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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They dont read 50k applications. They have criteria based on which they eliminate 3/4.

Simply not true. At many of the most prestigious colleges and universities, they readily admit about 2/3 or applicants are academically qualified. And the apps do get read.

Some review notes on meetings with top school admissions:
"80% of applicants are considered academically qualified to attend (so about 25K of the 37K applications.
99% are in the top ten % of their high school class.

THE PROCESS
There is a regional reader (in this case she covered three states plus NYC) who does initial processing of about 100 to 120 applications per week. (Other colleges the reader may be reviewing hundreds per day!)
She sends most to a 2nd reader, unless the student is unusually weak; examples are simple one sentence answers to questions, no specific U interest. (But this didn't seem to weed out a huge percentage)
After 2nd reader, returns to the regional reader.
Then goes to committee, which usually consists of 5 to 12 people, including (usually) the dean of admisions.
Each reader gives about a 30 second summary of the student.
The final say is the dean; it's not a democracy!"

In a book that people often tout on here . . . I can't remember the name ("Who gets into college" or something like that) I recall that it is said about 8 min. are spent on the first round of applications. After the months of writing, assembling information, etc. on top of getting recs, taking tests . . . then to spend MINUTES on them. It's insulting.

What would you regard as a "non-insulting" amount of time? How many more people would they need to hire to read tens of thousands of apps in that longer time?

The fact of the matter is that most American high school kids really aren't all that different from each other. A short read is probably all that's necessary.

In the town where I am from there are actually two youth orchestras. There is the real one run by actual musicians and then there is a fake one started by the parents of children who didn’t get into the real one. the fake one has a name that sounds more impressive to people that don’t know. the fake one also runs a concerto competition every semester with five winners, so that every child in the fake orchestra can claim that they won the concerto competition. what concerns me about the five minute read is that it’s much easier to pull a fast one and package your child as a concerto contest winner from the fake youth orchestra and it’s doubtful that someone who was hired as a temp and he’s getting paid by the hour is going to have the in-depth knowledge to know the difference between the two orchestras in an area. I’m sure the same thing goes on with sports teams and debate teams, and other types of extracurriculars. If there were smaller numbers of applicants and they were all read by actual full-time admissions people there would probably be if you were opportunities for lying an exaggeration because you would expect these people to catch these things

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Funny thing is, the majority of the rest of the world follows a much simpler admissions process - grades or ultimate subject tests (e.g. AP), entrance tests (similar to SATs) and maybe an interview. Far easier to provide free resources to underprivileged kids in that model that this convoluted, cumbersome nonsense that is American higher ed. It's more of a scammy system that encourages corruption, starting with 'fake' ECs, expensive tutoring to get higher grades, etc. none of which a poor kid has access to.
The government can easily set up free resources along the lines of Khan Academy and free online tutoring services with taxpayer dollars to coach kids on AP and SAT. How do you do that for a poor kid to start a non-profit? or BS 'leadership' role for, say, science olympiad, when the kid has to work?

Kids without resources are not expected to start nonprofits or do Science Olympiad. They may show leadership in very different ways. That is the point of holistic admissions. I’m not opposed to tests being an element but be serious. Kids with poor teachers and schools may not have access to AP classes because the school may not have enough students to fill and AP class or it simply may not be a priority for the school, which may be dealing with safety, hunger, homelessness and other more pressing issues. I understand where you are coming from but it comes across as very naive to think the solutions are that simple.

+1 extremely naive

[Anonymous]

True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

But you're writing that as if they have nothing else going on. The kind of student with those resources has been encouraged to perform in the classroom all the while. It's not like a D student is getting into a top college because they started a non-profit. The non-profit is probably one of many things that make them stand out in the admissions process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will admit we are not happy with the results of the early rounds. And I hope anyone reading understand it is not coming from a place of bitterness but from a place of helplessness. It is hard to digest how the most venerable institutions of this country peddle and getaway with blatant lies year after year and demolish the spirits of a vast majority of kids.

I am trying to understand how any of their claims add up?

"Application are reviewed holistically & We also like receiving 50,000 applications


They never explain how they manage to read 50k+ apps and how spending 2-5 min per app allows holistic evaluation is beyond me. This is total crap!

There's got to be a better way. I don't know why no journalists have covered this. We are fighting about diversity/discrimination but the issues with college admission is more basic. The college admission first need to stop lying to the kids, period!

Spoiler: Nobody is actually reading all that crap your snowflake wrote. I really can't believe smart parents still believe that nonsense. Most kids are filtered out by software. Will they EVER admit that? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

But you're writing that as if they have nothing else going on. The kind of student with those resources has been encouraged to perform in the classroom all the while. It's not like a D student is getting into a top college because they started a non-profit. The non-profit is probably one of many things that make them stand out in the admissions process.

Honestly, that should disqualify him for admission at any school let alone a T-10 even if they are the best at everything. I cannot believe someone is actually defending this type of behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They dont read 50k applications. They have criteria based on which they eliminate 3/4.

Simply not true. At many of the most prestigious colleges and universities, they readily admit about 2/3 or applicants are academically qualified. And the apps do get read.

Some review notes on meetings with top school admissions:
"80% of applicants are considered academically qualified to attend (so about 25K of the 37K applications.
99% are in the top ten % of their high school class.

THE PROCESS
There is a regional reader (in this case she covered three states plus NYC) who does initial processing of about 100 to 120 applications per week. (Other colleges the reader may be reviewing hundreds per day!)
She sends most to a 2nd reader, unless the student is unusually weak; examples are simple one sentence answers to questions, no specific U interest. (But this didn't seem to weed out a huge percentage)
After 2nd reader, returns to the regional reader.
Then goes to committee, which usually consists of 5 to 12 people, including (usually) the dean of admisions.
Each reader gives about a 30 second summary of the student.
The final say is the dean; it's not a democracy!"

In a book that people often tout on here . . . I can't remember the name ("Who gets into college" or something like that) I recall that it is said about 8 min. are spent on the first round of applications. After the months of writing, assembling information, etc. on top of getting recs, taking tests . . . then to spend MINUTES on them. It's insulting.

What would you regard as a "non-insulting" amount of time? How many more people would they need to hire to read tens of thousands of apps in that longer time?

The fact of the matter is that most American high school kids really aren't all that different from each other. A short read is probably all that's necessary.

In the town where I am from there are actually two youth orchestras. There is the real one run by actual musicians and then there is a fake one started by the parents of children who didn’t get into the real one. the fake one has a name that sounds more impressive to people that don’t know. the fake one also runs a concerto competition every semester with five winners, so that every child in the fake orchestra can claim that they won the concerto competition. what concerns me about the five minute read is that it’s much easier to pull a fast one and package your child as a concerto contest winner from the fake youth orchestra and it’s doubtful that someone who was hired as a temp and he’s getting paid by the hour is going to have the in-depth knowledge to know the difference between the two orchestras in an area. I’m sure the same thing goes on with sports teams and debate teams, and other types of extracurriculars. If there were smaller numbers of applicants and they were all read by actual full-time admissions people there would probably be if you were opportunities for lying an exaggeration because you would expect these people to catch these things

I hear your concern, but your view is also really biased. Is this orchestra truly fake (ie. They don't actually play) or are they just an alternative that you deem lesser? Maybe they are using the competition to draw better players and become a better orchestra. An area can have several orchestras. We have mcyo, pvyo, dcyo plus some great hs orchestras. Your kid can always add that their orchestra is the most competitive in the area in tgeir description. Also, if your kid is that good, they should have all state or individual competition wins to corroborate. No need to denigrate a start up orchestra!

Also, it takes a lot more tgan 1 orchestra membership to distinguish an applicant from another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

T10s want full-pay high stats rich kids whose parents will donate. Everyone knows that. Nobody was duped, as you suggest. It's just a rich kid signaling s/he's rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

But you're writing that as if they have nothing else going on. The kind of student with those resources has been encouraged to perform in the classroom all the while. It's not like a D student is getting into a top college because they started a non-profit. The non-profit is probably one of many things that make them stand out in the admissions process.

What many things most of the 17 years old kids possibly have
It's bullshit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

But you're writing that as if they have nothing else going on. The kind of student with those resources has been encouraged to perform in the classroom all the while. It's not like a D student is getting into a top college because they started a non-profit. The non-profit is probably one of many things that make them stand out in the admissions process.

Honestly, that should disqualify him for admission at any school let alone a T-10 even if they are the best at everything. I cannot believe someone is actually defending this type of behavior.

Everyone is lying on their apps. Nobody verifies anything. Elite colleges want rich elbowy b.s. artists. Ruthless strivers who know how to play the b.s. game.

[Anonymous]

So the AOs can't tell which orchestras are fake, which charities are not real, and everything else that is wrong with these kids, despite the fact that they do this for a living...

BUT

The people who CAN tell all these differences are, coincidentally, the parents of the kids they don't admit?

Wow that's quite a coincidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:True story from this admission cycle -

1. Kid starts a non profit,
2. Hires College counselors and essay writers
3. Talks about the impressive amount of money their non profit has raised and donated to XYZ cause
4. Admitted to a T-10

Anyone know how a HS student was able to raise such an impressive amount of money?

Not surprisingly all that money came from one source - The parents of the same HS student.

"Holistic" admission process works!

But you're writing that as if they have nothing else going on. The kind of student with those resources has been encouraged to perform in the classroom all the while. It's not like a D student is getting into a top college because they started a non-profit. The non-profit is probably one of many things that make them stand out in the admissions process.

What many things most of the 17 years old kids possibly have
It's bullshit

???. What are the impressive accomplishments of your kid that were overlooked?

[Anonymous]

Honestly, this thread is making me quite depressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They dont read 50k applications. They have criteria based on which they eliminate 3/4.

Simply not true. At many of the most prestigious colleges and universities, they readily admit about 2/3 or applicants are academically qualified. And the apps do get read.

Some review notes on meetings with top school admissions:
"80% of applicants are considered academically qualified to attend (so about 25K of the 37K applications.
99% are in the top ten % of their high school class.

THE PROCESS
There is a regional reader (in this case she covered three states plus NYC) who does initial processing of about 100 to 120 applications per week. (Other colleges the reader may be reviewing hundreds per day!)
She sends most to a 2nd reader, unless the student is unusually weak; examples are simple one sentence answers to questions, no specific U interest. (But this didn't seem to weed out a huge percentage)
After 2nd reader, returns to the regional reader.
Then goes to committee, which usually consists of 5 to 12 people, including (usually) the dean of admisions.
Each reader gives about a 30 second summary of the student.
The final say is the dean; it's not a democracy!"

In a book that people often tout on here . . . I can't remember the name ("Who gets into college" or something like that) I recall that it is said about 8 min. are spent on the first round of applications. After the months of writing, assembling information, etc. on top of getting recs, taking tests . . . then to spend MINUTES on them. It's insulting.

What would you regard as a "non-insulting" amount of time? How many more people would they need to hire to read tens of thousands of apps in that longer time?

The fact of the matter is that most American high school kids really aren't all that different from each other. A short read is probably all that's necessary.

In the town where I am from there are actually two youth orchestras. There is the real one run by actual musicians and then there is a fake one started by the parents of children who didn’t get into the real one. the fake one has a name that sounds more impressive to people that don’t know. the fake one also runs a concerto competition every semester with five winners, so that every child in the fake orchestra can claim that they won the concerto competition. what concerns me about the five minute read is that it’s much easier to pull a fast one and package your child as a concerto contest winner from the fake youth orchestra and it’s doubtful that someone who was hired as a temp and he’s getting paid by the hour is going to have the in-depth knowledge to know the difference between the two orchestras in an area. I’m sure the same thing goes on with sports teams and debate teams, and other types of extracurriculars. If there were smaller numbers of applicants and they were all read by actual full-time admissions people there would probably be if you were opportunities for lying an exaggeration because you would expect these people to catch these things

I hear your concern, but your view is also really biased. Is this orchestra truly fake (ie. They don't actually play) or are they just an alternative that you deem lesser? Maybe they are using the competition to draw better players and become a better orchestra. An area can have several orchestras. We have mcyo, pvyo, dcyo plus some great hs orchestras. Your kid can always add that their orchestra is the most competitive in the area in tgeir description. Also, if your kid is that good, they should have all state or individual competition wins to corroborate. No need to denigrate a start up orchestra!

Also, it takes a lot more tgan 1 orchestra membership to distinguish an applicant from another.

+1- Seems like orchestra mom is just as loony as crazy soccer mom. Wonder if she has the "real" orchestra magnate next to the "COEXIST" sticker on her car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the AOs can't tell which orchestras are fake, which charities are not real, and everything else that is wrong with these kids, despite the fact that they do this for a living...

BUT

The people who CAN tell all these differences are, coincidentally, the parents of the kids they don't admit?

Wow that's quite a coincidence.

Seriously. The doom and gloom post are mostly people with poor coping skills, who have to believe that everyone else is an idiot and can't just deal with disappointments and move on.