA and it was on the other side of hte country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do they go the extra mile? Do they love to learn? Are they scholarly with a natural gift for academic pursuits? Are they engaged deeply and for a sustained period ( years) with ECs of interest? Are they distinguished participants in those ECs? Are they a real standout in a particular discipline?

Unless they have some hook, that is the type of candidate they are up against to gain admittance at top universities. Top grades and scores are not enough....all the applicants admitted have that.

+1

I have said in this board before that there is a difference between a high academically performing kid and a truly gifted child. Intellectual curiosity, unique interests, superior performance in a specific area need to be demonstrated.

" Intellectual curiosity, unique interests, superior performance in a specific area need to be demonstrated." - Not ALL accepted HYPSM kids truly have these traits. Many extrapolate what they do. There is NO validation/verification done by the schools. I understand it's hard to do that for every applicant. But once they have shortlisted, they can atleast spot check one per every 100 application or something like that. Atleast the schools can verify the few things in the application that they considered for admission. This "holistic" approach truly benefits only a small percentage. There are a lot that just game the system.

Not really. Why would a system gamer want to go those schools anyway?

one example of gaming the system - starting a charity organization or a tutoring agency. the website will talk have pics, info, etc projecting as if the org is doing amazing things but in reality it's not. And their essays will talk a lot about these amazing things which wouldn't have happened in that magnitude in reality. I personally know 3 such kids. 2 got into Princeton and 1 to Harvard. They are academically high achieving kids for sure but not as heavily involved in community service / leadership which they claim to be in their LinkedIn profile and their charity/tutoring websites.

I resent these kids, too, but how would they check? They do some Google searching and look for inconsistencies with letters, etc. what else would you have them do? There is a counselor in Nothern California where I live , not sure if he’s still in Business, who basically sets all of this up for your child. There are professors you can pay for your child to “help” them with research and get the kid on the article as an author. These things are fraud, pure and simple. I guess the best schools can do is dig deeper when things seem too amazing. They could also reach out to the counselors (who likely know the kids fairly well). This is all fed by parents, by the way. No kid is scrounging up the cash for this. It’s parents who are insane and will do anything for their kid to get into certain schools. I’m not even certain that the kids care all that much if they get into the schools (other than that they get in trouble if they don’t).

If the schools cannot verify/validate a credential/accomplishment, then that should not be given so much weightage in admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These universities were publicly advertising that they wanted 'first generation' students. Hopkins president came out and said he didn't want legacy. My husband was a first generation JHU student so it's crazy that our kid will be dinged because his dad went there.

Princeton advertised that 68% of their student body is mixed race. That makes me very leery of what people are claiming on their applications. Hello Pocahontas Warren wannabes.

That's impossible--less than 10% of the US population under 18 years old is biracial/mixed race. I think you mean people of color or non-white. I found this that supports your 68% number: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9451013/Princeton-selecting-fewer-white-students-year.html

Princeton announced its 2025 class on Thursday; 68% are non-white (black, Asian, Hispanic and other races)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9451013/Princeton-selecting-fewer-white-students-year.html

So only 32% of the class is white?

No, 32% of accepted 2025 students to Princeton were white. According to the CDS for that class (enrolled students), 37.5% are white, 8% are black, 11% are Hispanic, 21% are Asian and the remaining are internationa/Two or more races.

Right. Less than 1/3 of the class is white. Period.

And yet 57.8% of the US is white. So it’s not representative of the US population. 13% are black and 5% Asian, etc.