Help DS Decide: Duke ED or Harvard/Princeton REA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

That's a nice problem to have. Is your best friend a big donor or did the kids just happen to be really smart? I don't think all three kids go to Princeton and Duke unless it's one or the other.

Smart kids and shrewd parents. Friend isn't rich enough to be a big donor, but is adept at playing the admission game so the kids started ECs at a young age. Kids enrolled in a less competitive high school for high GPA and they had a tutor for SATs. Combined with legacy factor and it was enough for all 3 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It matters what high school he is in. Is it public (magnet, top public, regular public), private (top or regular)? Also, is him white, Asian, or URM?

Of course URM

Op already said his son is white.

+1 and even then white is not as competitive as Asian nowadays.

Asian male

Yes especially Asian male. But it's no cakewalk for white male either.

That depends on what area — white and Asian males at a huge disadvantage for CS, engineering, business. BUT, they have a huge advantage when applying for humanities.

+1 nowadays asian male for CS is a bloodbath

What kind of genius Chinese male must be majoring in comp sci at MIT now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

That's a nice problem to have. Is your best friend a big donor or did the kids just happen to be really smart? I don't think all three kids go to Princeton and Duke unless it's one or the other.

Smart kids and shrewd parents. Friend isn't rich enough to be a big donor, but is adept at playing the admission game so the kids started ECs at a young age. Kids enrolled in a less competitive high school for high GPA and they had a tutor for SATs. Combined with legacy factor and it was enough for all 3 kids.

Even with legacy, that's seriously impressive. Hats off to them. Is your friend the Princeton parent or Duke parent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

That's a nice problem to have. Is your best friend a big donor or did the kids just happen to be really smart? I don't think all three kids go to Princeton and Duke unless it's one or the other.

Smart kids and shrewd parents. Friend isn't rich enough to be a big donor, but is adept at playing the admission game so the kids started ECs at a young age. Kids enrolled in a less competitive high school for high GPA and they had a tutor for SATs. Combined with legacy factor and it was enough for all 3 kids.

This was a best friend situation but I'll also say that around here, you often can't tell who has a ton of family $$. It is not as visible in daily life with high earners whose income would support their lifestyles anyway. Most people don't want to live in enormous homes or have 8 cars.

[Anonymous]

What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

Unless this occurred in the last two years, completely irrelevant. Admissions are very different in the test optional world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

You'd need to be one of the top competitors in your age group nationally for these to get a coach's support as a recruited athlete at an elite school Yes, fewer people play these sports but it isn't easy to be the best at a national or international level and there are very limited college roster spots for these sports in particular. Even if you are good enough at the sport, you'd need to have a strong academic history and high-end standardized test scores (unless the school is test optional). It is quite a bit easier to just invest the $$ and time for your child to have a nearly perfect SAT score, GPA, and a handful of school or regional ECs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

Being a recruited athlete definitely helps. But the recruited athletes at schools like Harvard, Duke, and Princeton are also extremely qualified. In some cases, the athletes perform better than most of the student body academically. The big exceptions would be Duke's major D1 sports like basketball, football, etc. But if we're talking non-athletics, do a summer program like RSI or do research that gets recognized by Regeneron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

Unless this occurred in the last two years, completely irrelevant. Admissions are very different in the test optional world.

+1 Now Harvard has a 3% acceptance rate, Princeton has 4%, Duke has 5%. Totally different ballgame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

Being a recruited athlete definitely helps. But the recruited athletes at schools like Harvard, Duke, and Princeton are also extremely qualified. In some cases, the athletes perform better than most of the student body academically. The big exceptions would be Duke's major D1 sports like basketball, football, etc. But if we're talking non-athletics, do a summer program like RSI or do research that gets recognized by Regeneron.

the age-old DCUM lie. Harvard admissions data is very clear that recruited athletes academic ratings are substantially inferior to those of other admitted students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

Unless this occurred in the last two years, completely irrelevant. Admissions are very different in the test optional world.

Not very different for legacies who can also provide strong scores though, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

Being a recruited athlete definitely helps. But the recruited athletes at schools like Harvard, Duke, and Princeton are also extremely qualified. In some cases, the athletes perform better than most of the student body academically. The big exceptions would be Duke's major D1 sports like basketball, football, etc. But if we're talking non-athletics, do a summer program like RSI or do research that gets recognized by Regeneron.

Sometimes the case, sometimes not based on the Ivy recruits at my school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funnily enough, my best friend is part of a double Princeton & Duke legacy family so this was a question their 3 kids debated over. Two of them went Princeton and the third went Duke.

Unless this occurred in the last two years, completely irrelevant. Admissions are very different in the test optional world.

Not very different for legacies who can also provide strong scores though, right?

I think it is different for everyone, including legacies,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

Being a recruited athlete definitely helps. But the recruited athletes at schools like Harvard, Duke, and Princeton are also extremely qualified. In some cases, the athletes perform better than most of the student body academically. The big exceptions would be Duke's major D1 sports like basketball, football, etc. But if we're talking non-athletics, do a summer program like RSI or do research that gets recognized by Regeneron.

the age-old DCUM lie. Harvard admissions data is very clear that recruited athletes academic ratings are substantially inferior to those of other admitted students.

I sense somebody’s mad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What EC wins the admission game? Fencing? Women’s crew? Squash?

You'd need to be one of the top competitors in your age group nationally for these to get a coach's support as a recruited athlete at an elite school Yes, fewer people play these sports but it isn't easy to be the best at a national or international level and there are very limited college roster spots for these sports in particular. Even if you are good enough at the sport, you'd need to have a strong academic history and high-end standardized test scores (unless the school is test optional). It is quite a bit easier to just invest the $$ and time for your child to have a nearly perfect SAT score, GPA, and a handful of school or regional ECs.

This person knows what they’re talking about