Stop the Speculations :)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

There is a new crop of suckers every year. People look at the instagrams of the Big 3 college admits and think their kid can have the same outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly why the school college counselors should be providing parents with more info and not less. Backing up assertions and recommendations with cold hard facts and data that is actually useful (not the SCOIR data which is essentially meaningless if you don’t know possible hooks and that they leave the parents to interpret for themselves) would be welcomed, at least by this parent!

How is SCOIR useless? At our school they take out the hooked kids. The GPA curves are pretty darn definitive for most schools. (they're sobering but definitive). I.e if your kid does not have a 3.9, do not attempt an unhooked Ivy bid. If you're not above a 3.7 you'll probably end up at a school ranked above 50.
I mean, it's all there. I've posted about it before (on DCUM) and parents argue with me. "Oh, no way--lots of kids getting in XYZ with 3.5 GPAs.". Well, no. The actual data doesn't show that.

I really think the schools (at least some--maybe not GDS) give more data than parents report. They just might not give data that parents want to believe.

SCOIR is useless because most schools do not take out hooked kids, which makes outcomes look much better. Unfortunately, not taking out hooked kids leads unhooked kids to believe they have a much better chance of getting into prestigious schools than they actually have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A student from a high achieving HS with 20 APs who takes 3 would get a lower score than a student from a rural school that only offered 6 APs.

Obviously. But, more commonly, what about the student who takes 8 or 10 APs at a school that offers 20? That should be enough, but how does that play out when the applicant from the nearby rural county took 3 of 6 offered?

Right, good question. I am sick of counselors, admissions officers, experts giving obvious advice and scenarios. I’m interested in more granular details, and since many of us live in affluentish suburbs or cities, how do these kids compare to each other? That is after all how students are picked- in school groups, yes?

At the end of the day, your kids are competing with the kids from their own school and maybe one or max 2 peer schools. That’s it.

Are the 2 readers ranking all of the students from same school against each other if there is no class rank?

Do the private school counselor letters basically tell the admissions committee who they think should be admitted?

What’s the answer to this question??

The answer is yes, private school counselor letters basically rank the applicants from their school for the admissions committee. There was a girl who sued Sidwell over her counselor letters a few years back and this was their defense. You can Google it if you’re interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

ED is not going to get a kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a top 20 university without a hook.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

ED is not going to get a kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a top 20 university without a hook.

ED is not going to get a kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a top 20 university without a hook.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

ED is not going to get an unhooked kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a T20 college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

ED is not going to get an unhooked kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a T20 college.

Don’t think anyone thinks that a 3.6-3.7 ED gets into T20….
Lucky to get into T50….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A student from a high achieving HS with 20 APs who takes 3 would get a lower score than a student from a rural school that only offered 6 APs.

Obviously. But, more commonly, what about the student who takes 8 or 10 APs at a school that offers 20? That should be enough, but how does that play out when the applicant from the nearby rural county took 3 of 6 offered?

Right, good question. I am sick of counselors, admissions officers, experts giving obvious advice and scenarios. I’m interested in more granular details, and since many of us live in affluentish suburbs or cities, how do these kids compare to each other? That is after all how students are picked- in school groups, yes?

At the end of the day, your kids are competing with the kids from their own school and maybe one or max 2 peer schools. That’s it.

Are the 2 readers ranking all of the students from same school against each other if there is no class rank?

Do the private school counselor letters basically tell the admissions committee who they think should be admitted?

What’s the answer to this question??

The answer is yes, private school counselor letters basically rank the applicants from their school for the admissions committee. There was a girl who sued Sidwell over her counselor letters a few years back and this was their defense. You can Google it if you’re interested.

Sidwell won.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this happens at many schools.

Just because it happens at many schools does not make it right. Private schools cannot rely only on large donors and financial aid students. It is not a sustainable model when tuition is skyrocketing. If these schools continue to coddle the large donors, athletes, and lifers, in the college admissions process, guess what? The "middle class" families will leave and fewer will want to enter. Everybody paid the same purchase price to attend the school, they should be treated fairly and equally. In fact, non financial aid families who are full pay but not big donors, sacrifice a lot of their income to enable their students to attend private schools. Their hard-earned money is wasted because the schools don't care about their students in the college admissions process.

I think the truth is that the private schools have very little influence over what kid gets into what college. It is determined by the kid and parents. Kids that get into T20 schools are either hooked (VIP parent, legacy parent, URM, recruited athlete) or the kid has a >3.9 GPA and is top 15% of class.

You are totally correct that parents paying full freight with no hook and a kid with a 3.6-3.8 GPA get screwed in that the kid ends up in a college that they could have been accepted to from a public high school.

I think it depends on the private high school..for some private high schools 3.8-3.9 is T15-25, while 3.9+ is T10.

3.6-3.7 is no man’s land tho and ED early is very important otherwise stuck with undesirable choices.

ED is not going to get an unhooked kid with a 3.6-3.7 into a T20 college.

Don’t think anyone thinks that a 3.6-3.7 ED gets into T20….
Lucky to get into T50….

is this true? what's most highly regarded school a 3,7uw has gotten into in your experience in the last year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to burst your bubble, but at top 10 schools with 60k applicants....

Fascinating, since none of the T10 schools had 60K applicants last year.

A few had over 50K, but...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to burst your bubble, but at top 10 schools with 60k applicants....

Fascinating, since none of the T10 schools had 60K applicants last year.

A few had over 50K, but...

UPenn had 65000.
I am sure at least one other T10 had over 60

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hate to burst your bubble, but at top 10 schools with 60k applicants....

Fascinating, since none of the T10 schools had 60K applicants last year.

A few had over 50K, but...

Columbia 60,200

[Anonymous]

^well not actually T10 though