What are the most common/unremarkable ECs?

[Anonymous]

Need to get away from the idea that activities are awards in and of themselves, that activities carrying some sort of outward prestige are required. That just isn't the case. There are all sorts of qualities like intellectual curiosity and taking initiative (i.e., leadership) that can be shown through non-special activities. It's all in what you do and how you then describe that.

[Anonymous]

Your kids should dive into ECs they love and that enriches their lives, not check boxes off to get into some school.

If the things they have chosen to immerse themselves in aren't "good enough" for a school then I'd argue the child isn't a fit in the first place.

Expecting kids to just do random things they have zero interest in for the purposes of getting into one of these schools is entirely stupid, let them enjoy their ECs and go from there. Anyone who does otherwise is setting their kids up for a lifetime of stress having been micromanaged to death to the point they can't even follow their own interests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your kids should dive into ECs they love and that enriches their lives, not check boxes off to get into some school.

If the things they have chosen to immerse themselves in aren't "good enough" for a school then I'd argue the child isn't a fit in the first place.

Expecting kids to just do random things they have zero interest in for the purposes of getting into one of these schools is entirely stupid, let them enjoy their ECs and go from there. Anyone who does otherwise is setting their kids up for a lifetime of stress having been micromanaged to death to the point they can't even follow their own interests

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Need to get away from the idea that activities are awards in and of themselves, that activities carrying some sort of outward prestige are required. That just isn't the case. There are all sorts of qualities like intellectual curiosity and taking initiative (i.e., leadership) that can be shown through non-special activities. It's all in what you do and how you then describe that.

Yes, agree. and its why certain college counselors do really well with their placement in T20

[Anonymous]

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

If your kids are doing things just to check a box perhaps that's part of the problem and you should encourage them to look beyond "what do I need to do to get into X school" and just do things they enjoy. Maybe this line of thought is the problem. If your kids aren't passionate about their ECs I'd say they should find other ECs they are passionate about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is our example with our 2 white privileged kids, one at IVY, the other at a t25:

2 yrs ago - T25 kid: 1520 SAT 3.9 UW GPA. Violin, volunteering at non profit, sports, denied at all IVYs applied.

Last yr - IVY Kid: 1380 SAT, 3.7 UW GPA. Started business selling his product to 10 different countries and sold it for $40k beginning of Sr year. donated it all to a charity for kids prior to application, was in the local news. Pre-College summer program in Europe before Sr yr. Sport in HS. Accepted at 3 IVYs and 2 t20.

That is impressive and you can see exactly what made the difference. It is demonstrable initiative, innovation and social consciousness. Well done your kid.

Absolutely. It has frustrated kid #1 as she has always been considered the “smart one” by everybody else outside out family. She is thriving now, but I know this has bothered her a lot. All those hours working to get a 98 on all her AP classes and Calc BC, while son slacked a little in HS since his focus was on his little business and didnt even take Calc AB…..he maxed out at Honors Pre-Calc…..

He wouldn’t have achieved it without test optional. She’s rightfully upset that he’s this under qualified but allowed into an Ivy.

And yet, he’s had a 4.0 his Freshman yr….high A’s in everything…..kids just mature academically at their own pace. He was way too busy to focus as much on academics in HS as his sister did. He is not any less smart or capable. I’m glad these IVY’s didnt have YOU as an AO..

yeah that is just a bitter a hole.

What he has is entrepreneurial spirit, as you will know. Gates, Bezos, Jobs etc.

calm down, the kids is hardly a bezos.

Those are entrepreneurs. That is the comparison. Do catch up!

your neighborhood dry cleaning owner is also an entrepreneur.

Don't be silly - they are a small business owner not and entrepreneur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

If your kids are doing things just to check a box perhaps that's part of the problem and you should encourage them to look beyond "what do I need to do to get into X school" and just do things they enjoy. Maybe this line of thought is the problem. If your kids aren't passionate about their ECs I'd say they should find other ECs they are passionate about.

Its what your kids would be doing if no one was ever looking. And how that's conveyed/woven throughout the application.
Successful applications do this in a way that appears effortless - and maybe it is bc its an authentic interest.

The cynic in me knows that some private college counselors know how to emulate this "feel".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

If your kids are doing things just to check a box perhaps that's part of the problem and you should encourage them to look beyond "what do I need to do to get into X school" and just do things they enjoy. Maybe this line of thought is the problem. If your kids aren't passionate about their ECs I'd say they should find other ECs they are passionate about.

there are no EC they are "passionate" about. it's a stupid word. they will still kick ass out of your "passionate" kids and write excellent essays about it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids should dive into ECs they love and that enriches their lives, not check boxes off to get into some school.

If the things they have chosen to immerse themselves in aren't "good enough" for a school then I'd argue the child isn't a fit in the first place.

Expecting kids to just do random things they have zero interest in for the purposes of getting into one of these schools is entirely stupid, let them enjoy their ECs and go from there. Anyone who does otherwise is setting their kids up for a lifetime of stress having been micromanaged to death to the point they can't even follow their own interests

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

if they aren't passionate about it, they probably aren't defined by those ECs. In which, sadly, they aren't important enough to make or break your candidacy.
Or its good enough for a T50-100....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the most common/unremarkable ECs, unremarkable meaning that an admissions officer would not give much weight to them due to how widespread it is, even if there is leadership involved, and that would only catch an AOs eye if you won a national-level award for the EC?

IMO, the most common, especially in this area, would be student government, debate/model un, academic team/math/science/etc Olympiad, NHS, odyssey, Scouts, rec sports, and maybe theater

Someone published a tier list of ECs and it seemed to get general agreement from a lot of people.

What it basically boils down to is that anything that is merely an extracurricular activities are mundane and doesn't really count for much other than give you something to put on the application
You are looking for extracurricular accomplishments.

Getting elected to student government or being the editor of your school newspaper is competitive and will be seen as a minor accomplishment
Eagle Scout/Black Belt is seen as a common but minor accomplishment
Being a starter for a championship team is seen as a minor accomplishment
Local awards are seen as a minor accomplishment.

Once you start getting regional or state level recognition (you not your team or your school, you), your accomplishments get more recognition.

Eagle Scout is a national recognition - FYI.

It's a middle of the road activity for conformists who want to go to mediocre colleges.

no, that would be coin collecting, bird watching, origami etc

Yes, those too. It is 100% on a par with those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the most common/unremarkable ECs, unremarkable meaning that an admissions officer would not give much weight to them due to how widespread it is, even if there is leadership involved, and that would only catch an AOs eye if you won a national-level award for the EC?

IMO, the most common, especially in this area, would be student government, debate/model un, academic team/math/science/etc Olympiad, NHS, odyssey, Scouts, rec sports, and maybe theater

Someone published a tier list of ECs and it seemed to get general agreement from a lot of people.

What it basically boils down to is that anything that is merely an extracurricular activities are mundane and doesn't really count for much other than give you something to put on the application
You are looking for extracurricular accomplishments.

Getting elected to student government or being the editor of your school newspaper is competitive and will be seen as a minor accomplishment
Eagle Scout/Black Belt is seen as a common but minor accomplishment
Being a starter for a championship team is seen as a minor accomplishment
Local awards are seen as a minor accomplishment.

Once you start getting regional or state level recognition (you not your team or your school, you), your accomplishments get more recognition.

Eagle Scout is a national recognition - FYI.

It's a middle of the road activity for conformists who want to go to mediocre colleges.

uh.. a bunch of high achieving kids who have similar stats and activities end up at T20s.

You don't know what "conformist" means, clearly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids should dive into ECs they love and that enriches their lives, not check boxes off to get into some school.

If the things they have chosen to immerse themselves in aren't "good enough" for a school then I'd argue the child isn't a fit in the first place.

Expecting kids to just do random things they have zero interest in for the purposes of getting into one of these schools is entirely stupid, let them enjoy their ECs and go from there. Anyone who does otherwise is setting their kids up for a lifetime of stress having been micromanaged to death to the point they can't even follow their own interests

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

if they aren't passionate about it, they probably aren't defined by those ECs. In which, sadly, they aren't important enough to make or break your candidacy.
Or its good enough for a T50-100....

okay... my kids have been playing their instruments for a long time, with some success (CMs, all state). their teachers are very successful musicians who do nothing but teach and perform all day long. i've had a lot of long conversations with those musicians. a lot of professional musicians are not very "passionate" about music in your crass understanding of passion. they don't describe themselves that way and have experienced various crises during their young years. you don't become a professional musician or even develop notable EC based on a passion.

[Anonymous]

Your post shows your ignorance of the process OP. Any EC can be turned into a winning formula. Order some books off Amz about college admissions. That's what I did. It worked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not how it works. ECs are table stakes for showing you don't play video games exclusively.

Rare ECs are a boost for useful but rare skills like getting a bassoonist in the orchestra vs the 50th violinist that they don't need (but it's still fine as a basic EC/C for well roundedness)

Leadership activity is for showing you aren't a pure sheep, not about how huge of a leader you are in high school.

Awards are considered separately, and can be EC or C, that make the school famous.

Basket weaving is rare but not very interesting, while robotics is common but in more demand for engineering programs.

you sound like quite a sheep yourself. there are fewer bassoonists than violinists, sure, but also little need for them. bassoon repertoire is minimal and boring and they play three notes per concert.

in contrast, violin is the most important instrument in orchestra, by far. first violins carry all the tunes, CM leads the whole orchestra and has frequent solos.

Cellos are more interesting than violins and you get a chance to shine if there's only 4 of you instead of dozens. But I agree, the bassoon is basically percussion. Triangle anyone?

Rude! How about the oboe? That good enough for you? I can’t imagine valuing orchestral music without seeing the important role each instrument plays.

Back in the day I had a friend who switched to oboe from piano because she wanted to major in music performance and apparently that was the easiest instrument she could switch to in the middle of high school and still get into school for...and she did! Not a top school or even a top music school, but still.

So...at least at some point oboe had value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you are assuming that there is always a stark line between activities students are passionate about, on one hand, and activities required to get into a selective college, on the other.

but this is not the case. a lot of kids are not particularly passionate about any of their activities, even ones they excel at. meanwhile, it's not quite clear what colleges are looking for, either. it makes sense that people are trying to figure that out..

If your kids are doing things just to check a box perhaps that's part of the problem and you should encourage them to look beyond "what do I need to do to get into X school" and just do things they enjoy. Maybe this line of thought is the problem. If your kids aren't passionate about their ECs I'd say they should find other ECs they are passionate about.

there are no EC they are "passionate" about. it's a stupid word. they will still kick ass out of your "passionate" kids and write excellent essays about it

Some people think you have to be passionate about something to be good at it.
About 20 years ago, I was seated next to a well regarded violin instructor at an event.
We talked about passion and music and how passion is an indispensable trait in a musician.
At some point, the demographics of his students started to change and he started getting a bunch of students that he got very excited about only to watch them drop music and go to medical school or law school.
They were literally using music to get into college and then turning music into a hobby.
His disappointment in some of his former student picking medicine/finance/law over music was palpable.
He said the world needed that kid to be a musician more than it needed another investment banker.
The problem is that the NY philharmonic might pay $400K and is a really tough gig to get.
Meanwhile there are thousands of doctors, lawyers and bankers that make more than that with much less effort.

IOW, it doesn't necessarily take passion to get good at playing the violin; it takes passion to dedicate your life to becoming a violinist but even an expert cannot tell which kids have that passion and which kids are just good at music. How the heck is some 30 year old admissions officer supposed to know.