Are Grades and Test Scores all that Matter at Big State Schools

[Anonymous]

Check each school's Common Data Set to see what else they prioritize and how much

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VT does not focus on grades and test scores. I have no idea what they do care about though.

Grades seemed the most important based on Naviance. It was one of the schools that had an easy to see line - almost everyone got in with a GPA over x and few got in below that number. The Test scores were not as easy to assess.

Maybe at your kid’s school. UVA had a clear line which we appreciated. VT did not for my kid’s school. And results for class of 2022 were even harder to predict. Many high stats kids did not get in. They are clearly chasing something other than grades and test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VT does not focus on grades and test scores. I have no idea what they do care about though.

Grades seemed the most important based on Naviance. It was one of the schools that had an easy to see line - almost everyone got in with a GPA over x and few got in below that number. The Test scores were not as easy to assess.

Maybe at your kid’s school. UVA had a clear line which we appreciated. VT did not for my kid’s school. And results for class of 2022 were even harder to predict. Many high stats kids did not get in. They are clearly chasing something other than grades and test scores.

But many did. They don't have room for ALL high stats kids, so they have to pick and choose. Why can't people realize this?
DP

[Anonymous]

But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

The are just not the *only* thing that's relevant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

I'm sure the essays are read, but there's not enough time and admissions staff to give all of them THAT close a look. Some applications are weeded out early to focus on others.

[Anonymous]

VT waitlisted some high stats kids this year so they could better predict enrollment.

They have also been clear that they want to increase their 1st Gen population. Kids from UMC families who were using it as a safety did not get in (some of the time).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

The are just not the *only* thing that's relevant

Yes, and OP’s question was whether grades and test scores are all that matter at big state schools. And I answered that no, that is not the case at VT. They look at other factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

I'm sure the essays are read, but there's not enough time and admissions staff to give all of them THAT close a look. Some applications are weeded out early to focus on others.

Unless you are an adcom, you have no way of saying what happens. If it was so easy, why do we wait weeks and weeks to hear back from some of these schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

I'm sure the essays are read, but there's not enough time and admissions staff to give all of them THAT close a look. Some applications are weeded out early to focus on others.

Unless you are an adcom, you have no way of saying what happens. If it was so easy, why do we wait weeks and weeks to hear back from some of these schools?

Many schools hire temporary staff to read through them and rank order them. My neighbor did this for UC Berkeley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

I'm sure the essays are read, but there's not enough time and admissions staff to give all of them THAT close a look. Some applications are weeded out early to focus on others.

Unless you are an adcom, you have no way of saying what happens. If it was so easy, why do we wait weeks and weeks to hear back from some of these schools?

Many schools hire temporary staff to read through them and rank order them. My neighbor did this for UC Berkeley.

No school is rank ordering 45,000 applications (e.g. that kid'e application is ranked 36, 264).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But lower stats kids did get in. That’s why we know stats are not relevant to VT.

Obviously, those "lower stats" kids had things your kid did not. You have no idea what they brought to the table - what kinds of EC, leadership, commitments outside of school, interests, etc. No idea whatsoever. You also have no idea the rigor of their classes, etc. In short, you simply don't know, though you obviously think you have all the answers.

One thing is for certain - VT is not closely examining or carefully scrutinizing each of its 45,000 applications.

They DO read the essays, which they deem "very important."

I'm sure the essays are read, but there's not enough time and admissions staff to give all of them THAT close a look. Some applications are weeded out early to focus on others.

Unless you are an adcom, you have no way of saying what happens. If it was so easy, why do we wait weeks and weeks to hear back from some of these schools?

Many schools hire temporary staff to read through them and rank order them. My neighbor did this for UC Berkeley.

No school is rank ordering 45,000 applications (e.g. that kid'e application is ranked 36, 264).

Are you saying I'm a liar? Honest to God, my neighbor did this. Unless you are saying they have a cut off and only read the ones above that, which he did not tell me, but I could imagine. I believe they read their stack and presented the ones they felt were meritorious. I did not literally mean they rank 45,000 kids. My wording was imprecise.