Did not get into Georgetown or Notre Dame. Now what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We toured Georgetown last Spring. Did the big group conference in the hall and then broke into groups for the campus tour.

My DS was literally 1 of 6 cis white males out of the entire group of about 100 prospects. The vast majority of the others were Asian and Indian males. Girls were barely represented.

He didn't even apply. He is high stats, his mom is an undegrad and grad school alum, and his grandfather taught there for two decades.

It isn't what it used to be.

You sound deeply prejudiced against non whites, yet claim that the school is "MAGA idiots" - which one is it?

Pp is odd since gtown isn’t known to be an Asian/indian male school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

My kid is at a Jesuit high school where lots of kids go on to these colleges. Holy Cross accepts 100% of the kids who applied. The scattergram is literally filled with green circles. So that's what I based my recommendation on. Villanova is a much harder admit. Of course, I don't know OP's kid's info.

Are you guys talking about Holy Cross in Indiana near Notre Dame or College of the Holy Cross in Mass? The one in Mass is pretty hard to get into these days. The one in Indiana is not.

Acceptance rate at HC is around 40%

That stat is misleading. HC is the type of school that doesn’t get kids just applying in large numbers. It is a particular type of kid. In this day and age pure admissions rates are out the window.

Look at common data set.

That said, if you think you kid was competitive to get into ND or GU, you should be fine.

I looked up the cds for holy cross

1420 is the 75th percentile at hc

That’s super low if you are at the median for nd/gu

A median scoring unhooked kid at nd and gt is 75th+ percentile at hc

And if you layer on top being full pay and from a Catholic school — hc is a safety for said aforementioned profile

Yes the OP kid should get in. But to call it an easy safety generally is not correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Sorry to hear this, pp and op.

My college senior, after being rejected at Georgetown (my alma mater), went to St. Joe’s. There is a lot to be said for being a big fish in a little sea, rather than swimming with sharks.

There are many, many families with kids at both Villanova and SJU. Talk with them. My son has HS friends at Villanova and he’s even ridden the train home to DC with them on breaks.

The world is simply different today.[/b] I do wish they would limit the number of schools kids apply to, but I guess the schools might miss the cash and “selectivity” that comes with rejecting HS seniors.

[b]The number of schools applied to has nothing to do with getting rejected, let's say at Georgetown. There are only a certain number of admission spots.

It does. Kids are blasting applications everywhere. In the 1980s, 1990s--you would apply to 4-5 colleges. Now kids are applying to all 8 Ivies, every top 10 and most of the top 25. So now these schools have close to 50,000-75,000 applicants. It does matter.

Test optional is an other reason these kids are now applying to so many schools too (minus Gtown of couse which isn't TO). A kid that had a 1200 SAT (which was like a 1080 back in the late 80s) would not bother applying to any Ivies--even with a 4.0. Now kids just don't send the scores and VIOLA! you get huge numbers. The screening/cutoff isn't there.

It has adapted. With the deemphasized on test scores and other achievement metrics, the most accomplished applicants cannot be assumed to be the most deserving of admission. Rather than seeking students with the most distinguished academic records, a school might seek those who best represent the state from a demographic perspective or those that will benefit most from the curriculum.

Yeah, but I suspect that is changing as schools have learned that an A from Podunk HS is not the same as an A from other schools it may know better. Colleges and universities have had to invest millions in remedial classes and tutoring for “straight A” kids, TO, who were just passed through. It’s maddening. Then these kids, with excessive extra help, will graduate from top schools. Some will have flourished, learned how to study, worked hard and really be just as meritorious as the kids who went to top rated high schools and killed testing as well. But there will be others that just don’t measure up. That will become the employer’s problem. It’s really not fair. I expect to see more colleges and universities revoke TO, just as MIT did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Sorry to hear this, pp and op.

My college senior, after being rejected at Georgetown (my alma mater), went to St. Joe’s. There is a lot to be said for being a big fish in a little sea, rather than swimming with sharks.

There are many, many families with kids at both Villanova and SJU. Talk with them. My son has HS friends at Villanova and he’s even ridden the train home to DC with them on breaks.

The world is simply different today. I do wish they would limit the number of schools kids apply to, but I guess the schools might miss the cash and “selectivity” that comes with rejecting HS seniors.

Current CIA Director went to La Salle and argues the size of school became his competitive advantage entering State Department. It’s what you make of it!

+1 million!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We toured Georgetown last Spring. Did the big group conference in the hall and then broke into groups for the campus tour.

My DS was literally 1 of 6 cis white males out of the entire group of about 100 prospects. The vast majority of the others were Asian and Indian males. Girls were barely represented.

He didn't even apply. He is high stats, his mom is an undegrad and grad school alum, and his grandfather taught there for two decades.

It isn't what it used to be.

You sound deeply prejudiced against non whites, yet claim that the school is "MAGA idiots" - which one is it?

Pp is odd since gtown isn’t known to be an Asian/indian male school

GU is more diverse than those who have never stepped foot on campus think it is, that is the funny part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Sorry to hear this, pp and op.

My college senior, after being rejected at Georgetown (my alma mater), went to St. Joe’s. There is a lot to be said for being a big fish in a little sea, rather than swimming with sharks.

There are many, many families with kids at both Villanova and SJU. Talk with them. My son has HS friends at Villanova and he’s even ridden the train home to DC with them on breaks.

The world is simply different today.[/b] I do wish they would limit the number of schools kids apply to, but I guess the schools might miss the cash and “selectivity” that comes with rejecting HS seniors.

[b]The number of schools applied to has nothing to do with getting rejected, let's say at Georgetown. There are only a certain number of admission spots.

It does. Kids are blasting applications everywhere. In the 1980s, 1990s--you would apply to 4-5 colleges. Now kids are applying to all 8 Ivies, every top 10 and most of the top 25. So now these schools have close to 50,000-75,000 applicants. It does matter.

Test optional is an other reason these kids are now applying to so many schools too (minus Gtown of couse which isn't TO). A kid that had a 1200 SAT (which was like a 1080 back in the late 80s) would not bother applying to any Ivies--even with a 4.0. Now kids just don't send the scores and VIOLA! you get huge numbers. The screening/cutoff isn't there.

It has adapted. With the deemphasized on test scores and other achievement metrics, the most accomplished applicants cannot be assumed to be the most deserving of admission. Rather than seeking students with the most distinguished academic records, a school might seek those who best represent the state from a demographic perspective or those that will benefit most from the curriculum.

Yeah, but I suspect that is changing as schools have learned that an A from Podunk HS is not the same as an A from other schools it may know better. Colleges and universities have had to invest millions in remedial classes and tutoring for “straight A” kids, TO, who were just passed through. It’s maddening. Then these kids, with excessive extra help, will graduate from top schools. Some will have flourished, learned how to study, worked hard and really be just as meritorious as the kids who went to top rated high schools and killed testing as well. But there will be others that just don’t measure up. That will become the employer’s problem. It’s really not fair. I expect to see more colleges and universities revoke TO, just as MIT did.

This is actually true - I agree with revoking TO, but I do not agree with excessive test prep, or tutoring all through HS in classes that are too rigorous for the student (whose parents claim the U.S. has bad high schools).

[Anonymous]

Fordham and Manhattan College

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

My kid is at a Jesuit high school where lots of kids go on to these colleges. Holy Cross accepts 100% of the kids who applied. The scattergram is literally filled with green circles. So that's what I based my recommendation on. Villanova is a much harder admit. Of course, I don't know OP's kid's info.

Are you guys talking about Holy Cross in Indiana near Notre Dame or College of the Holy Cross in Mass? The one in Mass is pretty hard to get into these days. The one in Indiana is not.

Acceptance rate at HC is around 40%

That stat is misleading. HC is the type of school that doesn’t get kids just applying in large numbers. It is a particular type of kid. In this day and age pure admissions rates are out the window.

Look at common data set.

That said, if you think you kid was competitive to get into ND or GU, you should be fine.

I looked up the cds for holy cross

1420 is the 75th percentile at hc

That’s super low if you are at the median for nd/gu

A median scoring unhooked kid at nd and gt is 75th+ percentile at hc

And if you layer on top being full pay and from a Catholic school — hc is a safety for said aforementioned profile

Yes the OP kid should get in. But to call it an easy safety generally is not correct.

If kid is from a Jesuit HS and was competitive for ND & GU, the HC is a safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

Assumption would be a true safety - up the street from HC. Beautiful school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Public school

Non Catholic?

Public school. We are Catholic, but I don't think it really came through in the application. He was not an altar boy or anything like that.

He'll move on and already has some good choices but it was a disappointment. Not least because a kid with far inferior stats (but legacy) was admitted and the kid & parents have been blowing up social media about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Sorry to hear this, pp and op.

My college senior, after being rejected at Georgetown (my alma mater), went to St. Joe’s. There is a lot to be said for being a big fish in a little sea, rather than swimming with sharks.

There are many, many families with kids at both Villanova and SJU. Talk with them. My son has HS friends at Villanova and he’s even ridden the train home to DC with them on breaks.

The world is simply different today. I do wish they would limit the number of schools kids apply to, but I guess the schools might miss the cash and “selectivity” that comes with rejecting HS seniors.

Current CIA Director went to La Salle and argues the size of school became his competitive advantage entering State Department. It’s what you make of it!

After LaSalle, CIA Director Burns went to Oxford (St. John's College) and then worked in the State Dept. for many years. Burns was a high school valedictorian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Public school

Non Catholic?

Public school. We are Catholic, but I don't think it really came through in the application. He was not an altar boy or anything like that.

He'll move on and already has some good choices but it was a disappointment. Not least because a kid with far inferior stats (but legacy) was admitted and the kid & parents have been blowing up social media about it.

There was a double legacy family (recent poster) that was denied this admission cycle, PP, FWIW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obvious: BC, Villanova, Santa Clara, safety Holy Cross. But you must have considered all these?

Holy Cross a safety? Hardly.

+1 Villanova is the safety on that list.

My 4.4/1520/500+ hours of community service kid (plus a million other ECs and such) got rejected from Villanova today. I wouldn't call it a safety.

Public school

Non Catholic?

Public school. We are Catholic, but I don't think it really came through in the application. He was not an altar boy or anything like that.

He'll move on and already has some good choices but it was a disappointment. Not least because a kid with far inferior stats (but legacy) was admitted and the kid & parents have been blowing up social media about it.

I guess it has just gotten that competitive.

If you see the "If my child gets into their dream school, I won't tell anyone but there will be signs" post on a local page (with the Villanova flag), that's the obnoxious family I'm talking about. GO BACK TO JERSEY.

There was a double legacy family (recent poster) that was denied this admission cycle, PP, FWIW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your child should have applied to at least one safety school that they love. You need to fire whoever has been advising you/her.

How do you know that the student has not applied to other schools ? This was just the EA round.

OP said this:

“My kid is non-Catholic business major.
ND and GU were two top choices.

The next options were Vanderbilt, WashU, Emory, USC, CMU, NYU”

Applied to a few regualr EA schools like Northeastern, UVA, USC, etc.
ND and GU were just top choices.
If it didn't work out, planned to ED2 to schools like Emory, CMU, Vanderbilt, BC

Sorry, but Northeastern, UVA, USC (California), Vanderbilt, Emory, CMU, and even BC are fairly equal to ND and Georgetown. These schools are all high reach or low reach for everyone. BC's acceptance rate for the class of 2027 was 15%. That means 85% of applicants were denied. CMU was 11%, Georgetown 13%, NYU 8%, NE 5.6% (that's insane), ND 11%, USC 10%, Vandy 6%, WashU 12%, UVA 13% OOS, and Emory 10%.

Applying to these schools is fine, but your child will need safety and target schools that they will be happy attending. Things have changed in the last few years and all these schools are hard to get into.

You should not be comparing acceptance rates like this. ND and Georgetown have those acceptance rates without ED (which severely lowers acceptance rates).

[Anonymous]

BC