No, test optional isn’t the reason your kid didn’t get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

So.. kids who put in the hard work for years and are clearly academically qualified to attend an elite academic institution are entitled but someone with lower academic pedigree is not? What are on? Moron juice?

The difference between the 95 and 99% is small. Elite institutions are not by and large admitting kids with 1200 and 3.2GPAs. The kids they admit TO are taking rigorous course loads and doing extremely well with it. That's the problem. You can't accept that someone with a 3.8UW is similarly smart as your 1580 kid.

[Anonymous]

What is clear is that *most* people can't agree that college admissions should be based on academic merit, and that colleges should spend most money on teaching and research, and not admin overhead and amenities. There seem to be several segments. First, you have those that want to use college to balance racial or ethnic divisions. Second, you have the alumni donors who think that financial support should drive some preference. Third, you have the D1 athletics racket that parents start pushing their kids into at age 5. Fourth, you have the U.S. News ranking racket, which drives colleges to aggressively yield-manage, denying entry to qualified applicants out of fear that they will not accept and drive up acceptance rate. Finally, the admin-industrial complex at all of these places has become huge and interested in persisting all of this stuff. All of this results in a totally broken system. It'll only seize up once prices finally reach the breaking point and ROI actually becomes negative for most. I hope it's soon--the system is unbelievably bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

You do realize you are advocating for socialism, right?
There are no guarantees of fair in our society, and what is fair is very hard to define. Is it fair that one student has had enrichment from early on? Or that the best musicians had parents who got them lessons, masterclasses and required them to practice 3 hours/day from age 8 up? Is it fair that a student has 2 parents w/ graduate degrees to help them navigate academics? Every student is different and brings different skills/ideas to the table in conjunction w/ his/her resources.
This whole notion of fairness is whack. You seem to think URM kids have some great advantage and ready to throw them all under the bus. Most admissions to top colleges are white and Asian. Many parents like you thought there was some formula for success, and if Jr. just ticked all the boxes, top admission is guaranteed. But, that's just not how it works. Colleges value various types of merits, not just the ones you value. Also, there isn't really a "system." Colleges all have their own priorities. You'll need to move to a socialist country for a system. Enjoy that.

You have a weird logical sense.
Of course no society can achieve total fairness.
However fair competition is what free democratic society is striving for and built upon
If you think URMs have disadvantages, help them to compete instead of giving them a free bye.
Lowering standards is not the answer.

By the way, for the millionth time, Asians are proven to be superior in various merits in leadership, Music, Art, ECs, etc. in the Supreme Court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Test-optional adds to the uncertainty and STRESS.

This is the end result. People are not as confident they will get in, and therefore second-guess themselves, agonize and apply to more schools, which creates more work and more stress for everyone.

And as a poster said above, there aren't more seats in college. It is a zero sum game. Admissions officers taking a chance on a test-optional student WILL have to reject an academically qualified high stats student for that option!

So I disagree with the dismissive posters above regarding test-optional. Test-optional is actually the reason some students are not accepted. Literally.

Now yield protection is different: you can bypass that by demonstrating interest, and customizing your essay to make sure the college knows it isn't just a last recourse. All colleges want is a little courtesy in that regard, even though looking at stats, they are well aware they won't be the first choice. But again, customizing essays, visits and interviews are adding STRESS to the process.

So all this atmosphere leads to more stress than previously. This is not healthy or acceptable. No other country does college admissions this way, and the USA should not either!!!

I hear you, but students who are excellent students but don't test well are burdened with far more stress if tests aren't optional. Why can't they be allowed to put their best foot forward with awards, achievements, APs and other indices? As someone who teaches SAT test prep, I am bothered that people place too much emphasis on SAT in relation to merit.

We need to expand our definitions of top schools rather than hoard spaces for kids who are able to perform well on SAT.

No such thing. That’s called grade inflation.

BS---test anxiety is a real thing. Given that rarely (or rather never for most people) have I been required to take a test in the real world, never required to do a project without ability to look things up or work with anyone else if I have questions, why is how someone can do on an individual test so important to you?

Always wondered how 'test anxiety' crops up for the SATs but never for the multiple mid-terms, final exams and APs.. Someone care to explain this?

It often does as well, hence why kids with anxiety/adhd can get accommodations for testing in schools. But it's more easily managed when you can study for one specific test on specific data such as your calculus midterm or an AP test. How many tests do you take weekly at your job? Have you ever taken one at a job? Not me. ON the job I work with my team to get the project done. If I need to I research, consult others and ask questions. Critical thinking is needed to problem solve. But I dont' do it in a vacuum where I cannot talk to anyone else. Taking a test is NOT the real world we live in.

I want people on my team who can work with others and get the problems solved/work done. I don't care if they can take a test and get 98%. I want someone who can find the answers themselves if they don't remember, don't know, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

Because revealing that would not let people know what their real chances are. And there is already enough data to know if you don’t have a shot. So the only event that could happen from revealing more information is fewer applicants, which is the opposite of what they want to build their class from.

Everyone knows that any school with a less than 20% acceptance rate (and certainly those with single digits) is a REACH. You know that you have the chance to buy the lottery ticket and the chance of winning is small, so most do NOT have a shot. It's not a surprise.

People need to stop with this preachy BS. Do you think parents that have raised smart kids don't know the chances? What they are pissed off about is that someone dumber got into a school when their kid didn't (yes, if your kid's stats are lower than mine, he's dumber than mine).

I understand the concept of generational advantage in education and wealth. A lot of rich/urm folks on here (almost all White) fall into that category. Parents paid for their education at an Ivy/top school which they got in because their parents went there. Having increased their offspring's admission chances through this legacy/donation(bribe) mechanism, they come on here and bleat about social justice, etc.

What about the Asians? The vast majority of the parents are immigrants who are nowhere near wealthy but make just enough to not be considered poor. Most also have an education (because they wouldn't have been allowed into the country without one). Their kids are clubbed with the kids of the aforementioned group just because they are not poor or not a preferred minority? How's that fair? Not wanting an institution to be 'filled with Asians' is just your racism shining through and nothing else. Don't hide that behind your fake concern about URMs and the poor. if you really cared, you'd advocate for more money for primary education and adult education that helps keep families together, prevent teen pregnancies, etc. vs. this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is my take on this issue: You have two cooks.

Cook #1 is given the best ingredients, fresh, local, expensive, top notch. This chef cooks an amazing meal in a state of the art kitchen with a lot of assistants.
Cook #2 is given poor quality ingredients in a run down kitchen, but still manages to prepare an amazing meal all by themselves.

Who would you hire?

I would give cook #2 a bonus point if they produce really the same quality result.

However, Cook #1 usually produces better in reality.

Oh, therefore I'll likely hire #1 for my fancy Michelin restaurant.

#2 will still be great and successful at a little lower grade restaurant.

What could cook #2 produce with the high end kitchen, the help and the best ingredients?

That's a question and you have to make some assumptions.
#1 is already proven.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Test-optional adds to the uncertainty and STRESS.

This is the end result. People are not as confident they will get in, and therefore second-guess themselves, agonize and apply to more schools, which creates more work and more stress for everyone.

And as a poster said above, there aren't more seats in college. It is a zero sum game. Admissions officers taking a chance on a test-optional student WILL have to reject an academically qualified high stats student for that option!

So I disagree with the dismissive posters above regarding test-optional. Test-optional is actually the reason some students are not accepted. Literally.

Now yield protection is different: you can bypass that by demonstrating interest, and customizing your essay to make sure the college knows it isn't just a last recourse. All colleges want is a little courtesy in that regard, even though looking at stats, they are well aware they won't be the first choice. But again, customizing essays, visits and interviews are adding STRESS to the process.

So all this atmosphere leads to more stress than previously. This is not healthy or acceptable. No other country does college admissions this way, and the USA should not either!!!

I hear you, but students who are excellent students but don't test well are burdened with far more stress if tests aren't optional. Why can't they be allowed to put their best foot forward with awards, achievements, APs and other indices? As someone who teaches SAT test prep, I am bothered that people place too much emphasis on SAT in relation to merit.

We need to expand our definitions of top schools rather than hoard spaces for kids who are able to perform well on SAT.

No such thing. That’s called grade inflation.

BS---test anxiety is a real thing. Given that rarely (or rather never for most people) have I been required to take a test in the real world, never required to do a project without ability to look things up or work with anyone else if I have questions, why is how someone can do on an individual test so important to you?

Always wondered how 'test anxiety' crops up for the SATs but never for the multiple mid-terms, final exams and APs.. Someone care to explain this?

It often does as well, hence why kids with anxiety/adhd can get accommodations for testing in schools. But it's more easily managed when you can study for one specific test on specific data such as your calculus midterm or an AP test. How many tests do you take weekly at your job? Have you ever taken one at a job? Not me. ON the job I work with my team to get the project done. If I need to I research, consult others and ask questions. Critical thinking is needed to problem solve. But I dont' do it in a vacuum where I cannot talk to anyone else. Taking a test is NOT the real world we live in.

I want people on my team who can work with others and get the problems solved/work done. I don't care if they can take a test and get 98%. I want someone who can find the answers themselves if they don't remember, don't know, etc.

Tests are meant to identify people that are capable of doing all the things that you want in people in the workplace! How is that not obvious?

Extending your logic, why have any tests at all? Let's cancel all tests starting with elementary school. No grades (since there are no tests). Let us use a lottery system to admit kids to college...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is my take on this issue: You have two cooks.

Cook #1 is given the best ingredients, fresh, local, expensive, top notch. This chef cooks an amazing meal in a state of the art kitchen with a lot of assistants.
Cook #2 is given poor quality ingredients in a run down kitchen, but still manages to prepare an amazing meal all by themselves.

Who would you hire?

I would give cook #2 a bonus point if they produce really the same quality result.

However, Cook #1 usually produces better in reality.

Oh, therefore I'll likely hire #1 for my fancy Michelin restaurant.

#2 will still be great and successful at a little lower grade restaurant.

What could cook #2 produce with the high end kitchen, the help and the best ingredients?

#2 goes to a lower grade but still a good restaurant, and you'll see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Test-optional adds to the uncertainty and STRESS.

This is the end result. People are not as confident they will get in, and therefore second-guess themselves, agonize and apply to more schools, which creates more work and more stress for everyone.

And as a poster said above, there aren't more seats in college. It is a zero sum game. Admissions officers taking a chance on a test-optional student WILL have to reject an academically qualified high stats student for that option!

So I disagree with the dismissive posters above regarding test-optional. Test-optional is actually the reason some students are not accepted. Literally.

Now yield protection is different: you can bypass that by demonstrating interest, and customizing your essay to make sure the college knows it isn't just a last recourse. All colleges want is a little courtesy in that regard, even though looking at stats, they are well aware they won't be the first choice. But again, customizing essays, visits and interviews are adding STRESS to the process.

So all this atmosphere leads to more stress than previously. This is not healthy or acceptable. No other country does college admissions this way, and the USA should not either!!!

I hear you, but students who are excellent students but don't test well are burdened with far more stress if tests aren't optional. Why can't they be allowed to put their best foot forward with awards, achievements, APs and other indices? As someone who teaches SAT test prep, I am bothered that people place too much emphasis on SAT in relation to merit.

We need to expand our definitions of top schools rather than hoard spaces for kids who are able to perform well on SAT.

No such thing. That’s called grade inflation.

BS---test anxiety is a real thing. Given that rarely (or rather never for most people) have I been required to take a test in the real world, never required to do a project without ability to look things up or work with anyone else if I have questions, why is how someone can do on an individual test so important to you?

Always wondered how 'test anxiety' crops up for the SATs but never for the multiple mid-terms, final exams and APs.. Someone care to explain this?

It often does as well, hence why kids with anxiety/adhd can get accommodations for testing in schools. But it's more easily managed when you can study for one specific test on specific data such as your calculus midterm or an AP test. How many tests do you take weekly at your job? Have you ever taken one at a job? Not me. ON the job I work with my team to get the project done. If I need to I research, consult others and ask questions. Critical thinking is needed to problem solve. But I dont' do it in a vacuum where I cannot talk to anyone else. Taking a test is NOT the real world we live in.

I want people on my team who can work with others and get the problems solved/work done. I don't care if they can take a test and get 98%. I want someone who can find the answers themselves if they don't remember, don't know, etc.

MIT research concluded GPA + Test is the best indication of performance, and reinstated test required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

Because revealing that would not let people know what their real chances are. And there is already enough data to know if you don’t have a shot. So the only event that could happen from revealing more information is fewer applicants, which is the opposite of what they want to build their class from.

Everyone knows that any school with a less than 20% acceptance rate (and certainly those with single digits) is a REACH. You know that you have the chance to buy the lottery ticket and the chance of winning is small, so most do NOT have a shot. It's not a surprise.

People need to stop with this preachy BS. Do you think parents that have raised smart kids don't know the chances? What they are pissed off about is that someone dumber got into a school when their kid didn't (yes, if your kid's stats are lower than mine, he's dumber than mine).

I understand the concept of generational advantage in education and wealth. A lot of rich/urm folks on here (almost all White) fall into that category. Parents paid for their education at an Ivy/top school which they got in because their parents went there. Having increased their offspring's admission chances through this legacy/donation(bribe) mechanism, they come on here and bleat about social justice, etc.

What about the Asians? The vast majority of the parents are immigrants who are nowhere near wealthy but make just enough to not be considered poor. Most also have an education (because they wouldn't have been allowed into the country without one). Their kids are clubbed with the kids of the aforementioned group just because they are not poor or not a preferred minority? How's that fair? Not wanting an institution to be 'filled with Asians' is just your racism shining through and nothing else. Don't hide that behind your fake concern about URMs and the poor. if you really cared, you'd advocate for more money for primary education and adult education that helps keep families together, prevent teen pregnancies, etc. vs. this nonsense.

Wow, you really are an a-hole, even by the standards of DCUM.

And BTW, my ivy kid was NMS scholarship winner, 36 1 try, 1st in class at highly ranked HS, with published research, so no, he is not dumber than your kid.

But you are still a rude person who no one would want to be around, and if you spoke to your kids guidance counselor the way you post here I would not be surprised if he passed that along in his recommendation. So maybe YOU kept your kid out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

You do realize you are advocating for socialism, right?
There are no guarantees of fair in our society, and what is fair is very hard to define. Is it fair that one student has had enrichment from early on? Or that the best musicians had parents who got them lessons, masterclasses and required them to practice 3 hours/day from age 8 up? Is it fair that a student has 2 parents w/ graduate degrees to help them navigate academics? Every student is different and brings different skills/ideas to the table in conjunction w/ his/her resources.
This whole notion of fairness is whack. You seem to think URM kids have some great advantage and ready to throw them all under the bus. Most admissions to top colleges are white and Asian. Many parents like you thought there was some formula for success, and if Jr. just ticked all the boxes, top admission is guaranteed. But, that's just not how it works. Colleges value various types of merits, not just the ones you value. Also, there isn't really a "system." Colleges all have their own priorities. You'll need to move to a socialist country for a system. Enjoy that.

You have a weird logical sense.
Of course no society can achieve total fairness.
However fair competition is what free democratic society is striving for and built upon
If you think URMs have disadvantages, help them to compete instead of giving them a free bye.
Lowering standards is not the answer.

By the way, for the millionth time, Asians are proven to be superior in various merits in leadership, Music, Art, ECs, etc. in the Supreme Court.

They are not "lowering standards". Once again, by and large, URM that get into elite universities are excellent students who have overcome a lot to have great GPAs and take rigorous course load. Obviously most schools do NOT want a class of only 1580+, 4.0UW and 14APs+. They could build a class like that but they have never done that for good reasons. Because they want a balance and by balance it's lets take kids between the 95 and 99+ percentiles into our freshman class. Let's look at the whole student, because your SAT scores do NOT define you. They never have.

BTW, nobody is saying your smart kid cannot go to college. Most with ability to get lottery ticket to a T25 can and will get into several schools in the ~30-60 range and will do well in life. They still get to attend an excellent university and succeed in life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

Because revealing that would not let people know what their real chances are. And there is already enough data to know if you don’t have a shot. So the only event that could happen from revealing more information is fewer applicants, which is the opposite of what they want to build their class from.

Everyone knows that any school with a less than 20% acceptance rate (and certainly those with single digits) is a REACH. You know that you have the chance to buy the lottery ticket and the chance of winning is small, so most do NOT have a shot. It's not a surprise.

People need to stop with this preachy BS. Do you think parents that have raised smart kids don't know the chances? What they are pissed off about is that someone dumber got into a school when their kid didn't (yes, if your kid's stats are lower than mine, he's dumber than mine).

I understand the concept of generational advantage in education and wealth. A lot of rich/urm folks on here (almost all White) fall into that category. Parents paid for their education at an Ivy/top school which they got in because their parents went there. Having increased their offspring's admission chances through this legacy/donation(bribe) mechanism, they come on here and bleat about social justice, etc.

What about the Asians? The vast majority of the parents are immigrants who are nowhere near wealthy but make just enough to not be considered poor. Most also have an education (because they wouldn't have been allowed into the country without one). Their kids are clubbed with the kids of the aforementioned group just because they are not poor or not a preferred minority? How's that fair? Not wanting an institution to be 'filled with Asians' is just your racism shining through and nothing else. Don't hide that behind your fake concern about URMs and the poor. if you really cared, you'd advocate for more money for primary education and adult education that helps keep families together, prevent teen pregnancies, etc. vs. this nonsense.

Someone with a 3.8GPA and 1460 SAT is NOT DUMBER than your 1580 kid. (95 vs 99 percentile). Both are extremely smart kids. Perhaps that kid has better people skills, is a budding artist or musician or great interest in working on energy conservation and climate change, etc . Schools realize that having a class of all 1600/4.0UW kids is not the best. They recognize that kids can be equally smart and destined to succeed in life and not have perfect scores. That is your problem. You can't wrap your mind around the fact that colleges look at a variety of factors to build their class. I wouldn't want to be around someone who thinks they are smarter than others because their SAT score is higher. Seriously delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Test-optional adds to the uncertainty and STRESS.

This is the end result. People are not as confident they will get in, and therefore second-guess themselves, agonize and apply to more schools, which creates more work and more stress for everyone.

And as a poster said above, there aren't more seats in college. It is a zero sum game. Admissions officers taking a chance on a test-optional student WILL have to reject an academically qualified high stats student for that option!

So I disagree with the dismissive posters above regarding test-optional. Test-optional is actually the reason some students are not accepted. Literally.

Now yield protection is different: you can bypass that by demonstrating interest, and customizing your essay to make sure the college knows it isn't just a last recourse. All colleges want is a little courtesy in that regard, even though looking at stats, they are well aware they won't be the first choice. But again, customizing essays, visits and interviews are adding STRESS to the process.

So all this atmosphere leads to more stress than previously. This is not healthy or acceptable. No other country does college admissions this way, and the USA should not either!!!

I hear you, but students who are excellent students but don't test well are burdened with far more stress if tests aren't optional. Why can't they be allowed to put their best foot forward with awards, achievements, APs and other indices? As someone who teaches SAT test prep, I am bothered that people place too much emphasis on SAT in relation to merit.

We need to expand our definitions of top schools rather than hoard spaces for kids who are able to perform well on SAT.

No such thing. That’s called grade inflation.

BS---test anxiety is a real thing. Given that rarely (or rather never for most people) have I been required to take a test in the real world, never required to do a project without ability to look things up or work with anyone else if I have questions, why is how someone can do on an individual test so important to you?

Always wondered how 'test anxiety' crops up for the SATs but never for the multiple mid-terms, final exams and APs.. Someone care to explain this?

The accommodation request process for the SAT and ACT currently requires the school to assert that the student regularly accesses the requested accommodations in their regular classes/ tests. Once accommodations are established for the SAT they are also available for the AP exams too.

Don’t blame the kids with actual disabilities for the people who cheat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Test-optional adds to the uncertainty and STRESS.

This is the end result. People are not as confident they will get in, and therefore second-guess themselves, agonize and apply to more schools, which creates more work and more stress for everyone.

And as a poster said above, there aren't more seats in college. It is a zero sum game. Admissions officers taking a chance on a test-optional student WILL have to reject an academically qualified high stats student for that option!

So I disagree with the dismissive posters above regarding test-optional. Test-optional is actually the reason some students are not accepted. Literally.

Now yield protection is different: you can bypass that by demonstrating interest, and customizing your essay to make sure the college knows it isn't just a last recourse. All colleges want is a little courtesy in that regard, even though looking at stats, they are well aware they won't be the first choice. But again, customizing essays, visits and interviews are adding STRESS to the process.

So all this atmosphere leads to more stress than previously. This is not healthy or acceptable. No other country does college admissions this way, and the USA should not either!!!

I hear you, but students who are excellent students but don't test well are burdened with far more stress if tests aren't optional. Why can't they be allowed to put their best foot forward with awards, achievements, APs and other indices? As someone who teaches SAT test prep, I am bothered that people place too much emphasis on SAT in relation to merit.

We need to expand our definitions of top schools rather than hoard spaces for kids who are able to perform well on SAT.

No such thing. That’s called grade inflation.

BS---test anxiety is a real thing. Given that rarely (or rather never for most people) have I been required to take a test in the real world, never required to do a project without ability to look things up or work with anyone else if I have questions, why is how someone can do on an individual test so important to you?

Always wondered how 'test anxiety' crops up for the SATs but never for the multiple mid-terms, final exams and APs.. Someone care to explain this?

It often does as well, hence why kids with anxiety/adhd can get accommodations for testing in schools. But it's more easily managed when you can study for one specific test on specific data such as your calculus midterm or an AP test. How many tests do you take weekly at your job? Have you ever taken one at a job? Not me. ON the job I work with my team to get the project done. If I need to I research, consult others and ask questions. Critical thinking is needed to problem solve. But I dont' do it in a vacuum where I cannot talk to anyone else. Taking a test is NOT the real world we live in.

I want people on my team who can work with others and get the problems solved/work done. I don't care if they can take a test and get 98%. I want someone who can find the answers themselves if they don't remember, don't know, etc.

Tests are meant to identify people that are capable of doing all the things that you want in people in the workplace! How is that not obvious?

Extending your logic, why have any tests at all? Let's cancel all tests starting with elementary school. No grades (since there are no tests). Let us use a lottery system to admit kids to college...

Once again, Harvard is not admitting 50% of their class with 1200 and 3.2UW. 90% of class has UW GPA over 3.75 and very rigorous course load and 1460+ SAT. The differences between 1460 and 1580 is very small---both really smart but some, including Harvard might argue the 1460 is smarter or a better fit for their school. They simply are NOT admitting kids who will not succeed. Their definition of "smart" it just a bit broader then yours of SAT is king of all intelligence tests.

My "average kid" (think 1300/3.5UW, no APs in HS) kid graduated from a great college (attended with merit, ), works for a company that does give 2 or 3 rigorous "tests" as a gateway to getting an interview. This kid has test anxiety and struggled even with in school testing---that happens when you lack exec functioning, you study and learn it, but when anxiety kicks in during the test you cannot retrieve the info (lack of ex functioning). Supposedly only 10-15% of people make it past the testing at this company to even get an interview. My kid did---these tests are "personality testing" and critical thinking tests. Working there for 2+ years and has gotten the highest raise possible each year (they rank the cohorts and give raises accordingly). I'd call that highly successful. Because my kid has the people skills and critical thinking and drive to do well on the job. Anywhere they've worked the managers love them.

My kid is succeeding in life and their job. May not have gotten straight As in school due to their learning issues/exec functioning issues. But they get the work done and obviously managers love them and their output. Because they can critically think and problem solve. They are "smarter" than their testing and gpa indicate. They just learn differently. But in the real world, my kid doesn't have to have everything memorized. They can look something up to make sure they have it right--and just knowing that takes away anxiety and makes life easier. They can ask their Team lead and other co-workers if they have questions. They learn from the team and contribute to helping others on the team. Goal is to get the project working with help from everyone.
So while my kid was not T25 material, I can see kid with similar issues who has a 3.8 UW, takes some APs, highly motivated and only gets 1450 would be equally smart as many at T25 schools. Put them in the right environment and they will shine. I'd argue they are as smart as your kid. Apparently T25 schools think so as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read this 2019 article from the NYT? Sound familiar?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/magazine/almost-all-the-colleges-i-wanted-to-go-to-rejected-me-now-what.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR33p-Nhl1mO5BSmjk461YIxU1iqqvLZ5moObJWGaE2-iV7bm-csPn0xEFU&mibextid=Zxz2cZ

Kids have been getting rejected from Uber-competitor schools for a very long time. This was pre-COVID, pre-TO.

I realize there is an impulse to look for something to blame if your kid is rejected from their dream school or most of their targets. But it’s important to remember that your kid is the common denominator (especially with multiple rejections). There is obviously something deficient in the application for the kinds of schools targeted — maybe the essay is bad, maybe you didn’t take enough foreign language, maybe the ECs are spread too thin and don’t demonstrate passion and commitment over time?

What impressed me about the letter writer in the article was he seems to recognizes that instead of casting blame on others. At least there’s some acknowledgment he’s dealing with a bruised ego. That said, his attitude about the schools he did get into leaves a lot to be desired.

I feel bad for kids who faced a lot of rejection this year. But telling them it’s because test optional let lesser kids sneak in and steal their birthright admission isn’t helping them deal with reality. Learn to make the best of the opportunities you ARE given.

Well, these sermons about learning to deal with the harsh realities of college admissions is of little help to students who spent years of high school chasing an unattainable goal. Not because they didn't study enough or didn't give their best to their community, their extracurriculars and their internships but because they are from unwanted financial class, race, geography or whatever.

That is your fault as a parent if you made them think T25 is an "attainable goal" for anyone. They have always been a reach for everyone, save a well hooked student (think parent is a celebrity or presidents or bill gates, etc).
A well raised kid will grow up knowing you work hard in school to learn, do well and aim high, but also know their life is not over if they only get into school ranked #32.

Amen! So many entitled people on this thread.

This is the dumbest s**t, I have ever heard. You wouldn't dare say this to an URM or woman trying to get a coveted spot anywhere and coming up short and then venting. Everybody has the right to expect that if they work hard and play by the rules, they will get their reward in a country that is fair. Instead the universities play by twisted rules that are never made transparent and jerk people along. People are not entitled for expecting fair treatment, the Universities are evil for not being transparent about their admission policies.

Why don't HYPMS, make all their committee decisions and scores public after redacting personally identifying information. Why don't they release application and admit rates by race, score, GPA, legacy status etc every year so that people can clearly see what their real chances are.

Don't you dare call people entitled. If admissions were fair, everybody would know their chances very well as the would be enough data to make a very good guess. Instead these universities exploit applicants. They are the evil side here. Blame them

You do realize you are advocating for socialism, right?
There are no guarantees of fair in our society, and what is fair is very hard to define. Is it fair that one student has had enrichment from early on? Or that the best musicians had parents who got them lessons, masterclasses and required them to practice 3 hours/day from age 8 up? Is it fair that a student has 2 parents w/ graduate degrees to help them navigate academics? Every student is different and brings different skills/ideas to the table in conjunction w/ his/her resources.
This whole notion of fairness is whack. You seem to think URM kids have some great advantage and ready to throw them all under the bus. Most admissions to top colleges are white and Asian. Many parents like you thought there was some formula for success, and if Jr. just ticked all the boxes, top admission is guaranteed. But, that's just not how it works. Colleges value various types of merits, not just the ones you value. Also, there isn't really a "system." Colleges all have their own priorities. You'll need to move to a socialist country for a system. Enjoy that.

You have a weird logical sense.
Of course no society can achieve total fairness.
However fair competition is what free democratic society is striving for and built upon
If you think URMs have disadvantages, help them to compete instead of giving them a free bye.
Lowering standards is not the answer.

By the way, for the millionth time, Asians are proven to be superior in various merits in leadership, Music, Art, ECs, etc. in the Supreme Court.

They are not "lowering standards". Once again, by and large, URM that get into elite universities are excellent students who have overcome a lot to have great GPAs and take rigorous course load. Obviously most schools do NOT want a class of only 1580+, 4.0UW and 14APs+. They could build a class like that but they have never done that for good reasons. Because they want a balance and by balance it's lets take kids between the 95 and 99+ percentiles into our freshman class. Let's look at the whole student, because your SAT scores do NOT define you. They never have.

BTW, nobody is saying your smart kid cannot go to college. Most with ability to get lottery ticket to a T25 can and will get into several schools in the ~30-60 range and will do well in life. They still get to attend an excellent university and succeed in life.

The Supreme Court with probably ton of more hard evidences than you seems to disagree.
At least they think colleges ask hinger standard for Asians.
Not just SAT score, they scored higher on everything - leadership, ECs, interviews, etc.