In your opinion, how should the elite colleges decide conduct admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No recruited athletes - sports as just another EC. No legacy. Standardized test required as part of admissions decisions. One application deadline - no ED/EA/REA. Schools can only have one supplemental essay and one LOC that must be from a teacher.

Admissions staff say they care about the mental and emotional well-being of the students but the system they are part is f is almost abusive.

It is honestly shocking colleges can get as many applications as they do, making students run in circles with different deadlines, admissions types, hidden admissions practices with relatively vague advice that lead students to pick up rigorous classes, many different "impactful" extracurriculars (but not too many of course, because that is bad for some reason), etc. It's all a game that is genuinely detrimental to highschool students and needs to have some standardization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people care a lot about the SAT, while others think the extracurriculars are what count. What do you think?

It's not either or. With elite colleges, the academic profile is the the baseline and everyone meets and exceeds that threshold. ECs are differentiators. With lower level schools, ECs don't matter. They just pretend it does.

This. Students at the elite schools have the academic chops AND the ECs. Thus idea that a 1590 somehow ranks someone's IQ above a 1540 is nonsense. I taught SAT prep, and they are coachable tests, not some IQ determinant. This obsession is ridiculous and just offbase. It's not an either/or. It's yes, and...

[Anonymous]

Kid gets a number from common app. No demographic information allowed. Admission based on GPA, test scores, ECs, essay and recommendations. Again no mention of any demographic information allowed in response.

Limit applications to 9 schools 3 reach, 3 target and 3 safety.

On school side have a set percentage of admits set aside for athletes and school defined critical needs not to exceed 20%, remainder based on wholistic score based on GPA, test scores, ECs, essay and recommendations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

Not the American way. The culture of college in the US is academics plus social life/athletics/clubs/etc.

It was the American way for most of America. This shift is relatively recent and has become poisonous to our institutions who've had to reduce the quality of te education to keep up with the test optional dummies and the 1520, which now means nothing. We need smart people back in our top colleges.

This is not correct. The previous American was was money, personal connections, private school connections and legacy. Those are still active but not as significant and public school kids like mine have a shot. Met a lady who, once she found out my kid got into an Ivy, cornered her at the ladies room to rant about how her kid shouldn't have settled for a T30 when she was an "A+" student. She didn't even think to ask if my kid (winner of multiple national awards) had anything to merit the admission. So entitled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

Not the American way. The culture of college in the US is academics plus social life/athletics/clubs/etc.

It was the American way for most of America. This shift is relatively recent and has become poisonous to our institutions who've had to reduce the quality of te education to keep up with the test optional dummies and the 1520, which now means nothing. We need smart people back in our top colleges.

The American way for most of America was rich/white/connected regardless of intellect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By height

Or whoever can run the fastest

[Anonymous]

No one's educational experience is enhanced by a class of drones. That being said, for highly selective schools I'd want to see the stress on class rigor and being challenged, GPA, SAT/ACT test scores, interesting ECs that really demonstrate some passion and talent, teacher recommendations, and can they write a compelling essay.

I'd get rid of legacy, significant wealth, and nearly all admissions advantages for athletes. If Duke wants a competitive basketball team, fine. I understand that's a special thing. Same with Notre Dame football. But crew and tennis and lacrosse and soccer and Columbia football are pretty ridiculous. The SLACs are usually appalling with this. Nearly half of Williams and Amherst are "athletes."

I'd also put way less emphasis on race even in the post SC era. Context always matters, but have seen way too many mediocre private school students getting spots solely because they check a box. It's never the brilliant kid from SE or the immigrant in Gaithersburg with the 1300 that gets into a T20. I would, however, really like to find the first generation and low income smart kids. That's a special group of students.

I'd also limit the international admits for undergrad. Grad school is a different story. But for undergrad, no student has ever said all that's missing from my college experience is more wealthy students from mainland China and the Persian Gulf.

Basically, less class. More talent.

[Anonymous]

1. Absolutely no identifying information, including school name. No names/addresses- nothing.
2. Standardized school profile reporting (class rank/percentiles, etc)
3. Sat/act mandatory
4. Limit number of applications
5. Limit EC section to 3 . Accompanied by an essay on each
6. No personal essay. Only essay topics that show how one thinks- solve a problem, etc.
7. No ED. Kids can force rank . But no requirements to attend if admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

Sounds like a boring crowd of admits, all with the same profile then.

+1

How about we just let the universities decide what they want to do. Simple easy solution.

If you have the "resume" for a T25, then you will likely gain admission to several in the 25-75 range (if not a T25). I prefer the diversity and variety of students that the current system brings. I wouldn't want to attend school with 1600 kids who all had 1580+ and 10+ APs, there are plenty of "equally smart" kids who only got a 1500 but have done so much more already with their path in life. Admit them.

I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

Are you an educator? I have no idea about information processing capability of recent school admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

This is not what elite college is supposed to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By height

Photos. By looks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT needs to go back to being an IQ test and should be the basis of admission along with gpa. No more extracurriculars! They are turning high schoolers into freaks who can do research but can barely process information.

Sounds like a boring crowd of admits, all with the same profile then.

This is what racist whites always say when they know their lazy kids will be outworked by Asians.

Straight A white boy, perfect scores, straight A athlete —got in everywhere. Ivy bound

Gpa/courseload/scores as cutoff. After that can look holistically. But - for elite, everyone is straight As or close with high scores. After that essays and extracurriculars matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No recruited athletes - sports as just another EC. No legacy. Standardized test required as part of admissions decisions. One application deadline - no ED/EA/REA. Schools can only have one supplemental essay and one LOC that must be from a teacher.

Admissions staff say they care about the mental and emotional well-being of the students but the system they are part is f is almost abusive.

+! AGREE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one's educational experience is enhanced by a class of drones. That being said, for highly selective schools I'd want to see the stress on class rigor and being challenged, GPA, SAT/ACT test scores, interesting ECs that really demonstrate some passion and talent, teacher recommendations, and can they write a compelling essay.

I'd get rid of legacy, significant wealth, and nearly all admissions advantages for athletes. If Duke wants a competitive basketball team, fine. I understand that's a special thing. Same with Notre Dame football. But crew and tennis and lacrosse and soccer and Columbia football are pretty ridiculous. The SLACs are usually appalling with this. Nearly half of Williams and Amherst are "athletes."

I'd also put way less emphasis on race even in the post SC era. Context always matters, but have seen way too many mediocre private school students getting spots solely because they check a box. It's never the brilliant kid from SE or the immigrant in Gaithersburg with the 1300 that gets into a T20. I would, however, really like to find the first generation and low income smart kids. That's a special group of students.

I'd also limit the international admits for undergrad. Grad school is a different story. But for undergrad, no student has ever said all that's missing from my college experience is more wealthy students from mainland China and the Persian Gulf.

Basically, less class. More talent.

You want "talent" but you kept ranting about athletes. You do know that athletic performance requires talent, right? So much so that as a general rule only about 7% of high school athletes have the talent to compete at any level in college.

And Amherst and Williams athletes are, in fact, genuine athletes not "athletes" in skeptical quotes as you put it.

I'm sorry your kid got cut from the 8th grade club team but why haven't you gotten over it by now?