Anyone else thinks the whole college admission process is a total farse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why as parents are you conveying to your children that they are failures if they don't essentially win Powerball? Even with a "holistic" approach how do you know that your child would be one of the chosen? For them - their extras will top other kids scores, but your child should be ahead of all kids w/ scores beneath them? This is not rational and doesn't help your kids. People in this area need to stop using their kids schools as their own prestige and take that pressure off of their kids. My dad wouldn't put my high SLAC school's sign on his car because I didnt' get into an IVY (despite the scores but clueless to the college game 1st gen american parents) and only put on my ivy grad school and it bothers me to this day. Your relationship with your kids is more important than saying they went to a fancy school at cocktail parties

[phone]

The stress on kids today from their parents seeking prestige is ridiculous and leading to mental health as well as many other issues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I totally agree. Although it seems rough, I think countries that base it all on one exam have a system that makes more sense. Set a lower threshold for kids from below a certain income level to ensure parity.

Except in those countries cheating is rampant and the wealthy get to skip the test entirely.

Don't fool yourself that anyone has really figured it out.

But it is much much worse than it was 15 or 20 years ago. There was a semblance of merit and college decisions made sense. It was never surprising who got into Harvard. Now it feels completely random and out of control. Our universities are shooting themselves in the foot. Their prestige and credibility are suffering.

How? Harvard still has the class of freshman they want. They just get to pick from double the number of applicants

+1 More applicants from the US and the rest of the world, and most with some very strong hook that makes Harvard look at them seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep. 100%

The amount of lying and marketing oneself and trying to show you have some trauma or special adversity or belong to some outlier group so you can curry favor to Admin officers. It's gross.

And the fake non-profits and the no standards at times with overinflated gpas and no test results.

It's really gotten so out of hand given the sheer volume of applicants universities now face.

I swear it should be changed to this:

Everyone that meets certain requirements all get put in the hat and then they pull out admits like a lottery. At some point it's just too much.

All of these actions are based on heresy, mostly from parents who are just as clueless as the next person. I've never heard an AO say they want trauma or non-profits. Stop believing random strangers for something this important.

Not true. The heart-string stories. A friend was an AO at a top state university and the discussions were often said of very qualified kids from MC/UMC/!% that they never had to experience adversity. They were essentially penalized for coming from functional, normal backgrounds and being neurotypical 'normal' , but exceptional kids.

Most of the people who work in AO as a whole are not highly intelligent…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Despite this thread seeming a little whiny, I think it is fair for middle-class parents who don't have legacy status or generational wealth to feel like the system doesn't work for them. Their kids may be second or third generation Americans, just one generation removed from poverty. Perhaps they'll be 2nd gen college students. Maybe a minority, but not the under-represented kind. Family makes too much for lots of aid, but not enough to pay for private or out-of-state flagships. They have no hooks -- just families working really hard to try to move up the ladder. Parents did their best to provide stability and their kids sacrificed to excel in and out of the classroom. Parents hope that instead of a commuter college like the one they attended, their kids can have a richer college experience. But then their kid is rejected from UMCP and they didn't get aid from the SLAC on their list. Yes, those kids will be fine, but it is okay to have wanted something a little more. Especially since the marketing brochures (and most of culture up until a few years ago) made it seem possible. You can insult these parents by calling them strivers, but it reads a bit like you're telling them to know their station. Only Buffy and Bif get to go to the top schools, just like Granddaddy!

Colleges are businesses, yes. But many of them are like Gucci and other exclusive luxury brands. They are not meritocracies and they don't focus on social mobility. We need to help kids see them for what they are. Rejecting the bulk of the qualified middle class is how they build their brands.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

What test are you going to give that would result in Harvard getting 1,700 freshman a year? You're going to need a test that is almost impossible, but not quite. Mess up in the design even slightly and the class size is cut in half or doubled. Every top school will have the same situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep. 100%

The amount of lying and marketing oneself and trying to show you have some trauma or special adversity or belong to some outlier group so you can curry favor to Admin officers. It's gross.

And the fake non-profits and the no standards at times with overinflated gpas and no test results.

It's really gotten so out of hand given the sheer volume of applicants universities now face.

I swear it should be changed to this:

Everyone that meets certain requirements all get put in the hat and then they pull out admits like a lottery. At some point it's just too much.

All of these actions are based on heresy, mostly from parents who are just as clueless as the next person. I've never heard an AO say they want trauma or non-profits. Stop believing random strangers for something this important.

Not true. The heart-string stories. A friend was an AO at a top state university and the discussions were often said of very qualified kids from MC/UMC/!% that they never had to experience adversity. They were essentially penalized for coming from functional, normal backgrounds and being neurotypical 'normal' , but exceptional kids.

Most of the people who work in AO as a whole are not highly intelligent…

Most went to the school where they're working, so they're just as intelligent as the applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

Why would we want it to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

Why would we want it to?

Even if we did, more than likely, the PP is talking about a smaller country. Most countries have national exams, and the placement is based on the result of those exams.

We have public and private universities, and different states have different admissions criteria, and then you have in state vs out of state. You don't have that scenario in most other countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

Colleges must match heads to beds. Most top schools are residential with small class sizes (at least for upperclassmen). They need to manage yield very closely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

What test are you going to give that would result in Harvard getting 1,700 freshman a year? You're going to need a test that is almost impossible, but not quite. Mess up in the design even slightly and the class size is cut in half or doubled. Every top school will have the same situation.

Plus, who wants their kids to attend a school based on how they did on one test? That's not life and really isn't what the elite schools want either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

What test are you going to give that would result in Harvard getting 1,700 freshman a year? You're going to need a test that is almost impossible, but not quite. Mess up in the design even slightly and the class size is cut in half or doubled. Every top school will have the same situation.

Plus, who wants their kids to attend a school based on how they did on one test? That's not life and really isn't what the elite schools want either.

Yes!! This, exactly. Im the PP who mentioned home country. After having finished our 2nd in the college application process, I like the system here in the US so much better with the multiple data points- the standardized testing, grades, essays, letters etc. Even my kid said writing the essays was not a bad thing. I didn't think so either- the essays actuallh helped DC with their interviewing skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

Do people from across the world chose to attend university in your home country?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country, you first select the schools you want to go to.

Then each school was a testing day. You take the test/s.

You are eligible to attend the schools you passed tests for.
If you didn't pass, no second chances to that particular school.

Wonder if that method will work here?

People will whine about discrimination. It would not work here.

As a URM, who attended schools in the UK, I prefer their college admission process. The college admission process in the United States is a complete crap show on epic proportions. It's basically a popularity contest that is based on whether the admission counselor likes you or not. I am so glad that I attended school in a country where common sense, merit, and your academic ability matters. I would have probably committed suicide if I had to endure the US version of college admission.

My kid is only applying to international universities next year. He likes that the criteria for most international engineering schools is based on math proficiency and offer direct admission as suppose to here where prospective engineering students have to waste time in low level courses fighting over limited spots. Don't tell me that a kid who takes Multivariable Equations as a junior and one who scored 5s on every AP exam have to waste their time sitting in some USA university.

My advice to parents who value merit is to have their children apply to international schools. It helps if your child can speak the language as well. My child can fluently speak 4 languages too.

We're are not even entertaining universities in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure “farce” is the word I would choose, but certainly there is a lot more complexities involved and questions on how things are viewed by AOs. I only have a sophomore but from what I gather from these boards and others:

- rigorous course load taking as many AP as possible (but this is evaluated in the context of what the school offers and the actual AP score matters less than the course)
- good grades (but if student can get a B in an AP that is better than an A in a regular course)
- good letters of recommendation
- good test courses are helpful to show even if school os TO (and expected if student is UMC)
- extracurriculars that demonstrate leadership and “passion”. LT/multi year activities are best
- apply with a less popular major (CS and engineering most in demand currently)
- “passion project” of raising $$ for a cause, publishing a book (can be self published haha), independent research project (where paper at end can be self published on a student website) is needed for T20/30s
- essays that tell a student’s “story” and connects their interests, with the extracurriculars they did, with their choice of intended major.

Then the “lottery” elements: AO also look at race/ethnicity and normally want to stay within same percents as prior years (same with gender and geographic diversity) Legacy and any kids of that university’s professors, anyone Dean of Admissions indicates is special, enough full pay to cover scholarships/merit.

So I wouldn’t use the word “farce” but maybe the word “ridiculous”

I have great kids, decently smart but not robots, involved in activities but coming out of COVID and less social interaction, I’m happy they are involved again so not pushing leadership (nor are they). Really very puzzled where they will wind up and if a private counselor / consultant to help them “find their passion” is worth it. Honestly, IMO high schoolers should not find their passion. That’s what’s college and early adulthood is for. Heck, I’m 50 and in the midst of a career switch for which I have only found my passion. But I would not have traded my prior career bc that taught me a lot too.

But, I do want them to attend a college with an amazing and well connected career services office.

Excellent description of how to be admitted to a T10 school five years ago.

It's also a great summary of how to be admitted to a public flagship (at various levels) today.

However, students and parents aiming for a T10 school now need to begin thinking more creatively.

For the "academic spike" applicant, don't ask "will lack of rigor in a foreign language hurt me?" Ask, "can I take four college courses at an Ivy during high school and get As in all of them while graduating from high school a year early?"

For the "inspirational story" applicant, don't ask "can I scale my passion-project nonprofit internationally before junior fall?" Ask, "can I move back to my grandparents' war-torn village in Africa and enroll in the local school there before applying to Stanford?" or "can I get myself moved into foster care and commit some petty crimes that will send me to a juvenile detention center early enough so that I have time to turn my life around by the summer before senior year?"

For the URM applicant, don't ask "should my application reflect that my great-great-grandmother was born in Mexico?" Ask, "how willing am I to lie as blatantly as half the URM students at Brown and just say I myself was born in an armadillo-infested shack outside of Ciudad Juarez?" (even though you grew up in Great Falls).

We get hung up on the idea of extracurriculars that "show" leadership, but it's more important to think about how even someone whose parents both got doctorates from the top university in China and are famous scientists can still qualify as "first-gen."

It is a farce. The farce that we make it.