What has surprised you - as your kid comes to the end of this process

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is arguing that athletes aren't super motivated and focused. But so are kids who maintain high GPAs in really hard classes, or the kid who volunteers 800 hours a year, or the musician, or someone who has to work to support their family.

I think it's helpful to remind EVERYONE that there are MANY different admissions processes happening simultaneously and different groups of students are held to different standards. It's the school's right to admit whomever they want for whatever reason they want.

Just be aware that there are different roads to the same place.

100%
My kids just didn't have the athletic ability, they tried out, but since sports are so competitive, they couldn't make the team. However, they were heavily involved in Model UN, debate, science competitions, tutoring kids at no charge, etc... This requires substantial time dedication and teamwork in addition to the hours and hours of studying to get the 4.0 GPA. Agree... a different road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC, got into a lot of flagship state schools, with high stats, activities, national awards etc. and great essays. Even accepted into
the honors programs with direct admit to the capped majors with scholarships. we would be full pay anyway, no financial aid.

However, was rejected at Northeastern, and waitlisted at Vt ( in-state) . We were perplexed. i actually think schools evaluate the students based whether they would attend or not. she would have not gone to either but its like they have a sixth sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Northeastern yield protects, but VT is a state school. Do any state schools yield protect? They don’t in CA, where admissions may seem perplexing because there’s a mandate to serve students of all CA school districts not just the highest performing ones.

Michigan yield protects in the EA round from some private schools. Very top kids do not get in but kids in the next decile do. It happens every year. Some top kids then get in RD after writing the LOCI and saying that they'll attend.

I imagine this could be true for OOS applicants, but even for in-state kids? This is not a thing for UCs at my kid’s CA private, so I’m genuinely curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC, got into a lot of flagship state schools, with high stats, activities, national awards etc. and great essays. Even accepted into
the honors programs with direct admit to the capped majors with scholarships. we would be full pay anyway, no financial aid.

However, was rejected at Northeastern, and waitlisted at Vt ( in-state) . We were perplexed. i actually think schools evaluate the students based whether they would attend or not. she would have not gone to either but its like they have a sixth sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Northeastern yield protects, but VT is a state school. Do any state schools yield protect? They don’t in CA, where admissions may seem perplexing because there’s a mandate to serve students of all CA school districts not just the highest performing ones.

Michigan yield protects in the EA round from some private schools. Very top kids do not get in but kids in the next decile do. It happens every year. Some top kids then get in RD after writing the LOCI and saying that they'll attend.

I imagine this could be true for OOS applicants, but even for in-state kids? This is not a thing for UCs at my kid’s CA private, so I’m genuinely curious.

We're OOS, non-DMV. There is a definitive line in SCOIR over which kids are not accepted. The low kids do not get in, the top kids do not get in. It's very interesting.

[Anonymous]

For me the athletes thing bothers me because athlete parents seem to act like their kid has a lower GPA because they spend so much time playing their sport that they couldn't possibly be held to the same standard because it's "too hard". Which, come on, is BS. There are plenty of athletes who crushed academics as well. So if I deem them "unworthy" is mainly because of this pile of garbage that gets spewed from the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC, got into a lot of flagship state schools, with high stats, activities, national awards etc. and great essays. Even accepted into
the honors programs with direct admit to the capped majors with scholarships. we would be full pay anyway, no financial aid.

However, was rejected at Northeastern, and waitlisted at Vt ( in-state) . We were perplexed. i actually think schools evaluate the students based whether they would attend or not. she would have not gone to either but its like they have a sixth sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Northeastern yield protects, but VT is a state school. Do any state schools yield protect? They don’t in CA, where admissions may seem perplexing because there’s a mandate to serve students of all CA school districts not just the highest performing ones.

Michigan yield protects in the EA round from some private schools. Very top kids do not get in but kids in the next decile do. It happens every year. Some top kids then get in RD after writing the LOCI and saying that they'll attend.

I imagine this could be true for OOS applicants, but even for in-state kids? This is not a thing for UCs at my kid’s CA private, so I’m genuinely curious.

We're OOS, non-DMV. There is a definitive line in SCOIR over which kids are not accepted. The low kids do not get in, the top kids do not get in. It's very interesting.

Got it. So this phenomenon likely does not apply for applicants who are in-state for Michigan. The VT poster IS in-state for Virginia, however, so I’m thinking their DC, as objectively excellent a candidate as they are, was not yield protected but subject to a mandate for VT to serve all Virginian students not just those in the state’s highest performing school districts.

[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:I was surprised how mean and judgmental people can be about other people’s kids. Adult snark is one thing, mocking teenagers quite another. Regardless of the anonymous nature of this forum, I don’t understand why anyone feels the need to belittle a high schooler’s character, intellect, or choice of ECs, college, major, etc.

I admit anonymously to being overly harsh about a few kids who appear to have waltzed into tippy top schools to play sports but have not done anything close to the academic work my kid and friends have done (many of whom are still waiting for decisions).

There are a lot of students who are top academics. They aren’t rare. Talented athletes are rare so they are sought after. Sports are big money in this country. The universities make quite a bit of money from their athletes. There’s no point in getting upset.

Division 3 says hello. We are not talking about Alabama Div. 1 football or Stanford Olympic athletes. Given that Williams is 40% athletes, no, it is not at all rare. BTW, if your kid wants to go to Alabama, the athletes do not get in the way of your admission. In fact, there are fewer athletes there than Amherst College.

And the athletes at Williams do not get in your way either. Changing the acceptance rate from 6% to 10% means that the answer is still no for the vast majority of applicants and that a huge number of kids with equivalent stats were denied. And most athletes at Williams will have academics similar to typical admitted students meaning nobody lost out to anyone "less deserving".

Cutting athletes in 1/2 means 20% more “equally deserving kids” who are not athletes get in. This is a zero sum game — and not too difficult to understand.

Really isn't hard to understand if you look at the entire picture. Athletics is important to Williams, very important. I understand that you don't like it but they are an institutional priority at Williams.

Athletics is a huge priority at all of the Elite D3 schools because they value broad excellence and the skills that athletes bring (leadership, determination, grit) are highly valued. The combination of high academic capability and high athletic capability isn't common but and the applicants that have both tend to do very well. These schools want those kids, they really want them.

You really won't like what follows:

Who has the largest athletics program in D3? MIT
Who has won the most Directors Cups at the D3 level? Williams
Who has the second most? JHU
Who is in the top 10 this year?
JHU
Middlebury
W&L
Tufts
Emory
Williams
Amherst
CMU
WashU
MIT

NYU, Wesleyan, and CMS are the next 3.

Williams will never slack off on athletic recruiting because their peers aren't going to slack off. They will take 3.9UW, 1500 and very good athlete all day because that is an exceptional candidate and they are lucky to get them. Cutting athletic recruiting wouldn't mean fewer athletes, it would just mean weaker teams and which is in conflict with Williams institutional priority which is dominating the Directors Cup standings.

Athletics is a key priority for virtually every elite D3 school.

I’m a PP. I have no issue with a 3.9(high rigor), 1500, good athlete (i hope with some leadership) getting into Williams, etc.

I do have a problem with 3.5 (low rigor), TO athlete with no other activities getting into T20 schools.

Athletes are great, but no one else with one activity and those stats is getting into T20.

Just to be clear, you are jealous of a kid that spent thousands of hours more than your kid improving his/her athletic craft and is admitted to those schools?

Let me tell you. I have been a recruiter for the 2 of the top 5 IBs and the top MC group over the last 20 years. In all cases we would ALWAYS take the Athlete from the top schools, even if their GPA was a 3.0 than the non athlete with a 4.0. Very simple. You can teach that drive….once you remove the athletics out of the way, they have shown to be on avg, much better workers than the non-athletes….complain all you want. That is a fact.

This is yet another reason why top unhooked kids need to avoid SLACs with 30-40% athletes. Go to Chicago…

Unhooked students are becoming more savvy about where they apply ED or SCEA. It's not just Williams and Amherst that are losing exceptional students. So many of the more accomplished unhooked students now are applying ED where it matters. I'm coming to believe that most Harvard and Williams students admitted in the RD round were likely rejected in the ED round from Duke, Chicago, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rice, Johns Hopkins and the other schools were strong unhooked ED applicants have a meaningful chance.

I think this is almost certainly correct.

This is absolute nonsense. DO you have a single actual data point to support this hypothesis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How University of Maryland lets people in from North Carolina and Virginia with lower GPAs and Test Score than in state people.

But UNC, UVA want much higher test scores and GPAs from OOS people

This should be corrected from "in state people" to Montgomery County people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC, got into a lot of flagship state schools, with high stats, activities, national awards etc. and great essays. Even accepted into
the honors programs with direct admit to the capped majors with scholarships. we would be full pay anyway, no financial aid.

However, was rejected at Northeastern, and waitlisted at Vt ( in-state) . We were perplexed. i actually think schools evaluate the students based whether they would attend or not. she would have not gone to either but its like they have a sixth sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Northeastern yield protects, but VT is a state school. Do any state schools yield protect? They don’t in CA, where admissions may seem perplexing because there’s a mandate to serve students of all CA school districts not just the highest performing ones.

Michigan yield protects in the EA round from some private schools. Very top kids do not get in but kids in the next decile do. It happens every year. Some top kids then get in RD after writing the LOCI and saying that they'll attend.

I imagine this could be true for OOS applicants, but even for in-state kids? This is not a thing for UCs at my kid’s CA private, so I’m genuinely curious.

We're OOS, non-DMV. There is a definitive line in SCOIR over which kids are not accepted. The low kids do not get in, the top kids do not get in. It's very interesting.

Got it. So this phenomenon likely does not apply for applicants who are in-state for Michigan. The VT poster IS in-state for Virginia, however, so I’m thinking their DC, as objectively excellent a candidate as they are, was not yield protected but subject to a mandate for VT to serve all Virginian students not just those in the state’s highest performing school districts.

Yes, i know nothing about VT. Was only answering the question regarding if any state schools yield protect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is arguing that athletes aren't super motivated and focused. But so are kids who maintain high GPAs in really hard classes, or the kid who volunteers 800 hours a year, or the musician, or someone who has to work to support their family.

I think it's helpful to remind EVERYONE that there are MANY different admissions processes happening simultaneously and different groups of students are held to different standards. It's the school's right to admit whomever they want for whatever reason they want.

Just be aware that there are different roads to the same place.

Yes, but those others aren't consistently accused of being "unworthy" or of having "unfair advantages" by certain groups the way that athletes are here on DCUM.

It's because the academic bar is lowered for athletes.

But the simple truth is that it isn't for most athletes, especially at the Elite schools. There are some exceptions made in helmet sports but not nearly in the numbers that some on DCUM believe. Everyone has anecdotal "evidence" of some athlete that they "know" who got in with lesser stats. But, they don't really know but rather they assume and they are typically wrong.

Athletes do get a better deal at the Ivies (much easier to get into an Ivy as a recruited athlete than into the NESCAC, MIT or JHU) but there isn't the huge disparity in qualifications that some would posit.

The vast majority of athletes easily clear the baseline and then other things take over the same as admissions for everyone else in the process. The simple fact of life that Athletics are an Institutional Priority at these schools and they are treated as such.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What surprised me is how many "top" students cannot read a novel, cannot write a coherent paragraph (let alone essay), cannot have a conversation or interview without staring at their phone and cannot think critically without being told how to do so.

If you kid can do the above they will get into top universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How University of Maryland lets people in from North Carolina and Virginia with lower GPAs and Test Score than in state people.

But UNC, UVA want much higher test scores and GPAs from OOS people

Do you know where I can get this info? I'm curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What surprised me is how many "top" students cannot read a novel, cannot write a coherent paragraph (let alone essay), cannot have a conversation or interview without staring at their phone and cannot think critically without being told how to do so.

If you kid can do the above they will get into top universities.

Educator?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC, got into a lot of flagship state schools, with high stats, activities, national awards etc. and great essays. Even accepted into
the honors programs with direct admit to the capped majors with scholarships. we would be full pay anyway, no financial aid.

However, was rejected at Northeastern, and waitlisted at Vt ( in-state) . We were perplexed. i actually think schools evaluate the students based whether they would attend or not. she would have not gone to either but its like they have a sixth sense.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Northeastern yield protects, but VT is a state school. Do any state schools yield protect? They don’t in CA, where admissions may seem perplexing because there’s a mandate to serve students of all CA school districts not just the highest performing ones.

Michigan yield protects in the EA round from some private schools. Very top kids do not get in but kids in the next decile do. It happens every year. Some top kids then get in RD after writing the LOCI and saying that they'll attend.

I imagine this could be true for OOS applicants, but even for in-state kids? This is not a thing for UCs at my kid’s CA private, so I’m genuinely curious.

We're OOS, non-DMV. There is a definitive line in SCOIR over which kids are not accepted. The low kids do not get in, the top kids do not get in. It's very interesting.

Got it. So this phenomenon likely does not apply for applicants who are in-state for Michigan. The VT poster IS in-state for Virginia, however, so I’m thinking their DC, as objectively excellent a candidate as they are, was not yield protected but subject to a mandate for VT to serve all Virginian students not just those in the state’s highest performing school districts.

Yes, i know nothing about VT. Was only answering the question regarding if any state schools yield protect.

My fault for not being specific! What I meant to ask is if any state schools yield protect *their own in-state students*. Because if they do, that’s simply awful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For me the athletes thing bothers me because athlete parents seem to act like their kid has a lower GPA because they spend so much time playing their sport that they couldn't possibly be held to the same standard because it's "too hard". Which, come on, is BS. There are plenty of athletes who crushed academics as well. So if I deem them "unworthy" is mainly because of this pile of garbage that gets spewed from the parents.

It bothers me because it's affirmative action for rich kids - at least for almost all sports save football, basketball, track and maybe baseball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The athletes get jobs from other athletes. They are top traders and hedge fund managers on Wall Street. The game clock and training give them an edge in high pressure situations

Athletes are not traders at hedgefunds. I work at one and athletes are hired for sales jobs. We want strong math and CS skills at our fund.