Ivy League results so far? who is making it in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m from Boston. Keep in mind that many Harvard professors live there too.

Class size at BL is around 400.
You have to take class size into account when you look at the acceptances/matriculation

[Anonymous]

which music ensembles are national nowadays?

-former HYPS musician, just wondering

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the white mom of a white kid, and I'm a little tired of all the sniping about Ivy League affirmative action.

Affirmative action is at least as important for the white kids in a school as it is for the URM kids.

Our children may never have to do complicated math when they grow up. They may not have to read novels or poetry for work, or know what atoms are in a methane molecule. But they will all have to interact with different kinds of people. Being able to do that well could be a matter of life or death. In a country like the United States, intentionally operating monocultural schools is a grave mistake.

What about those who can interact with people just as well but can also do complicated math and understand atoms and molecules? Do they not deserve to go to top schools just because of their skin color?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the white mom of a white kid, and I'm a little tired of all the sniping about Ivy League affirmative action.

Affirmative action is at least as important for the white kids in a school as it is for the URM kids.

Our children may never have to do complicated math when they grow up. They may not have to read novels or poetry for work, or know what atoms are in a methane molecule. But they will all have to interact with different kinds of people. Being able to do that well could be a matter of life or death. In a country like the United States, intentionally operating monocultural schools is a grave mistake.

What about those who can interact with people just as well but can also do complicated math and understand atoms and molecules? Do they not deserve to go to top schools just because of their skin color?

Diversity is marginally valuable for the humanities and social sciences but is irrelevant for STEM fields. If AA is to have any meaningful impact on the college experience for all students there needs to be social integration on campus so students can learn from one another outside the classroom. But campuses are so segregated with special interest housing, clubs and social organizations not to mention self segregation by race in dining halls and friend groups that it makes a mockery of the program and reduces it to a simple admissions handicap......that’s all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:which music ensembles are national nowadays?

-former HYPS musician, just wondering

I think poster meant winning national competitions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the white mom of a white kid, and I'm a little tired of all the sniping about Ivy League affirmative action.

Affirmative action is at least as important for the white kids in a school as it is for the URM kids.

Our children may never have to do complicated math when they grow up. They may not have to read novels or poetry for work, or know what atoms are in a methane molecule. But they will all have to interact with different kinds of people. Being able to do that well could be a matter of life or death. In a country like the United States, intentionally operating monocultural schools is a grave mistake.

What about those who can interact with people just as well but can also do complicated math and understand atoms and molecules? Do they not deserve to go to top schools just because of their skin color?

Diversity is marginally valuable for the humanities and social sciences but is irrelevant for STEM fields. If AA is to have any meaningful impact on the college experience for all students there needs to be social integration on campus so students can learn from one another outside the classroom. But campuses are so segregated with special interest housing, clubs and social organizations not to mention self segregation by race in dining halls and friend groups that it makes a mockery of the program and reduces it to a simple admissions handicap......that’s all.

a. Re - Ivy results - My kid's at a public high school with a great, genuinely diverse student body and extremely uneven teachers. For the 2017-2018 academic year, the school got about 3% of its seniors into the nearest Ivy. I think that a lot of highly selective schools may see glomming on to kids from a fun, diverse, nearby high school as a way to add diversity, serve the local community and bring in some lively kids all at the same time.

b. Re - diversity and STEM:

You're making a reasonable argument, but, in my opinion, diversity has more importance in STEM fields than you recognize.

- Diversity has an obvious value in medicine, biology and anthropology.

- A lot of people who start out in math, physics and astronomy are going to end up working in economics sooner or later. I think knowing a broad range of people is extremely helpful to anyone involved in economics.

- I temped for a couple of extremely successful physicists for a few weeks one summer, and I think that exposure to diversity is also useful to people in the pure hard sciences. First, because top research centers attract scholars from all around the world, and, second, because top scientists are really managers of grant application and project management offices. The very top scientists may spend most of their time schmoozing members of Congress, congressional aides and foundation chiefs, in an effort to attract research grants and money for new labs, observatories, etc. The ideal top scientist knows how to do science, and to charm Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, and to charm Republican and Democratic leaders and aides in Congress.

[Anonymous]

As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

What I'm saying though, is so-called "well-rounded" kids aren't that "well-"rounded. They're just "rounded". I'd love to see a kid who was the president of a couple clubs and see how she fares, but so far that has alluded me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

What I'm saying though, is so-called "well-rounded" kids aren't that "well-"rounded. They're just "rounded". I'd love to see a kid who was the president of a couple clubs and see how she fares, but so far that has alluded me.

Ack. Eluded.

[Anonymous]

DD attends a top all-girls private on the east coast but not DMV. The smartest kid in her class announced on social media she was admitted to Penn. I dont know her exact stats but she is tippy top academics at v. rigorous school. Based on publicly known facts she is in all honors classes since 9th, a national merit semi-finalist, always earns the highest level honor roll (ie honors, high honors, highest honors). What is notable to me is the medium smart kids from this school end up Harvard or Princeton to play sports (squash, lacrosse, etc.) This kid is a class leader with national competitive academics and Penn it is.

I guess she figured she had a very good shot to go for that ED rather than a HYPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

What I'm saying though, is so-called "well-rounded" kids aren't that "well-"rounded. They're just "rounded". I'd love to see a kid who was the president of a couple clubs and see how she fares, but so far that has alluded me.

A few club presidencies make no difference to the elite schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

Know a decent number of otherwise unhooked kids who got into Harvard and Yale. None of them demonstrated excellence as you posit. This is just what parents tell themselves. It's not the case - those kids are not plentiful enough to fill one university class, much less eight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

What I'm saying though, is so-called "well-rounded" kids aren't that "well-"rounded. They're just "rounded". I'd love to see a kid who was the president of a couple clubs and see how she fares, but so far that has alluded me.

A few club presidencies make no difference to the elite schools.

Like I said, I don't have enough data to say that for sure. I'm predominantly seeing kids who are not even club presidents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an interviewer, I'm not seeing anyone get in. But I am seeing a pattern to those who don't. I see a lot of kids who might charitably be described - I'm sure their parents would describe them on DCUM - as well-rounded. They participate in a few clubs. But that's just it, they participate. Very few are officers let alone leaders.

My hypothesis, which I'd love to see tested, is that just being president of a couple things and having a decent talent would probably be enough to get you in. I'm an interviewer, so I don't know anything. But if you have a kid who's interested in Ivies, make sure she tries to actually lead something. Otherwise you'll be here whining about how "well-rounded kids don't have a chance."

This is old news. The ivies used to want well rounded kids but that time is long gone. Today they demand demonstrated excellence in a single field of endeavor. Presumably this makes their socially engineered class easier to assemble.

Know a decent number of otherwise unhooked kids who got into Harvard and Yale. None of them demonstrated excellence as you posit. This is just what parents tell themselves. It's not the case - those kids are not plentiful enough to fill one university class, much less eight.

This thread is about this year. How many of these kids got in this year? What were their grades and test scores?

People don’t understand how much more competitive it is now, compared to even 5 years ago. I think the 9 or 10 actual examples of admitted kids in this thread have been very illuminating. Recruited athletes, virtuoso musicians, legacies and a couple valedictorian types with 99th+ percentile test scores. The rest has been a bunch of hearsay with little to no supporting info