Did any high stats kids get rejected from all top 20s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course, ALL THE TIME! Are you new here? There’s NEVER a guarantee of getting into a top 20, no matter how high the stats. And if the child is an UMC white kid from the suburbs who isn’t a recruited athlete, it’s more likely that they won’t get in.

Most of the kids at T20s ARE UMC white kids from the suburbs.

The recruited athlete thing is overblown given the limited roster spots, but guess what? Most of those T20 athlete roster spots go to UMC white kids too!

[Anonymous]

Are you thinking that applying to 20 schools with 10% acceptance rates means you’re 100% getting into one?

You can do everything right and you should still expect a rejection because that’s what 90% of the people get. They have their pick among thousands of excellent applications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you thinking that applying to 20 schools with 10% acceptance rates means you’re 100% getting into one?

You can do everything right and you should still expect a rejection because that’s what 90% of the people get. They have their pick among thousands of excellent applications.

It’s not exactly a slot machine. Some kids do get in everywhere and some rejected everywhere. Come on now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course, ALL THE TIME! Are you new here? There’s NEVER a guarantee of getting into a top 20, no matter how high the stats. And if the child is an UMC white kid from the suburbs who isn’t a recruited athlete, it’s more likely that they won’t get in.

Most of the kids at T20s ARE UMC white kids from the suburbs.

The recruited athlete thing is overblown given the limited roster spots, but guess what? Most of those T20 athlete roster spots go to UMC white kids too!

Not necessarily. DP here.

OP, until the last couple of years, qualified applicants did not apply to all T20s - now, it is common place, and there are videos by students who do so (and get accepted to most/all). It seems students feel that they now have to apply to all T20s, not just their select few. So you may not be getting accurate information, even if they applicant was accepted, they may or may not have applied to all, as students currently do .

[Anonymous]

My high stats (1550, tons of APs) "UMC black kid" got rejected from all reaches and will go to UMD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My high stats (1550, tons of APs) "UMC black kid" got rejected from all reaches and will go to UMD.

UMD is a good school.

And...was your " UMC black kid's" UW GPA
omitted on purpose?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, they are at UMD for CS with merit. Another CS major friend of theirs who has an amazing application was also shut out and is with my DC at UMD, with merit.
Both kids went to magnet programs, 4.0 unwgpa and nearly 5.0 wgpa, SAT scores 1580+.

There are actually a lot of such kids at UMD, for CS at least.

DC: 1550, 4.0 u/w also attending UMD CS w/merit. UMD was their top target.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, they are at UMD for CS with merit. Another CS major friend of theirs who has an amazing application was also shut out and is with my DC at UMD, with merit.
Both kids went to magnet programs, 4.0 unwgpa and nearly 5.0 wgpa, SAT scores 1580+.

There are actually a lot of such kids at UMD, for CS at least.

DC: 1550, 4.0 u/w also attending UMD CS w/merit. UMD was their top target.

UMD CS w/merit is a fantastic outcome, congrats!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

It's your job to convince a "safety school" that you actually want to attend. Just like it's the school's job to manage yield and keep it high.
If you do your job, you will most likely get accepted at your safety, same for targets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

[Anonymous]

Rejected by all the women's colleges strongly suggests she never mentioned why she wanted to go to a women's college or her reasons were not deep or believable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

The only explanation is yield protection with the exception of Barnard and Wellesley. Did your DC apply ED to Wellesley? That would have made a big difference in the outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rejected by all the women's colleges strongly suggests she never mentioned why she wanted to go to a women's college or her reasons were not deep or believable.

Agree. I have a kid at an all women’s college who was accepted at all she applied to. This was an important piece of her application (and it probably rang true because she was targeting all women’s
Colleges).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL. “Safeties” are not right below the top 20. Almost everyone needs to apply to at least one college that accepts more than it rejects. Being >75th percentile in GPA and SAT doesn’t guarantee you admission.

Some of those colleges may yield protect so for high stats kids, they could get flat out rejected.

My DC, 1560 SAT, 4.0 u/w, 6APs only applied to SLACs. We are perplexed with the outcome.

Got accepted into Carleton, Grinnell, Haverford, Davidson and Vassar. Accepted Grinnell's offer.

Rejected by lower ranked LACs Skidmore, F&M, Oberlin, Mount Holyoke. Waitlisted by St. Olaf and Depauw. Which one of these colleges yield protect?

Other rejections were Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard and Wellesley.

Wellesley was her top choice. Still confused what happened.

Public or private HS?
This looks like YP and maybe the applications were not tailored enough for Barnard and Wellesley.
The kids we got into these 2 schools from our private in RD were TO and 3.8+uw......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, of course, ALL THE TIME! Are you new here? There’s NEVER a guarantee of getting into a top 20, no matter how high the stats. And if the child is an UMC white kid from the suburbs who isn’t a recruited athlete, it’s more likely that they won’t get in.

Most of the kids at T20s ARE UMC white kids from the suburbs.

The recruited athlete thing is overblown given the limited roster spots, but guess what? Most of those T20 athlete roster spots go to UMC white kids too!

Not necessarily. DP here.

OP, until the last couple of years, qualified applicants did not apply to all T20s - now, it is common place, and there are videos by students who do so (and get accepted to most/all). It seems students feel that they now have to apply to all T20s, not just their select few. So you may not be getting accurate information, even if they applicant was accepted, they may or may not have applied to all, as students currently do .

Another DP. White and Asian are the majorities by far at T20, but you seem to be suggesting that somehiw URMs have more acceptances overall? The only way to consider the amount of overall acceptances is anecdotally, and those echo the admitted stats. Kids getting into several T20s are also heavily white and Asian. If you go on these campuses, you really see how much of a discrepancy there is.