What tips an AO's decision for a cusp candidate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not an AO, just a parent of a T5 early admit this cycle, but DC’s quantitative factors are fairly indistinguishable from any other “high stats, max rigor” student. From the individualized note the AO sent after admittance, it seems DC’s personality, as evidenced by ECs, essays, and presumably LOR, was indeed the difference-maker.

what parts of your DC's personality? Curious about what character traits you think were difference-makers?
Waiting for decisions for my current senior - so not much they can do now!

AO note referenced DC’s empathy, collaborative spirit, and the impact they had on their community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read the links, but I absolutely believe this to be true and many have said it. They want to know what you’re going to do to add to their campus and what resources you’re going to take advantage of on campus. It does the school no good to have a brainiac that never leaves their dorm. They want contributors that are engaged to make a dynamic campus who then become engaged alumni and financial contributors

If you have toured a few top 10s in the last 2 years, you will see that perhaps these schools were focusing too much on the academic overachievers and ignoring the soft personality skills. It seems that there are A LOT of introverted and awkward kids. Perhaps they are trying to change the dynamic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's likeability, which of course is problematic since different people define it differently. But positive, curious and kind are the qualities that feed into it. It's compatible with driven, but not the same thing. Too many people use the essays to show how driven they are. That's evident in the high stats. You want to be likeable.

Doesn’t this favor extroverted popular social kids?

I don’t think this is it necessarily. DH has a coworker who is a former AO. She said professors and faculty advisors ask them to be on the lookout for particular things. There’s no way to know what those things are - maybe this year the jazz band needs an alto sax, the paper needs a sports photographer and an opinion writer, and the dance department needs a jazz choreographer. So they’re not just looking for likely contributors to campus community, but very specific contributors. No kid needs to do All The Things, but your kid might be lucky enough to do The Thing (or one of the things) they’ve been asked to look out for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's likeability, which of course is problematic since different people define it differently. But positive, curious and kind are the qualities that feed into it. It's compatible with driven, but not the same thing. Too many people use the essays to show how driven they are. That's evident in the high stats. You want to be likeable.

Doesn’t this favor extroverted popular social kids?

Not necessarily. These schools just want “do-ers”. This includes more quiet, introverted kids who have made an impact in the activities and ECs of their choice.

Those ECs don’t have to involve huge groups or popular kids. But the applicant should be able to translate / connect what they’ve chosen to do in high school to something they would do or contribute to the college campus.

And yes, their recommendations should describe how they’ve made an impact in the classroom. Again, they don’t have to be the loud extravert who talks constantly. There are plenty of ways more introverted kids contribute and demonstrate their positivity, elevate the discussions, and show kindness to their classmates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's likeability, which of course is problematic since different people define it differently. But positive, curious and kind are the qualities that feed into it. It's compatible with driven, but not the same thing. Too many people use the essays to show how driven they are. That's evident in the high stats. You want to be likeable.

No, I think it is more filtering out problems and looking for people who will contribute to campus life in a good way. They have a lot of similar kids to choose from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read the links, but I absolutely believe this to be true and many have said it. They want to know what you’re going to do to add to their campus and what resources you’re going to take advantage of on campus. It does the school no good to have a brainiac that never leaves their dorm. They want contributors that are engaged to make a dynamic campus who then become engaged alumni and financial contributors

If you have toured a few top 10s in the last 2 years, you will see that perhaps these schools were focusing too much on the academic overachievers and ignoring the soft personality skills. It seems that there are A LOT of introverted and awkward kids. Perhaps they are trying to change the dynamic?

Yup. Introverted is fine. I know TONS of introverts who are engaging and impactful in settings that suit them or with people they know and like. There’s nothing awkward about them. They’re just not into constantly meeting new people or huge groups or mixing it up with tons of new kids etc.

What colleges don’t need are reclusive kids. The ones who shut themselves in their rooms or the library for whatever reason. Sure, they might be brilliant with the potential to do something huge academically or scientifically etc.

But there are tons of kids who can do all that AND make an impact as the arts editor of the school paper or the head of a club sport or a peer mental health counselor or a first year mentor or an organizer of a conference or speaker series.

The truth is academic brilliance is way more common than many parents want to believe. Top 10 schools could fill their classes 20x over with it. So that’s a given in order to be considered. The real question is what else will the applicant add to the school’s community in their own authentic way?

[Anonymous]

I agree they want to see community (school) engagement. They don’t want kids who are only in it for themselves and their resume. I think that is why some high stats kids don’t do as well as their parents think they should. This aspect becomes clear in the recommendations.

I also think they know some of these high stats kids have cheated their way through high school and probably try to suss that out, although it is hard because nohigh school is going to call it out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First link is just parents. No AOs.

Second link is mostly parents and students. I don't see an AO flair. That reddit makes AOs email proof to get the flair since it's anonymous.

Someone was former AO. Read through

ONE person who worked in admissions, but we don't know at what capacity or for now long. Were they one of the temps charged with filling in program and GPA? Were they an actual decision maker? For how long?

We as adults need to have better critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on some of the other questions, what tips an AO decision for a borderline candidate? I saw this post on Reddit today, and this response made me pause - this seems like they are filtering for personality.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1i7z43z/what_is_that_one_factor_that_pushes_kids_over_the/

"Often, it’s just the sense that the applicant is a good egg who will likely be highly involved in and contribute to campus life: a considerate roommate, an intellectually curious and conscientious student, and an enthusiastic community member who will join clubs, serve on executive boards, perform improv, write for the student newspaper, lead hikes for the outdoors center, and otherwise contribute to a welcoming, fun, and varied campus community."

this other thread also had some surprising responses from former AOs:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1i4mr89/whats_up_with_the_aos/

I truly believe this is what helped my kid have such a successful application process last year. She was so genuine in her essays and is a super-involved kid - not just joining or holding leadership roles, but actively showing results in organizations in which she was a part. No surprise she is continuing that in her first year of college. They know who will contribute to their schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's likeability, which of course is problematic since different people define it differently. But positive, curious and kind are the qualities that feed into it. It's compatible with driven, but not the same thing. Too many people use the essays to show how driven they are. That's evident in the high stats. You want to be likeable.

Doesn’t this favor extroverted popular social kids?

Not necessarily. My DC was involved in some of the nerdiest activities (it's okay, they think so, too - it's their sweet spot ) and became the hype person for those. They grew organizations and became a cheerleader for others' success and said yes to every opportunity that resulted from their involvement. They also became very close to teachers and club advisors and I'm sure that helped immeasurably with recs.

[Anonymous]

all of this is very helpful.

also, it does explain why some of the "high stats" no-personality (less dynamic) kids at our high school had less impressive results.

[Anonymous]

I don’t really feel like I need to hear an AO (even thought I have on many a podcast), tell me they are looking for evidence of strong character and likability. It doesn’t have to translate to extrovert. I recall one mentioning a LOR that spoke about a student being very quiet but so well respected by her peers that when she spoke you could hear a pin drop as her opinions were so valued. In today’s age and how polarized our society is, they want kids that can collaborate, have an open mind, and work nicely with others.

[Anonymous]

Not surprisingly, much of this favors extroverted, attention-grabbing kind of kids. The quiet leaders don’t make the same kind of bold impression. Popularity is irrelevant. Quirky or nerdy doesn’t matter either. It’s the extroverts that have a leg up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not surprisingly, much of this favors extroverted, attention-grabbing kind of kids. The quiet leaders don’t make the same kind of bold impression. Popularity is irrelevant. Quirky or nerdy doesn’t matter either. It’s the extroverts that have a leg up.

Not exclusively. As other apps have noted, AOs want to see genuine kindness, team/collaboration and empathy. My DS is a happy, positive introvert (classic definition- he needs tome to recharge, not a showman, not at all flashy, and needs time to fully warm up with new people, a self-described nerd). Last cycle he got into all colleges he applied to, including all three of HYS. The AO noted an essay he wrote about not being picked for the Quiz team (super nerdy activity) but wanting his team to succeed so much that he put aside his disappointment and became an unofficial coach, helper, cheerleader helping the team get better in every aspect. He says even the teachers didn’t really know he was doing this, but perhaps some teacher did and included it in their recommendation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t read the links, but I absolutely believe this to be true and many have said it. They want to know what you’re going to do to add to their campus and what resources you’re going to take advantage of on campus. It does the school no good to have a brainiac that never leaves their dorm. They want contributors that are engaged to make a dynamic campus who then become engaged alumni and financial contributors

This. If you read Reddit, you'll see that many of the STEM kids only have things like Science Olympiads, external internships and volunteer work on their resumes. They've contributed next to nothing to their own high school communities. They don't tend to do well in admissions.

Volunteering is the perfect way for introverts to be involved in their school or community.

Agree with pp upthread that what is described in op favors extroverts.