NCS college admissions if kid is not a legacy, URM, or athletic recruit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

Yes. The NCS college counselor recommend College of Charleston and Elon for my DD. 3.2 GPA and 34 ACT.

Would your daughter consider a university in England or elsewhere? Obviously not Oxford, but somewhere exciting and stimulating in another country? That might be a good option. (I don't say this to be nasty, but are there many girls with this sort of overall GPA, getting almost all B's?) When did your daughter start at NCS? Just Upper School or has she been there the whole time? I am really asking this in a positive spirit and don't mean any offense at all. Very curious as my DD will be starting this fall for 9th.

Curious as well. Seems like a big disconnect unless there is ADHD at play and test stakes were high and a hyperfocus.

You must be unfamiliar with NCS and obvilious to the rest of this thread. A 3.2 at NCS is not a cakewalk. It requires hard work. There is no disconnect. Just an average kid doing well at a tough school. That 3.2 is like a 4.5 at your local public.

I get it. Thanks for the info. Lots of ways to skin a cat here, not just the Overworked, Grade Deflation school way. Enjoy.

The above PP doesn't make sense to me. You say that the example is just an average kid at a tough school, and then equate a 3.2 with a 4.5, but an "average" kid doesn't get a 4.5 at any school... also, you are comparing a non weighted GPA with a weighted one...

Right, that's the point. Public school weight, NCS doesn't. So you have to compare them. And yes, the average kid does get a 4.5 at public schools. Maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but a 4.0 is definitely not 10% of th class at public school.

But colleges look at the unweighted GPAs of pubic high school students as well as private school students, and they recalibrate the GPAs of all applicants using their own individual systems. So if a kid got a 4.5 W GPA in public that could easily be a 3.5ish UW (if they got Bs in lots of AP classes) So I think you are wrong about the "average" student having this GPA. First off, "average" students don't sign up for the hardest classes at any school, public or private, and I think that the difference between these GPAs gets smaller when you take this into account. If you are applying to UCs or Michigan,etc where they get so many applicants they can't manage a personalized approach then you are at a disadvantage, but at smaller schools the personalized rec letters that show the teachers actually knows these students would help NCS girls, in comparison to most public school students, even way above average ones who get form type rec letters.

This is the pro-school position. It doesn’t seem to bear out in reality. Do colleges want private school kids, if all else is roughly equal? Increasingly, it seems like they do not. Girls are already at a disadvantage compared to boys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

Yes. The NCS college counselor recommend College of Charleston and Elon for my DD. 3.2 GPA and 34 ACT.

Would your daughter consider a university in England or elsewhere? Obviously not Oxford, but somewhere exciting and stimulating in another country? That might be a good option. (I don't say this to be nasty, but are there many girls with this sort of overall GPA, getting almost all B's?) When did your daughter start at NCS? Just Upper School or has she been there the whole time? I am really asking this in a positive spirit and don't mean any offense at all. Very curious as my DD will be starting this fall for 9th.

Curious as well. Seems like a big disconnect unless there is ADHD at play and test stakes were high and a hyperfocus.

You must be unfamiliar with NCS and obvilious to the rest of this thread. A 3.2 at NCS is not a cakewalk. It requires hard work. There is no disconnect. Just an average kid doing well at a tough school. That 3.2 is like a 4.5 at your local public.

I get it. Thanks for the info. Lots of ways to skin a cat here, not just the Overworked, Grade Deflation school way. Enjoy.

The above PP doesn't make sense to me. You say that the example is just an average kid at a tough school, and then equate a 3.2 with a 4.5, but an "average" kid doesn't get a 4.5 at any school... also, you are comparing a non weighted GPA with a weighted one...

Right, that's the point. Public school weight, NCS doesn't. So you have to compare them. And yes, the average kid does get a 4.5 at public schools. Maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but a 4.0 is definitely not 10% of th class at public school.

But colleges look at the unweighted GPAs of pubic high school students as well as private school students, and they recalibrate the GPAs of all applicants using their own individual systems. So if a kid got a 4.5 W GPA in public that could easily be a 3.5ish UW (if they got Bs in lots of AP classes) So I think you are wrong about the "average" student having this GPA. First off, "average" students don't sign up for the hardest classes at any school, public or private, and I think that the difference between these GPAs gets smaller when you take this into account. If you are applying to UCs or Michigan,etc where they get so many applicants they can't manage a personalized approach then you are at a disadvantage, but at smaller schools the personalized rec letters that show the teachers actually knows these students would help NCS girls, in comparison to most public school students, even way above average ones who get form type rec letters.

This is the pro-school position. It doesn’t seem to bear out in reality. Do colleges want private school kids, if all else is roughly equal? Increasingly, it seems like they do not. Girls are already at a disadvantage compared to boys.

So when these girls apply to smaller SLAC they are still at a disadvantage? Truly curious. Or is the status quo that most NCS girls don't apply to them in the first place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

You are taking the rankings waaaaay too seriously and literally. Kids will choose a school ranked 60 over a school ranked 38 if they like the other one better and especially if it is better in their field. Every day of the week. There is no real difference between these schools. You have no idea how ridiculous you are being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

+10000. FFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

Yes. The NCS college counselor recommend College of Charleston and Elon for my DD. 3.2 GPA and 34 ACT.

Would your daughter consider a university in England or elsewhere? Obviously not Oxford, but somewhere exciting and stimulating in another country? That might be a good option. (I don't say this to be nasty, but are there many girls with this sort of overall GPA, getting almost all B's?) When did your daughter start at NCS? Just Upper School or has she been there the whole time? I am really asking this in a positive spirit and don't mean any offense at all. Very curious as my DD will be starting this fall for 9th.

Curious as well. Seems like a big disconnect unless there is ADHD at play and test stakes were high and a hyperfocus.

You must be unfamiliar with NCS and obvilious to the rest of this thread. A 3.2 at NCS is not a cakewalk. It requires hard work. There is no disconnect. Just an average kid doing well at a tough school. That 3.2 is like a 4.5 at your local public.

I get it. Thanks for the info. Lots of ways to skin a cat here, not just the Overworked, Grade Deflation school way. Enjoy.

The above PP doesn't make sense to me. You say that the example is just an average kid at a tough school, and then equate a 3.2 with a 4.5, but an "average" kid doesn't get a 4.5 at any school... also, you are comparing a non weighted GPA with a weighted one...

Right, that's the point. Public school weight, NCS doesn't. So you have to compare them. And yes, the average kid does get a 4.5 at public schools. Maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but a 4.0 is definitely not 10% of th class at public school.

But colleges look at the unweighted GPAs of pubic high school students as well as private school students, and they recalibrate the GPAs of all applicants using their own individual systems. So if a kid got a 4.5 W GPA in public that could easily be a 3.5ish UW (if they got Bs in lots of AP classes) So I think you are wrong about the "average" student having this GPA. First off, "average" students don't sign up for the hardest classes at any school, public or private, and I think that the difference between these GPAs gets smaller when you take this into account. If you are applying to UCs or Michigan,etc where they get so many applicants they can't manage a personalized approach then you are at a disadvantage, but at smaller schools the personalized rec letters that show the teachers actually knows these students would help NCS girls, in comparison to most public school students, even way above average ones who get form type rec letters.

This is the pro-school position. It doesn’t seem to bear out in reality. Do colleges want private school kids, if all else is roughly equal? Increasingly, it seems like they do not. Girls are already at a disadvantage compared to boys.

So when these girls apply to smaller SLAC they are still at a disadvantage? Truly curious. Or is the status quo that most NCS girls don't apply to them in the first place?

Girls are at a disadvantage applying to SLACs because SLACs want to balance classes and more girls apply. For the same reasons, they have an advantage applying to traditionalal engineering schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

You are taking the rankings waaaaay too seriously and literally. Kids will choose a school ranked 60 over a school ranked 38 if they like the other one better and especially if it is better in their field. Every day of the week. There is no real difference between these schools. You have no idea how ridiculous you are being.

OK, PP said hundreds. Can you say the same thing about choosing a school ranked 337 over a school ranked 38 or 60?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

And your point is utter bullshit. Period. You have no idea what kind of SATs or ACT scores these girls have and unless you’re a complete stalker you don’t know what their transcripts look like either. They could have all A’s and maybe one grade in a random class that brought the whole average down. Schools do look at that sort of thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

And your point is utter bullshit. Period. You have no idea what kind of SATs or ACT scores these girls have and unless you’re a complete stalker you don’t know what their transcripts look like either. They could have all A’s and maybe one grade in a random class that brought the whole average down. Schools do look at that sort of thing.

This. Colleges make the decision and they will take who they want. A “hook” ie a lot of things including having a very interesting resume and transcript.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other adjustment needed is the idea that there is something special or essential about the rankings in USNWR.

Until people accept that hundreds of colleges have stellar students getting a stellar eduction from stellar professors and going on to have stellar careers, this anxiety producing nonsense about only 10-20 colleges being acceptable for strong students will not end.

If your top student is attending a school ranked 60, that school has a fantastic student who will go on to do great things -- likely better things than a hundred kids from Harvard. The workforce makes this obvious; look around you. On top of that, that top-ranked kid from your school might not even be the top student at that 60th ranked college. Yours isn't the only super bright kid attending those schools ranked in the 40-120 range. Do you really think there aren't any geniuses at 117-ranked RIT? There are.

T20 is probably a target that should go away, but there are not hundreds of stellar colleges. To take your "hundreds" literally, Ball State is 202 and Bellarmin University is 203 according to US news (there is a multiway tie for 196). Do you think any NCS student or parent sending their kid to NCS would think those are stellar schools?

You are forgetting the excellent options at small liberal arts and regional colleges, plus colleges abroad. I stand by hundreds of options.

It's not hundreds. It's actually about a hundred and that's being generious. Top 50 Universities, top 50 LACs. That's about it. I crack up when come on here talking about the thousands of colleges. If you come from a private in the DC area, that's just not true. It's hundreds of students competing for a small handful of the same schools. I will be disappointed if my kid winds up at College of Charleston or Elon, which unfortunately is what her counselor is going to recommend as matches (safe matches, but not even safeties). After attending a competitive school with bright, hardworking girls, can you imagine surrounding yourself with those who attend College of Charleston or Elon? It's a whole different world and would be a disappointment. There's no way that many of those girls are extremely disappointed.

Yes. The NCS college counselor recommend College of Charleston and Elon for my DD. 3.2 GPA and 34 ACT.

Would your daughter consider a university in England or elsewhere? Obviously not Oxford, but somewhere exciting and stimulating in another country? That might be a good option. (I don't say this to be nasty, but are there many girls with this sort of overall GPA, getting almost all B's?) When did your daughter start at NCS? Just Upper School or has she been there the whole time? I am really asking this in a positive spirit and don't mean any offense at all. Very curious as my DD will be starting this fall for 9th.

Curious as well. Seems like a big disconnect unless there is ADHD at play and test stakes were high and a hyperfocus.

You must be unfamiliar with NCS and obvilious to the rest of this thread. A 3.2 at NCS is not a cakewalk. It requires hard work. There is no disconnect. Just an average kid doing well at a tough school. That 3.2 is like a 4.5 at your local public.

I get it. Thanks for the info. Lots of ways to skin a cat here, not just the Overworked, Grade Deflation school way. Enjoy.

The above PP doesn't make sense to me. You say that the example is just an average kid at a tough school, and then equate a 3.2 with a 4.5, but an "average" kid doesn't get a 4.5 at any school... also, you are comparing a non weighted GPA with a weighted one...

Right, that's the point. Public school weight, NCS doesn't. So you have to compare them. And yes, the average kid does get a 4.5 at public schools. Maybe that's a bit exaggerated, but a 4.0 is definitely not 10% of th class at public school.

But colleges look at the unweighted GPAs of pubic high school students as well as private school students, and they recalibrate the GPAs of all applicants using their own individual systems. So if a kid got a 4.5 W GPA in public that could easily be a 3.5ish UW (if they got Bs in lots of AP classes) So I think you are wrong about the "average" student having this GPA. First off, "average" students don't sign up for the hardest classes at any school, public or private, and I think that the difference between these GPAs gets smaller when you take this into account. If you are applying to UCs or Michigan,etc where they get so many applicants they can't manage a personalized approach then you are at a disadvantage, but at smaller schools the personalized rec letters that show the teachers actually knows these students would help NCS girls, in comparison to most public school students, even way above average ones who get form type rec letters.

This is the pro-school position. It doesn’t seem to bear out in reality. Do colleges want private school kids, if all else is roughly equal? Increasingly, it seems like they do not. Girls are already at a disadvantage compared to boys.

So when these girls apply to smaller SLAC they are still at a disadvantage? Truly curious. Or is the status quo that most NCS girls don't apply to them in the first place?

It’s harder for girls to be admitted to almost all SLACS because more girls than boys apply and more girls than boys enroll. Look at the female:male ratio at many SLACS. The very top SLACS are an exception—I think numbers are about equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

And your point is utter bullshit. Period. You have no idea what kind of SATs or ACT scores these girls have and unless you’re a complete stalker you don’t know what their transcripts look like either. They could have all A’s and maybe one grade in a random class that brought the whole average down. Schools do look at that sort of thing.

whoa, you need to settle down. Read the post. Plenty of parents (from the actual class) have commented that a good percentage of these girls ARE top students.
We are simply posting about the kids who are top students AND not one of these hooks. They are not attending top 30ish schools.

Why do people post angry replies when they clearly have not even reads the posts? Eternal message board question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

And your point is utter bullshit. Period. You have no idea what kind of SATs or ACT scores these girls have and unless you’re a complete stalker you don’t know what their transcripts look like either. They could have all A’s and maybe one grade in a random class that brought the whole average down. Schools do look at that sort of thing.

This. Colleges make the decision and they will take who they want. A “hook” ie a lot of things including having a very interesting resume and transcript.

Right. But in these cases, having a "very interesting resume and transcript" did work unless you were also a 1)rower, 2)minority or 3)VIP legacy. Plenty of the girls who got spots are the former (interesting, smart, top students) BUT it without the later (hooks) they didn't get in.
I am done arguing about what was a pretty straight forward post. This is just dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone think this is just a ploy to get someone to withdraw from their contract before May 31st...?
If not, what does the newish HOS have to say about this? Perhaps a change is afoot?

Have you looked at the list of where girls are going to school next year? It’s very impressive. The OP is completely deranged seriously.

For the 1000th time, the OP's point (verified in this post by many senior parents) is that all IVY and other top 20 admits (aside from 2) are HOOKED applicants.
Not that they're not impressive. Just that kids did not get in to those schools if they were not: 1)an athlete, 2)an URM or 3)a big donor legacy or multi-generational legacy.
That's the POINT of this post.

And your point is utter bullshit. Period. You have no idea what kind of SATs or ACT scores these girls have and unless you’re a complete stalker you don’t know what their transcripts look like either. They could have all A’s and maybe one grade in a random class that brought the whole average down. Schools do look at that sort of thing.

and that's missing the point, too. let's say that what you suggest is true. then it still the fact that the vast majority of them are hooked. so for OP, who says her kids has no hooks, she just wants to know if you, at the very least, need both. it could be that you only need the hook, but maybe you need both.

[Anonymous]

UGH. Typo
Meant to type:

Right. But in these cases, having a "very interesting resume and transcript" did NOT work unless you were also a 1)rower, 2)minority or 3)VIP legacy. Plenty of the girls who got spots are the former (interesting, smart, top students) BUT it without the later (hooks) they didn't get in.
I am done arguing about what was a pretty straight forward post. This is just dumb.